Despite what the sugary beverage and processed snack food companies want us to believe, all calories are not created equal.

A new study from Harvard shows that individuals following a low-carbohydrate (20% of total calories) diet burn between 209 and 278 more calories per day than those on a high-carbohydrate (60% of total calories) diet. So the type of calories we eat really does matter.

The New York Times: How a low-carb diet might help you maintain a healthy weight

This isn’t the first study to investigate this topic, but it is likely the best.

The current study was a meticulously controlled, randomized trial, lasting 20 weeks. Even more impressive, the study group provided all the food for participants, over 100,000 meals and snacks costing $12 million for the entire study! This eliminated an important variable in nutrition studies — did the subjects actually comply with the diet — and shows the power of philanthropy and partnerships in supporting high-quality science.

After a run-in period where all subjects lost the same amount of weight, participants were randomized to one of three diets: 20% carbs, 40% carb, or 60% carbs, with the protein remaining fixed at 20%. Importantly, calories were adjusted to stabilize weight and halt further weight loss, thus making it much more likely that any observed difference in calorie expenditure was not from weight loss, but rather from the types of food consumed.

After five months, those on the low-carb diet increased their resting energy expenditure by over 200 calories per day, whereas the high-carb group initially decreased their resting energy expenditure, exposing a clear difference between the groups. In addition, those who had the highest baseline insulin levels saw an even more impressive 308-calorie increase on the low-carb diet, suggesting a subset that may benefit even more from carbohydrate restriction.

Why is this important? It shows why the conventional wisdom to eat less, move more and count your calories is not the best path to weight loss. Numerous studies show better weight loss with low-carb diets compared to low-fat diets, and now studies like this one help us understand why.

Our bodies are not simple calorimeters keeping track of how much we eat and how much we burn. Instead, we have intricate hormonal responses to the types of food we eat. It’s time to accept this and get rid of the outdated calories in-calories, calories-out model, thus allowing for more effective and sustainable long-term weight loss.

Originally Posted on the Diet Doctor Blog 

Dr. Scher’s one-on-one Consultation was extremely valuable in my search for advice about cardiovascular health on a low-carb diet. During our discussion, I learned that interpreting lab results using the standard reference ranges can be misleading for anyone on low-carb or keto. He helped me better understand my test results and develop effective strategies to improve my cardiovascular health through nutrition and exercise. Dr. Scher is a good listener and a pleasure to work with. He is an excellent preventive cardiologist with a deep understanding of lipidology and metabolism, and the issues and challenges specific to a low-carb lifestyle.

Gabriel B.

Here it is again. The term “healthy” connected as a descriptor.

We see it all the time. Healthy Whole Grains. It reminds me of the common use of “fruits and vegetables,” as if they are one in the same.

Are whole grains, by definition, “healthy?”

For a full, in depth description, see the Whole Grains Guide on Diet Doctor, where I was the medical editor and reviewer.

For the quick answer, let’s leave it as a “maybe.”

If you choose to eat refined grains, white flour, processed snack foods, in essence the Standard American Diet, then switching to whole grains will almost certainly improve your health. And that is where the majority evidence in favor of whole grains stops. Compared to refined grains, they are great.

Who should eat whole grains?

If you are insulin sensitive, live in a society where you are physically active for most the day, eat fewer calories than most industrialized nations, and maintain a healthy body weight, then whole grains can be a healthy part of your diet. Observation of the Blue Zone countries demonstrate that whole grains can be part of a healthy lifestyle in that setting.

We cannot, however, extrapolate those findings above to apply to all Americans, Europeans, Asians etc. and say whole grains are by definition “healthy.”

Who should not eat whole grains?

If you are metabolically unhealthy with diabetes, metabolic syndrome or insulin resistance (estimated to be 88% of all Americans), then whole grains are anything but “healthy.” Borrow a continuous glucose monitor for a day and see how your blood glucose responds to whole grains. If you aren’t perfectly metabolically healthy, it isn’t pretty.

Instead, if you eat a whole-foods, low carb diet without grains and sugars, then whole grains have no necessary role and no association with health.

Enjoy the more detailed guide from DietDoctor.

Thanks for reading,

Bret Scher, MD FACC

Can you find a more polarizing topic than statins? One article says they are miracle drugs that should be given to everyone. Then you turn the page, and you read how they are poison and you should stay away from them no matter what.  How can one drug cause such differing views? And which should you believe?

The statin debate has intensified ever since the 2013 ACC/AHA cholesterol treatment guidelines increased the number of people without heart disease who “should” take a statin to 43 million Americans. That is for primary prevention, meaning the individual has never had a diagnosis of cardiovascular disease, never had a heart attack, and never had any type of a heart problem.

As you can imagine, this has been a windfall for the drug companies. But are we healthier and better off as a result? That is unknown.

The problem is understanding the bias of whoever is writing the story.

Subtleties of Science

But wait, you say. Won’t the science tell us if statins are good or not? Isn’t it an objective fact if they are good for us?

Not so fast. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and so is the application of science.

Are you getting advice from someone who believes prescribing more medicine is better? Or someone who believes a more natural lifestyle is better? 

Are you reading a report sponsored by the pharmaceutical company that paid for the research?

Or are you getting advice from a scientist who is more focused on statistical benefits, or someone who is more concerned with the potential benefit for the one individual they are taking care of at the moment?

It is a confusing sea of conflicting information, and you have to find which approach resonates more with your beliefs and your life.

The Three Keys

Regardless of who you are and your beliefs, I promised you the three most important things you need to know about statins. Here they are:

1. All statin studies are worthless! That’s right. All statin studies that have been done to date are worthless and don’t apply to anyone who follows healthy lifestyle principles.
2. Statins will not prolong your life. Not at all. Not for a single day.
3. Statins DO reduce your heart attack risk, by about 0.7% over 5 years.

All of a sudden, statins don’t seem so powerful, do they? Let’s go deeper into these points to learn why.

1-All Statin Trials Are Worthless

When designing a trial, you have to decide what your control group is going to be. You have to show that the drug is better than something. The key is defining what that something is.

Therein lies the problem. In order to show beneficial effects, primary prevention statin trials need thousands of subjects, studied over years. That is very expensive to do. The vast majority of trials, therefore, rely on drug company funding.

Do you think they are going to fund a trial that makes it easier or harder to show a benefit? Of course, that was a rhetorical question.

Pharma companies don’t have an interest in your health and wellbeing. Their priority is to their stock holders and their bottom line. They are going to sponsor trials that are most likely going to benefit them.

How does this make the trials worthless? They compare statins to “usual care.” That means a brief, and ineffective attempt to educate people about healthy nutrition and physical activity.

In addition, the specific nutritional guidance that was used has always been a low-fat diet. As we now know, what does a low-fat diet usually include? Lots of sugars and simple carbohydrates. What does that diet do? Increase your risk of obesity, diabetes, inflammation, and eventually heart disease.

That’s setting the bar pretty low to show a benefit from statins. And that is exactly what the drug companies want.

What we need is a control group that is involved in a comprehensive lifestyle intervention program. A program that helps participants get regular physical activity. Helps them eat vegetable based, real food, low in added sugars and simple carbs, and high in natural healthy fats.

Since that is the way we should all be living, THAT is what the control group should be. I guarantee you, the results would be far different compared to the standard control groups used to date.

That is the trial the drug companies never want to see and will never fund. And that is why all statin trials to date are worthless.

If you can focus on proper lifestyle interventions, using healthy foods, physical activity and stress management as medicine, then we have no idea what effect, if any, statins would have. But I assure you it will be minimal if any benefit.

2-Statins Will Not Prolong Your life

You read that right. For people who have never had heart disease before, the multi-billion dollar drug won’t help you live longer. The overwhelming majority of primary prevention trials involving statins show no difference in overall mortality between those who took the drug and those who did not.

That surprises a lot of people. Statins are promoted as if they are wonder drugs that save lives left and right. That’s good marketing and good PR. Reality is far different.

If they don’t help you live longer, they must increase the quality of your life, right? Nope. In fact, 30-40% of people on statins will experience muscle aches and weakness causing them to exercise less and decreasing the overall quality of their lives.

So, if they don’t help us live longer, and they don’t increase the quality of our lives, why do we take them????

3-Statins DO Reduce Your Heart Attack Risk

If the news was all bad there wouldn’t be any debate about their use. But the truth is that statins do reduce the risk of heart attacks, and that is why in some cases it may be beneficial for you to take one.

But the big question is: How much do statins reduce your heart attack risk? The answer is not as much as you would think. Considering the recommendations keep getting more and more aggressive for statin therapy, you would think statins would be immensely powerful at reducing heart disease risk.

In reality, they reduce the risk of a heart attack by 0.7-1.5% over 5 years. That means you need to treat 66-140 people for 5 years to prevent one heart attack.  (as an aside, for people with pre-existing heart disease, so called secondary prevention, you need to treat approximately 40 people for 5 years to prevent 1 heart attack and 85 people to prevent 1 death)

When presented like that, it should certainly temper the enthusiasm for statin therapy. Again, it may still be the right choice for some people, but given the potential risks and side effects, I would hope for a much greater benefit.

Better Than Statins

A common response is that statins are “the best we have to offer” to reduce one’s risk of cardiovascular disease.  If you are talking about a drug manufactured in a laboratory, then that would be correct. But what else are options?

It turns out following a Mediterranean eating pattern with vegetables, fruit, fish, legumes, and lots of nuts, olive oil and avocados reduces the risk of cardiovascular events as well. For something as simple as nutritional choices the benefit must be much less than a statin, right?

That is what the drug companies would want you to believe. In reality, you need to “treat” 61 people with the Mediterranean diet for 5 years to reduce 1 cardiovascular event (a “combined endpoint” of stroke, heart attack or death).

To be fair, you cannot compare one trial to another as they have very different populations studied, and the outcome measures are different. So, it is not scientifically fair to say, “The Mediterranean diet has been proven to be more beneficial that statins.”  That would require a head-to-head trial. Unfortunately, that trial is unlikely to ever happen.

But it makes for an obvious answer when asked “If statins aren’t all that helpful, what else can I do to reduce my risk of cardiovascular disease?

• Follow a real food, vegetable-based, Mediterranean style diet, low in sugar and high in healthy fats.
• Maintain a physically active lifestyle.
• Exercise with some form of moderate cardio exercise, resistance training and higher intensity interval exercises.
• Practice stress reduction techniques.
• Don’t smoke.
• Manage your other risk factors such as diabetes and high blood pressure.

If you can follow these healthy lifestyle principles, you will be doing far more for your health than any pill you could take. And the best part? The only side effects are having more energy, feeling more empowered, and reducing your risk for chronic diseases.  Sounds like a good trade off to me!

Thanks for reading.

Bret Scher, MD FACC

Cardiologist, author, founder of Boundless Health

www.DrBretScher.com

What Does My Cholesterol Level Mean?

Depending on how you look at it, cholesterol can be an incredibly simple topic, or an incredibly confusing one. Contemporary medicine teaches that cholesterol is “bad” and should be low. That seems pretty simple, right? Get it tested, if it’s high, start a drug to lower it. 

Times have changed. Now, cholesterol is much more complex, and we all need to be armed with knowledge before we sit down with our doctors to evaluate our cholesterol levels.

Here is my guide to you and your doctor for evaluating your cholesterol.

1. Understand the difference between Total Cholesterol (TC) and high density lipoprotein (HDL) and low density lipoprotein (LDL)

If you doctor is referring to your total cholesterol (TC) and is making decision based on your TC— Run, don’t walk. Run away and find another doctor. TC is comprised of low density lipoprotein (LDL), so-called “bad cholesterol” even though it isn’t bad. High density lipoprotein (HDL), so-called “good cholesterol”, and remnant cholesterol (VLDL and IDL). Initial studies in the 1960s and 70s looked at TC and risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and found a weak association.  That was prior to when scientists learned how to measure LDL and HDL.

Studies then looked at the individual lipoproteins (i.e. LDL and HDL) and found the higher the LDL, in general, the higher the risk for CVD. And the higher the HDL< the lower the risk of CVD. So, while talking about TC was cutting edge in the 60s and 70s, it is woefully outdated today. That is why if your doctor is still evaluating and treating TC—Run!

2. Does Your Doctor Know Your TC to HDL and TG to HDL Ratios?

If your doctor does not know your ratios, this is another reason to run away and find another doctor (We are doing lots of running here, bonus exercise!) Studies in the early 2000s and more recently have shown that total cholesterol to HDL ratio (TC:HDL) and triglyceride to HDL ratio (TG:HDL) are BETTER predictors of cardiovascular risk than isolated LDL, TC or HDL.

By incorporating TG and HDL into the analysis, these ratios incorporate the impact of remnant cholesterol and track with insulin resistance, both strong predictors of CVD. These ratios are calculated from a standard lipid profile, so they do not require any special testing or special labs. They are widely available for everyone to see. So if your doctor is not using them to evaluate your lipids, it’s time to find a new one.

3. Understanding a Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) diagnosis

Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is a diagnosis that requires (wait for it…) a family history! As the name suggests, it is an inherited condition passed from generation to generation. All too often, doctors will see an LDL level over 190 and make the diagnosis of FH. If your doctor makes that diagnosis that based on level alone without a family history, run!

There is a well-accepted scoring system, The Simon Broome Criteria, to help determine if someone has FH. This equation factors in age of diagnosis, absolute level of LDL, in addition to family history of early onset hyperlipidemia or early onset heart disease. It makes a big difference if you have FH or not. Don’t let your doctor label you as having FH without applying the full criteria. Just wait for the look on their face when you respond, “What was my Broome score? Did it confirm I have FH?” and hope you don’t hear crickets.

4. What is Advance Lipid Testing?

Advance lipid testing may be helpful. And it may not. Advanced lipid testing can tell us the size, density, and inflammatory characteristics of our lipoproteins. This can help further risk stratify the potential danger of our lipids. For instance, small, dense LDL tend to correlate more strongly with CVD, whereas so-called pattern A LDL (the larger, less dense version) does not correlate as well.

Here is the interesting part. Those with high TG and low HDL almost uniformly have small dense LDL and increased inflammation. Conversely, those with low TGs and high HDL have Pattern A, larger less dense LDL. Are you starting to see a pattern? Low TG and high HDL=good. High TG and low HDL=bad.

Sometimes, however, there can be variation in this equation. Therefore, I usually suggest people get advanced lipid testing one time to see if their results correlate. If they do, then you can just follow your ratios to predict your advanced results. Why not get them all the time? They are frequently not covered by insurance and can be expensive.

5. Interpret your lipids in context

Lipids don’t exist in a vacuum. They exist in your body, so it’s important to take into account what else is going on in your body. Insulin resistance and inflammation can directly affect your lipids and increase your risk in general. Hypertension, obesity, and family history of heart disease also play crucial roles in determining your risk.

Therefore, if your doctor checks only your lipids and bases decision on those labs alone—Run! Instead, you should get a hsCRP, Hgb A1c, fasting glucose, insulin and HOMA-IR, BP measurement, family history assessment, and complete history. This is the context in which your lipids should be evaluated. Not alone in a vacuum.

6. Why test a risk factor that may be related to CVD risk when you can test the disease itself?

Good question, right? To truly know what your lipids mean to you, you also need to know if you have evidence of CVD. Coronary artery calcium scores and Carotid Intima Media Thickness (CIMT) are two easy, relatively inexpensive tests, that you can get to show you whether or not you have current evidence of CVD. The presence or absence of disease significantly impacts the risk of lipid levels.

So, What Does Your Cholesterol mean to You? It depends.

It depends on many factors, and only by evaluating ALL of those factors can you truly know what impact your lipids may be having on our health. Anything short of this evaluation is an inadequate and antiquated approach to lipids.

Now you are forewarned and forearmed, and you can walk into your doctor’s office ready to ask the important questions and help guide the workup so that you can know what your cholesterol means to you.

Thanks for reading, and as always, please let us know If you have any comments or questions.

Bret Scher MD FACC

Founder, Boundless Health

www.LowCarbCardiologist.com