Friday, March 9, 2012

Low carb and thyroid: separating the truth from nonsense.

I've noted another recent trend on the blogosphere appears to be myths re: thyroid; meaning to say the paleo religious nutters have been whining lately that eating a low carb diet EXPLODES your thyroid, apparently.

There's this,
...and then this (FYI carbsane low carb foods are uber high in selenium, check out my feb post, my selenium intake is like 200% RDV)
...and I've observed countless murmurs in comments of various blog posts, that the solution to a thyroid problem (real or suspected or totally made up) is to dive into a bowl of oatmeal.


Here's the truth, and you might not like it, but here it is:

A decrease in thyroid function is inseparable from losing body fat. It is a result of (among many other things) a reduction in insulin, and leptin, and increased cortisol, which is also a logical function of body fat loss, which is a result of energy imbalance in the fat tissue.

Low carb gets the blame because this is the only diet which can result in almost effortless chronic use of contents of adipocytes, without necessitating starvation levels of calories to achieve it, when the real culprit is a chronic energy imbalance at the level of the fat tissue.

Here's an example. We all obviously know what the cause of coldness/hypothyroid symptoms and infertility is in a woman who is eating 900 calories (of a high % carbs). What we don't know, because it's not as obvious, is that the same thing occurs in a woman eating 1400 calories of fat with trivial protein and very few carbs.

The "same thing" is :
1) marked decrease in blood insulin,
2) marked decrease in blood leptin due to #1,
3)a greater efflux of fatty acids from the fat tissue, and a greater concentration of ketones (btw this occurs on any weight loss diet) without as great of a rate of uptake, also a result of #1
4) increased cortisol/HPA axis (related to 1 & 2, as well as an independent effect of negative energy balance).

^^^Together all of these conserve energy, and exert a suppressive effect on HPthyroid axis. They are all forever linked with dieting and losing body fat.
They can only be reversed by reversing the trend to lose body fat (or, by independently altering the endocrine system with exogenous leptin replacement or T3, good luck getting a doctor to help!)
"Reversing the trend" = becoming fat again = eating sufficient food to raise insulin and cause positive energy balance in the fat tissue, suppress fatty acids, raise blood leptin, suppress cortisol, etc.

In other words, the endocrine system and metabolism shift toward conservation at a much higher calorie intake, because low carb diets allow for similar endocrine effects promoting of body fat atrophy at much higher calorie intakes. The problem isn't low carb, the problem is losing body fat will always induce a metabolic conservation state, low carb gets the blame because it is easy to lose body fat on it.

So we arrive at a situation where the carb eating starvation calorie dieter blames her calorie levels for the flip off she is getting from her endocrine system, meanwhile the moderately low calorie eater of a low carb diet, who has the luxury of eating a lot more food, irrationally blames the low carb diet.
Stupid, yes I know.
Ironic, yes I also know, considering most dieters do everything they can to eat more, including eating fake foods like jello and soup, or eating and then exercising.

IF our low carb dieter pigged out on 3000 calories of fatty steak I assure you her basal temp would increase like crazy and she would feel rather well, with a similar endocrine shift which is induced by much lower calorie intakes of a carbohydrate diet. Caveat is that it's so so much easier to get fat on a carb diet, for that same reason. You kinda have to march with cross on back to the gym and experience chronic hunger and low calorie intakes, to get the endocrine situation in the same ballpark as a generous eating of a low carb diet.


For evidence of how easy it is to lose wt on low carb, see the previous entry on my blog. I am super thin, used to be hugely fat, and eating this much WITHOUT exercising, AND losing body fat. Yes, for serious.

The neat thing about the leptin study was they measured so many things that I learned a lot about how my body functions; they measured both my RQ and RMR. My RMR was measured at a ridiculous 1000-1100 calories (yes sthat bad!) yet I am losing body fat eating over 1800 calories of a mildly ketogenic diet without exercise. At baseline, I am no doubt functionally lower thyroid... and still I resist growing fat tissue eating this much caloric energy. So, in spite of the fact my body is super thrifty with energy, I am losing body fat eating almost 2000 calories a day.

But how! HOW!?

Magic?
...I R a witch?
...SPELLS?!! It's spells, rite?
...Satan?

Nope! cast aside your superstitions, SCIENCE to the rescue! This is physiology. Low carb diets alter the endocrine and nervous system, resulting in a state of heightened lipolysis and fat oxidation.
In addition to measuring my RMR (which was documented to be ridiculous), they also mesured my RQ.

RQ, respiratory quotient, helps descern which types of energy you are using (glucose, fat), and mainly it helps predict whether or not body fat is being oxidized at rest. A higher RQ = oxidizing glucose, a low RQ = oxidizing fat.
It is shown weight reduced people on higher carb diets have an elevated RQ compared to non-dieted people, and this is because the decrease in leptin as well as smaller adipocytes do not release FFA normally, supersensitivity to suppression from insulin, and also low insulin/leptin decrease catecholamines and the sympathetic nervous system which also inhibit fat oxidation. Combined, these = weight reduced people do not oxidize fat at rest, leading to subjective feelings of fatigue and resistance to further weight loss.

Ketosis can circumvent this defect by depleting glucose and forcing the body to use body fat at rest, similar to a non-dieted person, a person with a normal metabolism. A key finding in obesity resistance is the ability to enter a powerful "fasted state" after an overnight fast, marked by endocrine changes (low insulin, low leptin, high ghrelin) and low RQ (suggestive of an unimpaired ability to use body fat for energy in a fasted state). Obese individuals and people actively gaining weight are negative for all these signs - when they wake up in the mornin' insulin is high, leptin is high, ghrelin is low, and the RQ is maintained higher during sleep. Well, in wt stable obese people the RQ will drop normally, but in people actively fattening it won't (inhibited body fat oxidation = gaining weight).

These are all signs and symptoms of not oxidizing body fat normally when one should be oxidizing body fat very well, and most of them are directly a result of glucose intolerance/excessive insulin.

High fasting RQ predicts weight regain in dieted subjects.
High postprandial RQ also correlates with obesity (read as: fat people cannot oxidize body fat after high carb meals, file under D for Duh)
NWCR members: tendency for higher RQs compared to matched undieted controls.

Indeed, the testing showed my RQ was quite low. I don't remember the exact number (threw out all my papers whyyyy!) but it was the low .7s, I remember that much... much lower than even normal controls.
My RQ was this low, in spite of massive weight loss, because I eat very few carbs forcing my body into a no choice proposition of oxidizing body fat at rest.

I usually find, with trivial restriction, I wake up from an overnight fast thinner. For example, yesterday I ate 1600 calories, upon waking I could palpate my hip bones and ribs.
The metabolic tests I was subjected to quite nicely inform me that I am using damn near exclusively body fat when I am sleeping.

Basically, those of us on low carb diets, we can easily access body fat for energy at the same time as storage processes are not activated. They bias the entire endocrine system away from body fat storage, toward body fat use.
The result is I waste food calories as heat + energy in spite of the fact my body is like a dilapidated POS in terms of metabolism, after losing an entire human being of fat tissue and being super duper thin afterward.

It's sort of like type I diabetes, except not as ketoacidosis-y or hyperglycemia-y (I do have the trivial basal insulin for normal metabolic regulation, I am not diseased).
Just like the type I diabetic cannot store *any* food no matter *how* much he eats, and is rapidly breaking down fat to the point where the ketone accumulates to pathology (ketoacidosis), a functional physiological thing happens on the sort of diet I choose to eat.

Sure, if you eat a truck load, it (fat gain) will happen as all food requires insulin and in constitutionally obese people it is entirely possible to (re)gain body fat on ad lib low carb... but there is a grand canyon of leeway as compared to the self abuse required of maintaining low body fat, or god forbid losing body fat on a high carb diet. On a carb diet, 1800 calories every day would = me growing fat, no doubt about it. You can't argue with a RMR of 1100 calories. Sorry. Can't argue with fat tissue that is supersensitive to insulin. I require either leptin replacement OR I require ketosis, otherwise = progressive body fat gain, question is how fast (or slow) and that is usually a function of how many carbs + calories.


Anyway, back to the thyroid.

Should I choose to alter my diet to contain, say, 150-200 carbs instead of 40, insulin would increase, would direct energy to storage, and so would my leptin increase, and this would occur because my fat tissue was growing, as a result of the glucose mediated insulin. The insulin would increase the sympathetic nervous system, and leptin and insulin would both suppress HPA/cortisol, and all of these changes would = tons of thyroid activity.

Leptin: Exerts hypothalamus level effects to make TRH (similar to how it effects GnRH). Low leptin = functional hypothyroidism via lack of the thyroid making hormone.

Insulin (and leptin): Increases the sympathetic nervous system, which increases the conversion of T4 to T3

Cortisol (from higher CRH due to lower blood glucose, low leptin, low insulin): converts T4 into rT3, which blocks thyroid hormone.

If I eat a ton of calories of high carbs I too like cheeseslave and carbsane can *brag* that I was uber duper warm... and indeed I am waaay warmer if I am getting fat. Except, all of this super awesome insulin and thyroid power would result in my clothes eventually not fitting, and the scale would climb, along with this increased thyroid function. Plus I would feel a lot crappier emotionally, but generally most normal people don't get that effect.

Oh, we'll see how cheeseslave's weight situation is doing in a few wks of "ditching low carb". 1 weeks pay says she is right back to her prior body fat level in about 3 seconds.
(It is my understanding she used a low carb diet to deplete her body fat, and she is for some reason surprised at the result of being colder and having a lower temp, eating low calorie and low carb? LOL, oh the internet, you are so full of silly people.)

Hot new info: higher metabolic rates and thyroid is positively associated, and a direct result of the endocrine changes also resulting in body fat growth. Growing fatter amps up thyroid, assuming you are euthyroid in the first place. Big myth on the diet blogosphere that low thyroid causes obesity; nope, obese people are hypermetabolic, it's that whole "bathing in insulin+leptin" thing, that crazy responsive sympathetic nervous system thing.

And also, to restate this ... if cheeseslave and others complaining of low thyroid, were to eat 2500 calories of low carb food, you would also be super duper warm. Carbs totally aren't required. You just need food, enough food calories to shift endocrine system thus metabolism to a fed state. I assure you, 3000 calories of steak + brie cheese + pecans will = SUPER WARM AND ENERGETIC and all of these effects you are irrationally attributing to carbs will magically happen on a diet that contains enough food calories. You just need more of them if you choose to eat low carb. Last time I checked, weren't obesity resistant foods a good thing?

If you are eating moderately low cal of a VLC diet and have lost body fat, why are you surprised that you are cold and your basal body temp is low? I mean, seriously? I just can't get over this.


One last point on the whole "more thyroid = better" idea.
It's generally observed that hypermetabolic states in all animals lead to shorter lifespans.
Research suggests that genes which control lifespan are intimately tied to insulin signalling.
Generally, animals with very rapid metabolisms have shorter lifespans, wheresa animals that have quite low metabolisms live very long. This is true whether they are this way naturally or if scientists starve them, or restrict protein (calorie restriction and protein restriction both acheive a similar state of suppression of insulin & IGF which prolong the lifespan).

The increase in thyroid hormone which occurs by juicing your metabolism with insulin may be the very thing prematurely aging you, leading to diseases of civilization. Sure, this is highly hypothetical, but stands to reason.

Calorie/protein restriction (and thus a low insulin state) will lead to a depression of the sympathetic nervous system. Lower BP, lower heart rate, and yes, lower thyroid hormone conversion (which also amps up the BP and heart rate). This is shown in studies of all lifeforms to improve health, offer resistance to disease of aging, and prolong life span.

I've recently witnessed a few unfathomable morons on the internet, such as Matt Stone, arguing that hypermetabolic states protect against disease. Apparently these silly people are confusing cause with effect. Illnesses which result in higher stress responses (CORTISOL) will lead to physiological hypothyroidism, by altering T4 conversion to rT3. This is euthyroid sick syndrome.

Just because sickness causes low thyroid does not mean high thyroid protects against sickness. This is grossly irrational, but then again, it's a Matt Stone theory, what would you expect? Higher thyroid would merely be a marker for not being sick. However, the state of very high thyroid would also be a marker for excessive insulin signalling, the very thing that is known to control lifespan and disease resilience in worms, mammals and even closely related primates.



SUMMARY!

1) Low carb diets do not hurt the thyroid at all. Low carb diets are superior to induce an endocrine / metabolic milieu permissive of body fat atrophy. When body fat in negative balance occurs, as well as the endocrine status of it, this will lead to physiological lower thyroid activity. It takes very low calorie levels of normal carb diets to equal similar changes in insulin/leptin/body fat growth which are easily acheived with higher calorie intakes of low carb. It is the endocrine changes and body fat growth changes that temporarily decrease theyroid activity. It is entirely reversible upon piling up buttery steaks and avocados.

2) It is generally a good thing that one can eat more food before tipping over into "uh oh fat tissue growing!" so I have no idea why anyone is bitching. Isn't this everything that dieters try to accomplish with their chronic exercising and their fake foods with zero calories?

3) Evidence suggests lower insulin, lower thyroid and lower metabolic rate = anti-aging and prehaps promotes longevity. Far from proven but it does suggest this madness to amp up thyroid maximally may be very misguided, like replacing sat fat with trans fat, a horrible misunderstanding leading to very misguided counterintuitive recommendations.

41 comments:

Dottoressa T said...

Thanks, Woo. This looks really interesting. I look forward to reading this properly, but I am just off skiing in the Alps, so it will have to wait a week.

Stipetic said...

Finally, a breath of fresh air. I was beginning to suffocate in the fumes hovering in the paleosphere recently.

The loss of common sense and the abandonment of science that's been going on is mind-boggling. Thanks for infusing some of it back into the debate.

And please, don't label all "paleos" under the same label--we ain't all religious about it. It's more philosophy to some. It's a template to toy with prn. And BTW, Guyenet is not paleo. His thinking stops at ancestral. It never delves past 10,000 years.

gallier2 said...

This reminds me of Atkins recommendations when stalling (the stalling occurs because of slower metabolism): do a higher fat cure, which is a polite way of saying go pig out on fatty food.

Kindke said...

Witty as ever Wooo :)

The connection bewteen low-calorie ( not low-carb ) and reduced thyroid function is definitely there.

I came across a pubmed study recently showing how the incretin affect is dose dependent ( as one would expect I suppose) in that more calories = more incretins.

And it is incretins that help with thyroid function. For example here

Alot of it points to this TGR5 receptor thats in your gut. ( which binds fatty acids aswell as bile acids )

So anyway yeh,
low-calorie = low-incretin =

fucked up thyroid, NOT low-carb.

john said...

The evidence with all of these factors is inconsistent, so it's strange that people are making such adamant claims. I've seen a multivariate analysis that dietary fat had a better correlation with free t3 level than carbs--neither higher than calories though. Protein restriction increases t3 and may extend lifespan; but, I've also seen the opposite (shortened lifespan), and there is a reduced calorie, high protein study where rats had slowed aging, low body fat, and increased strength. Retinol and retinoic acid have been shown to increase temperature, fatty acid oxidation, plasma t3 and t3 uptake.

I think the evidence in general about lifespan and metabolic rate is mixed, but I tend toward Lustig's quote, "Quality of life and energy expediture are synonymous."

H. said...

Woo, what a delightful post. You have cheered my day very nicely.

Ambimorph, at Paleohacks, attempted part of the explanation for lowered thyroid function, in this thread:

http://paleohacks.com/questions/78343/is-lowered-t3-resulting-from-a-low-carb-diet-problematic#axzz1odMD7rNv

I was hoping you would address this, and behold, you have!

I will read this one many times, too, (as I do all the others). :)

Sending you the best thoughts and smiles. :)

H. said...

P. S. The wikipedia entry on respiratory quotient filled in some basics for me:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Respiratory_quotient#Respiratory_Quotients_of_Some_Substances

This part was nice:

The range of respiratory coefficients for organisms in metabolic balance usually ranges from 1.0 (representing the value expected for pure carbohydrate oxidation) to ~0.7 (the value expected for pure fat oxidation). See BMR for a discussion of how these numbers are derived. A mixed diet of fat and carbohydrate results in an average value between these numbers. An RQ may rise above 1.0 for an organism burning carbohydrate to produce or "lay down" fat (for example, a bear preparing for hibernation).

Thought I'd pass that along. :)

Sidereal said...

So true. LC gets blamed for hypothyroid issues and other unpleasant side-effects of dieting simply because it's a successful weight loss strategy which happens to expose the dangers of dieting! Newsflash: dieting is extremely stressful for the body. There is nothing inherently protective about eating carbs during a diet. Eating carbs will "protect" you against significant weight loss, sure, but that's it. I have never known a CICO dieter eating a "balanced" diet who lost a lot of weight (very few) who didn't also lose a lot of hair, feel cold all the time, had low energy, low heart rate etc. But because almost nobody loses a non-trivial amount of weight on a high-carb low-calorie diet, you don't hear about it as much. When someone does, other people put those symptoms down to "starvation".

I've noticed that some paleo gurus advise poor unsuspecting dieters to add some wonderful starch into their diets to resolve their hypothyroidism. Guaranteed to work! The person will be eating more calories and either stalling or regaining weight, thus raising their T3. I've been there. There is no solution to this to this catch 22. Either be fat or accept the side-effects and keep dieting. Personally, I have found iodine + selenium supplementation helpful in getting out of the hypothyroid pit.

Re longevity. I don't think many people in the LC community realise that low T3 isn't necessarily a sign of illness. High T3, high insulin and other signs of high metabolic activity are signs that food is plentiful and that reproduction is possible / desired. In the state of nature, once an organism breeds, mother nature doesn't care if it dies, you're disposable. In the West, insulin is high and carbs are plentiful all-year-round which is NOT NORMAL. If you want to live long (which by the way is totally "unnatural"), then surely you should aim to lower the metabolic rate. The effectiveness of this strategy has been known in lab animals since, what, 1930s? Many LC but especially paleo people are obsessed with this notion of cheating the body and hedonistically indulging in like 4,000 cal of ribeye and brie every day and exercising obsessively just cuz they can and feeling smug when they don't gain weight because they're eliminating the carbs. Go for it, lads, I'm sure your bodies look good but will you fuck yourself up and die young as a result of your indulgence is a different matter.

tess said...

THANK YOU for this, Wooo. of all the things i've read, i don't think i've EVER seen that low calories do the same damned thing....

when i read the pro-carbers say that "studies prove" low-carb is "bad" for thyroid function, i WONDERED if the subjects were adapted to ketosis, or were addicted to the SAD before. then i read Dr. Cate's recent exposition of the situation, and thumbed my nose at Colpo et al! ...not that i wasn't inclined to do so before.

if you're a "leptin poster child," i'm surely the one for "low carbs are good for hypothyroidism" -- i was theoretically born with it, and took prescribed synthetics and naturals till a couple of years ago, when the mysterious "shortage" occurred.... SHORTAGE, MY ASS. i have no doubt it was engineered. then i started my research bigtime, and concluded that my problem is malnutrition-related, and now i'm functioning well, using hand-picked nutrients and raw dried thyroid preparations!

i only just determined i want to add tyrosine supplements to my lineup; gotta go visit the shop today and get some....

Galina L. said...

People report opposite reactions on the same thing all the time, research results often add to the general confusions.
In my case all my health issues got better on LC, thyroid symptoms included, I have no problem with my sleep when I am in ketosis, adding carbs do not make me unconscionably decrease my calories intake (what Richard reports on eating potatoes), I just have to stick with things that work for me and ignore everybody else. Reading comments on Richard experiment with starches, I noticed that a lot of people who commented just felt confused because they were accustomed to do what others were doing and looking for somebody's guidance. Some commenter even suggested than in his eyes Weight Watchers now looked safer than LC version of poleo diet.
I am so happy I found out what works for me.

Kindke said...

It does sound like the whole low-carb vs paleo argument has come down to the simple issue of whether to tuber or not to tuber.

i.e. potatoes!

The argument from the paleo side seems to be that your more healthy if you have potatoes in your diet, and then there are those of us who just cannot consume potatoes without weight gain.

I enjoy baked potatoes as much as the next guy, but damn they make my waistline expand like crazy.

Galina L. said...

Kindke,
It makes me wonder how does it happen that Richard wants to eat less with potatoes in his diet. Not my case, but still interesting.

H. said...

Woo, any chance of a post on what these people inherit? I'm wondering how the brains and neurotransmitter functions, etc., are different, and what else???

From the online version of The Diabetes Solution:

I’m convinced that people who crave carbohydrate have inherited this problem. To some extent, we all have a natural craving for carbohydrate—it makes us feel good. The more people overeat carbohydrates, the more they will become obese, even if they exercise a lot.

But certain people have a natural, overwhelming desire for carbohydrate that doesn’t correlate to hunger. These people in all likelihood have a genetic predisposition toward carbohydrate craving, as well as a genetic predisposition toward insulin resistance and diabetes. (See page 181, “The Thrifty Genotype.”)

http://www.diabetes-book.com/cms/articles/9-dr-bernstein-shares-his-insights/2343-richard-k-bernstein-md-face-facn-fccws-

Dr. Blake Donaldson said that we inherit "shock tissue" as well as our traits from our parents and grandparents.

One example:

http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015003228171;view=image;seq=157;q1=shock;start=1;size=10;page=search;num=137

A page of references to "shock", showing how the shock tissue manifested in allergies, etc.

http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt/search?id=mdp.39015003228171;view=image;seq=7;q1=shock;start=1;size=10;page=search;orient=0

I'm always full of questions. Anything you'd have to post on what we inherit, how we inherit it, etc., would be grand, as always.

Thanks very much! :)

Kindke said...

Galina,

Who can say? People and gene's are different.

I see endless whining and complaints and finger pointing at Dairy for example, that it makes you fat, causes problems and so on blah blah.

Yet I can consume Dairy until im blue in the face and dont experience weight gain, I feel more energetic on Dairy and my mood is much much better.

Funny actually I remember in 2010 when I ended up consuming mostly Full Fat Milk mixed with chocolate whey protein ( maximuscle ), the weight was falling off me so fast I was laughing.

Lawl perhaps I should go back to it to shift this remaining 50lbs.

tess said...

has anyone else ever noticed, the "high" that you get when you start a new dietary plan? :-) i think that's what these "carb converts" are experiencing! in a few months they'll stall out, develop joint issues, find their brains are foggy and wake up dopey in the morning, and they won't know why....

@H -- oh boy, have i become a Donaldson fan! i DO have to use salt (my digestion requires it), but otherwise, i'm soaring on his program!

H. said...

Oh, Tess, I'm so glad. :) He is someone I really wish I could have known. I hope his book stays on the web.

I need salt, too. I get salt in the cheese, but when I don't eat cheese, I use that lovely, grey, coarse, French sea salt.

Dr. Donaldson's book has such good information about allergies and arthritis. It really helped me a lot.

I follow Dr. Bernstein's law of small numbers. It suits me more than Dr. D's three large meals.

Will you post here or at Sidereal's blog about your progress? Do you post at Low Carb Friends?

Thanks for the great news! :)

EF said...

The diet police at work.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6-A0iHSdcA

What a shame.

Nigel Kinbrum said...

You know what? I'd rather burn brightly for a shorter time than burn dully for longer.

I'm much more fun to be with when I'm burning brightly (as I am at the moment).

ItsTheWooo said...

@Dottoressa Thanks :) Have fun!

@Stipetic - I know not all paleos are this way, so when I call paleo a religious nutritional cult like veganism I do not speak to the sane ones (similarly I don't speak to sane vegetarians either). Thanks for the comments.

@gallier2 I am an advocate of having day(s) where one pigs out. Even slightly higher carb. I think in the long run it helps people cope with weight loss, if not physically than psychologically. I am against carb ups for glucose intolerant people but maybe even those would be good for otherwise healthy people who are trying to lose some vanity weight, or athletes. I seem to benefit if I raise carbs/calories for a day or two, the next few days I feel better at least. I feel worse if continued indefinitely but granted my crazy brain which uses ketosis as an antidepressant may be complicating things.



@Kindke Thanks :)
I would say all of these "low carb thyroid EXPLOSIONS" are nothing more than the expected outcome of too few calories, too chronic negative energy balance. Only difference is it happens on low carb at like 1400 calories whereas on high carb it would require about 1000. Stupid idiot people. I have never had an energy/coldness problem if I ate 2000+ calories of fatty beef, true this. I won't lose weight either, but then again, only a crazy person expects the body to become very thin while also being hypermetabolic. Sorry, I kinda logically expect my body to start shutting down after losing a lot of weight? Science generally shows this is the case! Loss of body fat leads to metabolic conservation end discussion.


@john generally restricting protein is thought to increase life span in animals and it is believed it is because protein restriction also helps reduce insulin signalling. Thyroid I suspect is not so important in lifespan other than an indicator of insulin or illness. Illness = low thyroid, and also suggests you will die earlier. High insulin = high thyroid activity and suggests proneness of risk to premature aging/mitochondrial damage which are considered to be related in animal studies.

I also do agree we should opt for quality not quantity... but the fact that high thyroid correlates with high insulin and hypermetabolism and premature aging/death, does seem to suggest that the goal should NOT be to maximize our thyroid activity and metabolic rates. We should seek to improve mitochondrial health if any focus exists at all (and low insulin suggests/food restriction helps this). It would be like people making sure to binge drink every weekend because of misguided interpretations of moderate alcohol being good. If you enjoy binge drinking whatever but making an attempt to do it more often is just dumb.

ItsTheWooo said...

@H yes, very true! Elevated RQs are redundant with not oxidizing body fat at rest. This is redundant with gaining body fat. THe reason high RQ is found in weight reduction, and growing obese individuals, is because body fat growth happens at night secondary to a failure to properly and well oxidize your own fat. An RQ above .7 after an overnight fast = very bad news. Ketosis / very low carb is fantastic for weight loss because it circumvents so many metabolic / endocrine defects. A person is DEFAULTED into using fat tissue for energy, and so weight regain is prevented, further weight loss is easier. It's like the difference between digging a pit with your bare hands vs using a shovel. I can't imagine losing weight on a high carb diet. I know for a fact I would not be able to and I like the NWCR people would need to eat about 1400 calories and exercise every day to be only semi-fat.

I am an advocate that human obesity is often a genetic conserved trait to exploit seasonal nutritional excesses. There are many overlaps between certain human obesities and the hibernation state or seasonally obese animals. I am quite certain my obesity is of this nature, and my mood disorder suggests this too as I am quite sensitive to light and dark and temp patterns.



@Sidereal LOL indeed carbs protect you from being thin, therefore also resolving negative energy balance related thyroid issues. Maaagic!
The ones who do lose weight need to eat like a concentration camp victim, and they also experience hair loss and coldness. If anything it is much worse on the low cal/high % carb diet because you are fighting insulin hypoglycemia/hunger, which tends to bias energy away from lean tissue toward fat tissue (read: more skinny fatness relative to a low carb insulin suppressive strategy). Also attempting to diet by the food pyrmaid = protein deficiency on a weight loss diet, so say good bye to your hair and nails and skin quality, and also immune system, and that is independent of any thyroid slowdown.

I agree, there really isn't a natural nutritional solution to this. It's a normal function of the endocrine system to fight significant body fat loss. Obesity is permanent. Leptin can help greatly by normally increasing TSH and suppressing cortisol (goodbye insomnia! goodbye rT3 and TBG! Hello free t3!).

This just goes back to what I have been ranting the past year or so: leptin plus insulin control is the cure for most common obesities. Insulin control arrests progression and slightly reverses it. Leptin allows for full depletion of fat tissue with your body working happily all the while. The abnormal drop in leptin and perhaps higher central leptin requirements are why and these are effects of sensitization from glucose/insulin in fat tissue (lots of fat cells).


The invariably young male paleos can be really annoying as they eat 4000 calories and are obsessed with body building and usually don't have any metabolic issues. Part of the appeal for them appears to to be the novel fun of pretending to be a virile caveman. *whatever*. I'm not one to criticize anyone's aesthetics but don't conflate vanity with health plz, thx!

ItsTheWooo said...

@tess welcome. Indeed rest assured the "thyroid horror!!!" is nothing more than negative energy balance which is easy to induce on low carb, ironically this is a good thing for dieters but they are too stupid to appreciate it and instead just decide to eat less food of a high carb diet and accept being fatter. Don't get it! Whatever!


Hope the tyrosine helps you. Studies in rodents suggest tyrosine added to diet can help circumvent lack of leptin even as many leptin mediated effects are by basal dopamine deficiency. I certainly seem to benefit from the tyrosine and even more when adding the weak COMT inhibitor of lots of fresh green tea. The first few days you may be epinephrine-y (I was totally jittery and agitated) but this will go away eventually as your enzyme decrease activity to cope with extra catecholamines. It's sort of like caffeine - most potent the first few days, eventually tolerance sets in but incompletely so.

Yes I do notice the high - sort of like a placebo, they burn out when novelty wears down.


@Galina L I tend to think whether one tends to high or low sugar makes the difference for insomnia. Low sugar -> higher stress responses to counteract -> insomnia. You tend to run high blood sugar so you don't have that effect. Personally I don't mind the sleep difficulty ALL THAT MUCH because if I am not sleeping, I am also not depressed. I would much rather deal with the malaise of stress and insomnia rather than be stuck in that horrible pit, which is so much worse for me and can become quite significant.


@Kindke I'll solve the debate: If you have a glucose metabolism problem or obesity, then NO TUBER.
FACT! Certain medical conditions have certain dietary restrictions. This myth that we need to eat a perfect ideal paleo/ancestral diet AND all our ailments will melt away = ignorant BS. That may work for healthy people, but what if you aren't so lucky?

Well , we could either advocate for medical therapies for sick people (like *gasp* no taters for diabetics/fat people!) ...or we could default back to Mr. Adolf Hitler's ideas and just bring back eugenic cleansing. Up to you, it's a personal preference which one you advocate for! I know where most paleos seem to stand (GRRR TRUE HUMAN SUPERMAN UBERMENSCH!)




@H I don't know if I believe that intense carb craving is inherited. I think that certain diseases may be heritable such as diabetes and glucose regulation problems, and that also leads to carb cravings. I think neurotransmitter vulnerabilities and taste preferences may be heritable.
However, just because something is heritable does not mean it is normal, adaptive, or your destiny. For example someone with intense carb cravings who responds to endorphin therapy (that low dose naltrexone that Emily Deans uses, for example, leads to a net improvement of endorphin signalling this may improve any low endorphin situations such as a propensity to binge eat or self harm common amongst borderline patients). Low dose naltrexone upregulates endorphin receptors. It is misguided that she states the drug works by "breaking reward". If that was the case, antipsychotics would work, that REALLY breaks reward (when I was on antipsychotics, I could drink alcohol and feel NOTHING. When I would go outside on a warm day with nice weather, I felt NOTHING. My dopamine = shot, hows that for a reward breaker?)

Anyway, my point is it may be true there is a heritability factor but I think many people will be surprised to discover if they fix their glucose regulation problems with supplements or diet their intense carb cravings can improve.

H. said...

Woo, thanks very much for your help. I really like finding out more of how to make progress, and that I am not "stuck with playing a badly dealt hand".

Healing through diet and supplements, yep, we keep at it.

Thanks again. I really appreciate your taking the time to explain so much. :)

H. said...

Woo, thanks for explaining more about RQ. VLC and eating less, that's it. No fat storage at night for me. :)

Your explanation about getting accustomed to the tyrosine helped, too. I started taking it again, today, not worried about that edginess, due to your explanation.

Thanks! :)

Am sending you smiles and all best wishes.

Dave said...

I agree with a lot of what you say here, but the one thing I don't believe is that people on a Low-carb diet can eat more calories and still lose weight. That seems to have been refuted by a number of studies. In fact it seems like when it comes to total caloric intake to create a caloric deficit, the ratio of fat and carbs makes no difference, and increased protein can have a metabolic advantage. Now I eat low-carb because I get less hungry, but not because I can eat a greater number of calories and still lose weight, because I just can't.

Wolfstriked said...

Woo,its high time you posted on binge weekends LOL.What I am finding is that 1200 to 1500 calories is where I lose comfortably.But this is with eating whatever on weekends.What I am also finding is that my stomach is shrinking from eating such small meals during the week.This is making my binges seem rather tame lately.I find that the tight stomach causes me to eat more small meals instead of my larger meals of past which helps in reducing insulin.

You mention longetivity and slow metabolism and I feel this is what happens to me.42 and my co-workers say I have more lives than a cat.I try to tell them its the low calorie/LCHF during the week but it falls on deaf ears.They want to attribute me to high willpower.I am now playing along since I like being a hard partying person that defies the drawbacks of that lifestyle.;) But in fact its all LCHF.

What sucks though is that my muscles are highly insulin sensitive and I get very full looking and the ladies love the muscular look...dont lie.But I feel like hell after just 2 to 3 days even doing the safe starch route....sadly :(

Piper said...

Thank you for this post. I have been confused by the anti-low-carb drumbeat lately. I have been trying to eat more carbs so I don't destroy my pitiful thyroid but I don't feet as good on high carb and I think I'm gaining weight. I even thought if I fasted most of the day it might make up for the carbs. Back to the superior health for me of low carb.

Wolfstriked said...

Piper,I am the same where I feel better with VLC.What you can try is,depending on your current carb intake,is to add in Small amount of carbs every other day.If you are VLC then see how you feel by throwing in 50gms of carbs to dinner on alternate days.If you eat around 50gms per day I would advise against it since you will then be thrown out of ketosis.Maybe try just 25gms w/dinner on alternate days??

H. said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ItsTheWooo said...

@H Glad to offer my perspective. Hopefully the tyrosine is useful to you, but if the edginess continues for several days it may not agree with you. Many individuals fare poorly with stimulant things, I personally love most of them and find it greatly helps me recreate a normal nervous system (obesity resistant).

@Dave I don't agree that low carb diets allow for unlimited calorie consumption, particularly in weight reduced individuals, but in my case and many others it is super evident we can eat a LOT more food before the body shifts to storage .... and, a lot more food before the body liberally uses energy as well.

Have you actually kept detailed food logs, like I do, and plotted your calorie intake? Have you identified that you lose weight on the exact same number of calories of high carb and low carb? Have you found that your weight gain resistance is the same?


Sorry for lack of better references (I may have to make this a detailed post later - it is simply NOT TRUE that weight loss is the same on all diets! )

http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1743-7075-1-13.pdf'

This study shows that weight loss is superior on a low carb diet with slightly higher energy intake, particularly truncal fat, which is exactly my experience. In males, REE is better sustained on a LC diet in spite of weight reduction, which I suppose is because females are more hyperresponsive to energy deprivation for evolutionary reasons.

This study is excellent because it differentiates between losses of fat mass and losses of lean mass and we can see that the fat mass is far superiorly lost on VLC whereas lean mass, particularly in females, is lost most on a low fat diet.

ItsTheWooo said...

(yes I know this was funded by atkins but I don't see how that is necessarily any more deal breaking than the overwhelming majority of studies which are done by people with clear biases against LC, or funded by pharmaceutical companies or food companies, and we consider their findings just as valid.)


@Wolfstriked very low calories or low carbs can lead to dehydration, if you drink more fluids and slightly increase calories or carbs you can obtain a better hydrated look :)

@Piper Go with how you feel, not a bunch of internet fools. There is zero evidence LC diets are harmful for thyroid, at best it is a physiologic decrease in activity ... and the irony is this may just very well end up being healthy and promoting of longevity due to decreased SNS activity and less whipping your mitochondria to an early death.

H. said...

Wooo, thanks very much. Am still experimenting with the tyrosine.

I appreciate your help! :)

Dave said...

Here is an example of why I think its been refuted that low-carb diets lead to a metabolic advantage.

http://weightology.net/weightologyweekly/?page_id=285

What do you think of James Krieger's work in this area?

ItsTheWooo said...

These sorts of tests are flawed for so many reasons.

1) The "metabolic advantage" of a low carb (that is, RESTRICTING carbs specifically) diet is going to be found in people like myself, who have clear cut glucose metabolism disorders. There is something wrong with how my body uses glucose for energy, partitioning energy to storage disproportionately. Getting normal subjects to test these things is pointless, for the same reason that we can't study the hyperglycemic potential of carbohydrate in people hwo don't hae diabetes. You can't learn about glucose control from a non diabetic, and you can't learn about weight loss and which diets promote normal use of energy from people without obesity.

In studies of real life obese people it is shown in many studies that dietary carb promotes abnormalities in energy use, endocrine system, when compared to the carb restricted diet. The "metabolic advantage" is usually less of an advantage and more of a normalizing of the metabolism for pepole with obesity.


2) In people who are eating glucose diets, a 70% fat 30% fat 0% carb may not be tolerated well because their endocrine system and digestive enzymes are biased toward a high percentage of dietary glucose and a low percentage of dietary fat. You can't just throw someone on that sort of glucose deficient diet and then conclude "see, high fat diets suck compared to eating carbs". Um, yea, you are testing people who have been eating tons of carbs forever. We might expect that early on their bodies will make energy fromg glucose better than fat, at least until the body adapts to a ketogenic diet, which takes at least several days possibly longer.They followed subjects 4 wks, maybe longer is required.


3) It seems as if they did not control for calorie intake, unless I am missing something. The reserachers noted that the low carb group was a lot less hungry, so they may have eaten less food. A drop in metabolic rate is expected and a normal part of eating less calories. It seems they used weight to determine whether or not subjects were in "energy balance" which is stupid and moronic, as the low carb group might have lost fat tissue and gained muscle mass therefore the BMI did not budge. However if the low carb group spontaneously reduced their caloric intake significantly, whereas the high carb group did not, it would be expected that the metabolic rate would drop. This decrease in metabolic rate is a normal, expected, reassuring sign of eating less calories, losing body fat, having lower insulin and lower leptin.


As I provided evidence for above it seems as if low carb diets superiorly recomposition the body, and have spontaneous reductions in caloric intake. A drop in metabolic rate will be expected of a drop in caloric take and emptying the contents of your fat tissue. This is a normal sign of better glycemia, better insulin dynamics.

If you want to know what I think of that study, I think it is worthless unless we know how many calories were consumed and what the body composition was. BMI = so what. I can put rocks in my pockets and be rapidly losing weight and have my BMI stay the same.

read said...

You should balance your activities with the proper amount of rest. Some of the leading experts in the field of aging now believe that regular exercise along with the proper amount of rest may actually add years to the life span. Weight Loss

read said...

You should balance your activities with the proper amount of rest. Some of the leading experts in the field of aging now believe that regular exercise along with the proper amount of rest may actually add years to the life span. Weight Loss

read said...

If you are reading this page then probably you are looking for weight loss advice that will finally put an end to your weight loss issues.

weight loss

Danny Albers said...

Really great write up. Sadly the fear based marketing of "safe starch paleo" continues to thrive.

I wish, truly wish, people would aknowledge what works for a 20 year old gym rat with 15 pounds to lose is not going to be the same as what works for a 40 year old man who was 150 pounds over the ideal...

Nora Gedgaudas said...

Woo--WHEW!

What a terrific blog post. You are helping to restore my faith in the human capacity to over-ride wishful thinking, fear mongering and food addiction with thoughtful and educated, and methodical common sense. --It's the difference between what is often seemingly a sympathetically over-aroused (read: hypoglycemic/hormonally agitated) knee-jerk, snarky reactivity toward the overriding evidence supporting a VLCKD and a much more rationally driven, responsive tone of a ketogenically well adapted brain. Bravo.

Many of the perky 20-somethings of the Paleosphere (possibly not yet metabolically deranged by a lifetime of dietary mistakes) WANT to believe they can have the carbs they love. Telling them what they want to hear might be politically savvy but sooner or later those metabolic chickens tend to come home to roost. A quarter of a century ago I would probably have wanted to believe the same thing. I’ve learned and witnessed far too many hard lessons since then. For me now it is a bigger picture than just deciding whether our ancestors ate starchy carbs or not. Of course they did (at least at times once cooking technology and benevolently temperate climate/seasons converged). To me the bigger question is: how do we take foundational "Paleolithic" dietary principles and apply those to a model of optimization toward the world we live in now (VERRRY different from that of our ancestors) and toward modern longevity science so we can better survive our current conditions more disease free for the longest possible time?

I heard Kresser make his dire remarks about VLC diets and their impact on thyroid (and other fictitious allegations against VLCD's) at AHS12 and was frankly stunned by some of the blatant misinformation. I think my jaw was actually hanging open in disbelief at one point. The increased rT3 and slightly low T3 that are a common consequence of such diets are actually the result of an improvement in thyroid efficiency that occurs with healthfully adapted ketogenic states. It is NOT cause for alarm (or for that matter, “starch therapy”). It's literally a longevity marker. There is nothing remotely pathological in this, though it is commonly used as a scare tactic by some and is a source of common misunderstanding in others. I happen to have the ONLY healthy functioning thyroid in my own family, which I wholly attribute to the ketogenically adapted diet I talk about in my book (Primal Body, Primal Mind).

I have no personal investment in whether anyone chooses to incorporate carbs in their diet or not (through whatever rationalization). I am only interested in making people aware of the potential consequences to their metabolic, immunologic, mental, emotional and long term cognitive health. I’m not trying to win any popularity contests. Everyone needs to decide what it is they really prioritize. --If it’s optimal health and longevity, then a VLCKD may well be the very best and smartest choice for you (it is at least worthy of serious exploration). If your priority is seemingly “prettier” T3 lab numbers, a hotter burning (and btw hungrier) thyroid/metabolism and sweet/starchy indulgence, then so be it. Enjoy the long term consequences.

After 15+ years of working very full time with mentally and physically struggling people (as well as many seeking more optimal performance) I am especially heartfelt-weary of all the suffering. I’m also aware of what miracles are possible when the appropriate dietary changes are made. It’s why I wrote the book I did.

I have never pretended that low carb (ketogenically adapted) is THE single answer to all health related issues…but it’s one heck of a helpful (and frequently essential ) foundation and makes the rest a damn sight easier.

Thanks, Woo. Your thoughtful attention to this misconception is greatly appreciated!

Danny Albers said...

@Nora, I have pointed out the Huckersterism of Kresser (and sorry Jaminet is to, he is just more "credible" for some unknown reason) for quite some time.

By trade I am a Business Analyst and have some background in provocation marketing, so I spotted both of these cons out of the gate.

Kresser has long been milking the thyroid issue and when Jaminet came around with his claims he hoped right on board.

I actually wrote an article detailing the marketing approach and it recieved far more anger and defense of Kresser (In the LOW CARB areas of the net) then I could have possibly imagined. WHich I suppose is a testiment to his marketing ability, because fear and provocation based marketing is designed to build loyalty which later sells products, not sell products directly.

Jaminet also has an extremely poor standard of evidence. He will, for example, use Danny Roddy as proof that low carb diets cause scurvy. Danny Roddy ate a zero carb pemmican and water ONLY diet for many months. He was also calorie fasting eating only 7oz a day, and he was also water fasting. In short this guy was starving himself. His "scurvy" went away he finally consuming more pemmican and water (not starches) and getting more food period.

He has since deleted his food logs and claims it was starch he needed but there is a whole community that recalls the event and how eating simply greater amounts on low carb brought him back.

Seeing this scammy hucksterism abound throughout "real food movements" has annoyed me to the point where I no longer follow it.

Its to bad because low carb meets paleo was a good match. Food quality and carb restriction is a total WIN and its shame guys like Kresser and Jaminet pushing diets and supplements and such for sale have to peddle lies to create a niche for themselves in a market where so many people doing their best to be honest have succeeded just fine.

http://primalnorth.blogspot.ca/2012/10/fear-based-marketing-consumer-education.html

ItsTheWooo said...

Nora : thank you for your comments :)
PS, carbsane is SO MAD you visited/praised my blog :( Between carbsane threatening to unleash a mob of trolls on me and stephan guyenet ordering a restraining order against me, it's safe to say my reputation is done for now in the paleosphere lol. But all the same thanks for the comment.

"To me the bigger question is: how do we take foundational "Paleolithic" dietary principles and apply those to a model of optimization toward the world we live in now (VERRRY different from that of our ancestors) and toward modern longevity science so we can better survive our current conditions more disease free for the longest possible time? " <-- I would agree entirely.
It matters not if a high starch diet is paleo and human cultures eat them, if it happens to be so that a modern 2013 night shift working abnormal light pattern exposed mitochondrial damage aquired person can't normally tolerate glucose, right? If a KETOGENIC DIET can ameliorate the negative impact of these things, that's all that matters. The HERE AND NOW.

People can become so dogmatic in theories. If paleo man ate potatoes this doesn't mean potatoes are good for modern people, because the modern world is not the paleolithic. I just posted a rambling blog entry about my childhood. I did not grow up in the paleolithic, I grew up drinking "quarter drinks", fed a high starch diet with a lot of omega 6 by my mother diligently following government nutritional protocols for nourishing a family on a budget.

Kresser's a quack, no doubt about it. He's not as egregious as the king of quacks (mercola) but he's a quack all the same.

I am of the opinion thyroid changes can be functional and promote energy thrift, and more is not necessarily better with thyroid. I can agree it's probably associated with longevity in so much that upregulated thyroid function is associated with hyperinsulinemia / fat gain / met dysfunction.


I also agree re: ketogenic/low carb diet, healthy people generally can eat carbohydrate and be healthy, but then again they aren't ones who most need an eating program, am I right.



@Danny Jaminet has at least uber dorkiness/ super smarts on his side which may be why, Kresser is just a california quack pretending to be a MD (as if even that were important). Not everything kresser says is bullshit and as far as gurus go he is a better one, but this "carbs are great / carb restriction causes hypothyroid" its just such fraudulent shit. The sad thing is how the paleos have brandished kressers quackism as REALSCIENZ , anything to discredit carbohydrate restriction (which, earth to the paleosphere, is ALREADY THE MAINSTREAM THERAPY for diabetes and glucose intolerance disorders like PCOS and hypoglycemia and and and. Duh.)

Danny Albers said...

@Woo

Quite correct, not everything said by Kresser is far off. Of course this can also be viewed as the necessary credibility establishing if you are as cynical about the guy as I am.

I mean, he has to make perfect sense 80% of the time or who would read his inserted provocation articles at all?

And I agree with you about Mercola.

This article I wrote on the "Hunger For Change" juicer infomercial everyone gobbled up outlined the excessive fear based headlines he sends to my email every day. Talk about exagerating every single little possible thing in life. If I paid Mercola serious attention I would be walking around afraid to touch anything, smell anything, or hell just leave a sterilized white room.

http://primalnorth.blogspot.ca/2012/12/hungry-for-dollars-change-best-late.html

PS wouldn't worry about losing credibility with Paleo, they seem all to ready to crucify anyone defending low carb any possible way they can and most of those areas of the net are best forgotten at this point. I truly miss the days when paleo was simply understood to be carb restriction friendly.