Potential Adverse Effects of Alcohol

In a recent blog post, I discussed the potential benefits of alcohol consumption on longevity, coronary artery disease, and dementia.

Not so fast there, buddy!

Not so fast there, buddy!

I have no intention of overselling the benefits of alcohol.  If you are considering habitual alcohol as a food, be aware that the health benefits are still somewhat debatable.  Consumption of three or more alcoholic drinks per day is clearly associated with a higher risk of breast cancer in women.  Even one or two drinks daily may slightly increase the risk.  Folic acid supplementation might mitigate the risk.  If you are a woman and breast cancer runs in your family, strongly consider abstinence.  Be cautious if there are alcoholics in your family; you may have inherited the pre-disposition.  If you take any medications or have chronic medical conditions, check with your personal physician first.

For those drinking above light to moderate levels, alcohol is clearly perilous.  Higher dosages can cause hypertension, liver disease, heart failure, certain cancers, and other medical problems.  And psychosocial problems.  And legal problems.  And death.  Heavy drinkers have higher rates of violent and accidental death.  Alcoholism is often fatal. 

You should not drink alcohol if you . . .

■  have a history of alcohol abuse or alcoholism
■  have liver or pancreas disease
■  are pregnant or trying to become pregnant
■  may have the need to operate dangerous equipment or machinery, such as an automobile, while under the influence of alcohol
■  have a demonstrated inability to limit yourself to acceptable intake levels
■  have personal prohibitions due to religious, ethical, or other reasons.

Steve Parker, M.D.

Author of The Advanced Mediterranean Diet

References: Lieber, Charles S.  Alcohol and health: A drink a day won’t keep the doctor away.  Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine, 70 (2003): 945-953.

1 Comment

Filed under Alcohol

Dental Problems and Systemic Chronic Disease: A Carbohydrate Connection?

Perfect health on a carnivorous, low-carb diet

Perfect health on a carnivorous, low-carb diet

Dentists are considering a return to an old theory that dietary carbohydrates first cause dental diseases, then certain systemic chronic diseases, according to a review in the June 1, 2009, Journal of Dental Research

We’ve known for years that some dental and systemic diseases are associated with each other, both for individuals and populations.  For example, gingivitis and periodontal disease are associated with type 2 diabetes and coronary heart disease.  The exact nature of that association is not clear.  In the 1990s it seemed that infections – chlamydia, for example – might be the unifying link, but this has not been supported by subsequent research.     

The article is written by Dr. Philippe P. Hujoel, who has been active in dental research for decades and is affiliated with the University of Washington (Seattle).  He is no bomb-throwing, crazed, radical. 

The “old theory” to which I referred is the Cleave-Yudkin idea from the 1960s and ’70s that excessive intake of fermentable carbohydrates, in the absence of good dental care, leads both to certain dental diseases – caries (cavities), periodontal disease, certain oral cancers, and leukoplakia – and to some common systemic chronic non-communicable diseases such as coronary heart disease, type 2 diabetes, some cancers, and dementia.  In other words, dietary carbohydrates cause both dental and systemic diseases – not all cases of those diseases, of course, but some.   

Dr. Hujoel does not define “fermentable” carbohydrates in the article.  My American Heritage Dictionary defines fermentation as:

  1. the anaerobic conversion of sugar to carbon dioxide and alcohol by yeast
  2. any of a group of chemical reactions induced by living or nonliving ferments that split complex organic compunds into relatively simple substances

As reported in David Mendosa’s blog at MyDiabetesCentral.com, Dr. Hujoel said, “Non-fermentable carbohydrates are fibers.”  Dr. Hujoel also shared some personal tidbits there. 

In the context of excessive carbohydrate intake, the article frequently mentions sugar, refined carbs, and high-glycemic-index carbs.  Dental effects of excessive carb intake can appear within weeks or months, whereas the sysemtic effects may take decades. 

Hujoel compares and contrasts Ancel Keys’ Diet-Heart/Lipid Hypothesis with the Cleave-Yudkin Carbohydrate Theory.  In Dr. Hujoel’s view, the latest research data favor the Carbohydrate Theory as an explanation of many cases of the aforementioned dental and systemic chronic diseases.  If correct, the theory has important implications for prevention of dental and systemic diseases: namely, dietary carbohydrate restriction.

Adherents of the paleo diet and low-carb diets will love this article; it supports their choices.

I agree with Dr. Hujoel that we need a long-term prospective trial of serious low-carb eating versus the standard American high-carb diet.  Take 20,000 people, randomize them to one of the two diets, follow their dental and systemic health over 15-30 years, then compare the two groups.  Problem is, I’m not sure it can be done.  It’s hard enough for most people to follow a low-carb diet for four months.  And I’m asking for 30 years?!   

Dr. Hujoel writes:

Possibly, when it comes to fermentable carbohydrates, teeth would then become to the medical and dental professionals what they have always been for paleoanthropologists: “extremely informative about age, sex, diet, health.”

Dr. Hujoel mentioned a review of six studies that showed a 30% reduction in gingivitis score by following a diet moderately reduced in carbs.  He mentions the aphorism: “no carbohydrates, no caries.”  Anyone prone to dental caries or ongoing periodontal disease should do further research to see if switching to low-carb eating might improve the situation. 

Don’t be surprised if your dentist isn’t very familiar with the concept.  Has he ever mentioned it to you?

Steve Parker, M.D.,

Author of The Advanced Mediterranean Diet

Reference:  Hujoel, P.  Dietary carbohydrates and dental-systemic diseasesJournal of Dental Research, 88 (2009): 490-502.

Mendosa, David.  Our dental alarm bell.  MyDiabetesCentral.com, July 12, 2009.

2 Comments

Filed under Carbohydrate, Causes of Diabetes, coronary heart disease, Glycemic Index and Load

Potential Beneficial Effects of Alcohol

FOD023For centuries, the healthier populations in the Mediterranean region have enjoyed wine in light to moderate amounts, usually with meals.  Observational studies there and in other parts of the world have associated reasonable alcohol consumption with prolonged lifespan, reduced coronary artery disease, diminished Alzheimer’s and other dementias, and possibly fewer strokes. 

Alcohol tends to increase HDL cholesterol, have an antiplatelet effect, and may reduce C-reactive protein, a marker of arterial inflammation. These effects would tend to reduce cardiovascular disease.  Wine taken with meals provides antioxidant phytochemicals (polyphenols, procyanidins) which may protect against atherosclerosis and some cancers.

What’s a “reasonable” amount of alcohol?  An old medical school joke is that a “heavy drinker” is anyone who drinks more than the doctor does.  Light to moderate alcohol consumption is generally considered to be one or fewer drinks per day for a woman, two or fewer drinks per day for a man.  One drink is 5 ounces of wine, 12 ounces of beer, or 1.5 ounces of 80 proof distilled spirits (e.g., vodka, whiskey, gin). 

The optimal health-promoting type of alcohol is unclear.  I tend to favor wine, a time-honored component of the Mediterranean diet.  Red wine in particular is a rich source of resveratrol, which is thought to be a major contributor to the cardioprotective benefits associated with light to moderate alcohol consumption.  Grape juice and grape extracts may be just as good—it’s too soon to tell.

Don’t miss my next blogging topic – “Potential Adverse Effects of Alcohol.”

Steve Parker, M.D.

Author of The Advanced Mediterranean Diet: Lose Weight, Feel Better, Live Longer  

References:

Standridge, John B., et al.  Alcohol consumption: An overview of benefits and risks.  Southern Medical Journal, 97 (2004): 664-672.

Luchsinger, Jose A., et al.  Alcohol intake and risk of dementia.  Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 52 (2004): 540-546.

1 Comment

Filed under Alcohol

Medical Cost of Obesity Soars

Healthcare dollars

Healthcare dollars

A report released last week found that obese individuals in the U.S. spend an extra $1,429 yearly on healthcare compared to normal-weight people.  Furthermore, total U.S. cost of treating obesity-related conditions was $147 billion in 2008.

Unsure if you’re overweight or obese?  Find out with one of the body mass index calculators available on the Internet.

Are you obese and fed up with the extra expense?  Are you already suffering from overweight-related medical conditions?  If so, read my document on how to prepare for weight loss, then get started soon. 

Well-begun is half done.

Steve Parker, M.D.

Author of The Advanced Mediterranean Diet

Reference:  Finkelstein, E.A., et al.  Annual medical spending attributable to obesity: Payer and service-specific estimatesHealth Affairs, 28 (2009): w822-w831.

1 Comment

Filed under Overweight and Obesity

U.S. Food and Drug Administration Approves Saxagliptin (Onglyza) for Type 2 Diabetes

CB107673Yesterday, July 31, 2009, the FDA approved use of saxagliptin, a DPP4 inhibitor, in adults with type 2 diabetes as an adjunct to diet and exercise.  Bristol-Myers Squibb and AstraZeneca will sell the drug under the brand name Onglyza.

The drug’s only competitor in the U.S. market is Merck’s Januvia, which sold over $400 million in the first quarter of this year.

“How does saxagliptin work?”

Incretin hormones influence secretion of insulin and glucagon by the pancreas.  The dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP4) enzyme inactivates these incretin hormones.  Saxagliptin inhibits the DPP4 enzyme, resulting in increased insulin production and decreased production of glucagon. 

“But it causes bad side effects, right?”

No, not that we know of yet.  Overall, incidence of side effects is similar to placebo side effects.  The drug may slightly increase headache, runny nose, and sore throat.  Risk of hypoglycemia is increased minimally, if at all. 

“Can I use Onglyza with my other diabetes drugs?”

It’s FDA-approved for use by itself or in combination with metformin, sulfonylureas, and thiazolidinediones. 

“What’s the dose?”

2.5 or 5 mg by mouth daily, without regard to meals. 

“Is this a tremendous breakthrough in treatment of type 2 diabetes?”

Probably not.  But it’s good to have another treatment option.  And competition among the drug manufacturers tends to bring down prices.   

Steve Parker, M.D.

References: 

Bristol-Myers Squibb.   Press Release from Bristol-Myers Squibb, July 31, 2009.

Goldstein, Jacob.  Saxagliptin approval: Finally, competition for Merck’s Januvia.  WSJ.com Health Blog, July 31, 2009.

Comments Off on U.S. Food and Drug Administration Approves Saxagliptin (Onglyza) for Type 2 Diabetes

Filed under Drugs for Diabetes

Glycemic Load Linked to Breast Cancer Risk

Who knew?

Who knew?

Swedish researchers report that  a high dietary glycemic load is tied to a woman’s risk of developing breast cancer.  This adds to a growing body of evidence that high glycemic index and load may be harmful.  Prior studies relate them to higher rates of diabetes and heart disease. 

Click here for my review of glycemic index and load.  NutritionData.com also has a good review of glycemic index.

Steve Parker, M.D.

References:

Reuters Health.  “Glycemic load” of diet tied to breast cancer risk.  MedlinePlus, July 10, 2009.

Parker, Steve.  Glycemic index and chronic disease risk (mostly in women).  Advanced Mediterranean Diet Blog, April 19, 2009.

Comments Off on Glycemic Load Linked to Breast Cancer Risk

Filed under Glycemic Index and Load

Low-Glycemic-Index Eating Had No Effect on Control of Mild Type 2 Diabetes

Caprese salad

Caprese salad

A Canadian study last year found no overall effect on type 2 diabetes control by using a low-glycemic-index diet and lower-carbohydrate diet, although the low-glycemic-index diet did reduce post-meal glucose levels and C-reactive protein.

Background

For many years, a high-fat, low-carbohydrate diet was recommended for type 2 diabetics.  Then in 1979 the American Diabetes Association recommended a high-carb, low-fat diet.  Later, the ADA allowed more fat, mostly monounsaturated. 

The experts are still debating how much and what kind of carbohydrate people with diabetes should eat.  Recent years have seen a trend towards lower carbohydrate intake and lower-glycemic-index eating.  Much of the supportive evidence we have is based on short-term studies – six to 12 weeks. 

A Cochrane review in 2004 concluded that there was no high-quality data on the effectiveness of dietary treatment of diabetes.

The authors of the Canadian study at hand wrote:

Although almost everyone would agree that diet is the cornerstone of diabetes therapy, there is marked disagreement about what kind of dietary advice is best, particularly with respect to dietary carbohydrate.

We can put a man on the moon, but still aren’t sure what’s the best diet for people with diabetes despite years of experience and experimentation.

The Canadian researchers aimed to compare the effects of altered glycemic index and amount of carbohydrate on hemoglobin A1c, blood glucose, lipids, and C-reactive protein in men and women with type 2 diabetes.

Methodology

162 subjects with mild diabetes, 35-75 years old, managed by diet alone, were randomly assigned to one of three diet groups:

  1. high-carb, high-glycemic-index (“high-GI“): 47% of calories from carb, 31% of cals from fat, glycemic index 63
  2. high-carb, low-glycemic-index (“low-GI“): 52% of cals from carb, 27% of cals from fat, glycemic index 55
  3. low-carb, high-monounsaturated fat (“low-CHO“): 39% of cals from carb, 40% of cals from fat, glycemic index 59

Average body mass index was 31 (mildly obese); average weight 83 kg (183 lb).  The study lasted one year, a major strength of the study.

Results One Year Later

Hemoglobin A1c rose from 6.1% to 6.3%, with no difference between the various diet groups.  There were no differences in insulin levels, whether fasting or two hours after an oral glucose tolerance test.  Blood sugar levels after a glucose tolerance test were 7% lower with the low-GI diet compared to the other diet groups.  No difference in LDL cholesterol levels.  Little effect on triglycerides and HDL cholesterol.  No differences in weight.  C-reactive protein in the high-GI group fell from3.34 mg/L to 2.75.  C-reactive protein in the low-GI group fell from 2.64 to 1.95.  [All these C-reactive protein readings are in the normal range.]        

Comments

Nearly all the people with diabetes I encounter are very different from this study cohort: they are on drug therapy for diabetes.  So the results here don’t  necessarily apply to the more typical cases of moderate or severe diabetes that require one or more glucose-control drugs. 

Low-carb diet advocates can justifiably argue that the carb intake was still too high, and that’s why their numbers weren’t better.  Vernon and Eberstein in their book, Atkins Diabetes Revolution, note that many people with type 2 diabetes will have to limit carboydrates (“net carbs”) to 40-60 grams a day.  In the study at hand, the low-carb diet aimed for 39% of calories from carbohydrates.  On a 2000-calorie diet, that’s 195 grams – a far cry from 60 grams.      

Low-Gi advocates also can justifiably argue that the glycemic index was not low enough to make a difference.  The researchers admit that the test diet reductions in carb intake and glycemic index were “modest.”  Perhaps they thought that more drastic reductions were unsustainable.

Attempts to control diabetes with low-carb or low-glycemic-index eating should make more dramatic changes.

The low-glycemic-index diet lowered two-hour glucose levels on the glucose tolerance tests.  The authors state that this parameter is a better indicator of heart disease risk – lower in this case – than are fasting glucose levels.  Findings suggests improvements in insulin resistance and/or pancreas beta cell function.  This finding may have no real-world clinical significance: remember that hemoglobin A1c levels were the same across all groups. 

The changes in C-reactive protein just don’t seem clinically significant to me (nor to an editorialist in the same journal issue).

The aforementioned editorialist, Dr. Xavier Pi-Sunyer, had an interesting comment:

This finding suggests that we must be careful about disrupting subjects’ or patients’ diets with radical , doctrinaire changes that may actually be counterproductive.  Furthermore, the diets had carbohydrate contents that varied from 39% to 52% of energy intake, and yet this variability had no effect on the subjects’ HbA1c.  This finding confirms previous reports that the proportion of carbohydrate in the diet is not very important in determining the concentration of fasting blood glucose and that variations of 10% to 15% of total calories make little difference to overall control in patients with early type 2 diabetes.

I would emphasize “. . . in patients with early type 2 diabetes.”

A Mediterranean-style diet, then, could be just as effective as, if not better than, all the other “diabetic diets” out there.

Steve Parker, M.D.

References:  Wolever, Thomas, et al.  The Canadian Trial of Carbohydrates in Diabetes (CCD), a 1-y controlled trial of low-glycemic-index dietary carbohydrate in type 2 diabetes: no effect on glycated hemoglobin but reduction in C-reactive proteinAmerican Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 87 (2008); 114-125.

Additional Resource:  Michael R. Eades, M.D.  Making worthless data confess.  The Blog of Michael R. Eades, December 13, 2008.  Accessed July 10, 2009.  [Highly critical analysis from a leading low-carb, high-protein advocate.]

2 Comments

Filed under Carbohydrate, Glycemic Index and Load

ADA Now Says Low-Carb Diets OK for Overweight Type 2 Diabetics

CB037166Eighty-five percent of type 2 diabetics are overweight or obese.  Overweight either causes or aggravates many cases of diabetes.

For the last quarter-century, many U.S. government agencies and healthcare organizations have advocated a low-fat diet for overweight people, including type 2 diabetics.  Recent studies have documented that low-carbohydrate diets can also be effective in weight loss.  Low-carb diets replace carbohydrates with either fats or proteins, or both.  The A to Z Weight Loss Study compared the Atkins, Ornish, LEARN, and Zone diets in 311 overweight pre-menopausal women.  The Atkins group tended to lose a bit more weight. Changes in lipid profiles, waist-hip ratios, fasting insulin and glucose levels, blood pressure, and percentage of body fat were comparable or better with Atkins versus the other diets.

The Amerian Diabetes Association now gives the go-ahead for use of low-carb diets as a weight-control method for type 2 diabetics.  Previously, the organization had recommended against diets that restrict carbohydrates to less than 130 grams daily.  (A baked potatoe without the skin has 30 grams.)  Understand that the ADA does not endorse low-carb diets for weight loss or diabetes management.  They simply say that either low-carb or low-fat calorie-restricted diets might be effective for up to one year.

I caution you that low-carb diets may be deficient in fiber, minerals, vitamins, and phytonutrients that may be very beneficial in terms of long-term health and longevity.

The tide has been turning against low-fat diets for the last six years.

Steve Parker, M.D.

Reference: American Diabetes Association.  Clinical Practice Recommendations 2008.  Diabetes Care, 31 (2008): S61-S78.

2 Comments

Filed under Carbohydrate, Overweight and Obesity

ABC News Outlines Healthy Components of the Mediterranean Diet

Happy Birthday, USA!

Happy Birthday, USA!

ABC News (online) June 24, 2009, published a well-done, detailed and balanced article on the various components of the traditional Mediterranean diet, such as fish, legumes, fruits and vegetables.  Lots of pretty pictures, too.  If you need a review, click here to read it

Steve Parker, M.D.

Comments Off on ABC News Outlines Healthy Components of the Mediterranean Diet

Filed under Mediterranean Diet

A Chance to Cut is a Chance to Cure

"Has anybody seen my pen?"

"Has anybody seen my pen?"

Gastric bypass is the most common bariatric surgery in the U.S.  The odds of dying from that procedure are roughly 1 in 200.  Thousands of people sign on the dotted line for it every year.  Why do they take that risk?

A recent study out of Sweden shows that people who undergo various bariatric surgeries reduce their risk of death over the next 11 years by 25%.

In the Swedish Obese Subjects Study, 2010 subjects underwent bariatric surgery and 2037 received conventional treatment.  Overall mortality was recorded over the next 11 years.  Only three of the subjects were lost to follow-up (unknown whether alive or not).  The average body mass index (BMI) for all subjects was 41.

Out of the conventional treatment group, 126 died.  In the surgery group, only 101 died.  Average weight change in the conventional treatment group was up or down only 2%.  People in the surgery group were given one of three operations: gastric bypass, vertical-banded gastroplasty, or banding.  After 10 years, average weight loss of the groups was 25%, 16%, and 14%, respectively.

Over the course of 11 years, people in the surgery group had 25% less chance of dying when compared to the conventional treatment group.  The most common causes of death were heart attacks and cancer.

Even better results were found back in the U.S.  Researchers in Utah looked at mortality rates of 7925 patients who had undergone gastric bypass surgery between 1984 and 2002.  They compared death rates to a control group (also 7925 people) of obese people who applied for driver’s licenses.  Subjects were matched for sex, body mass index, and age.  Average BMI of the surgical group was 45.

Over the course of seven years, there were 321 deaths in the control group and 213 in the surgery group.  Deaths from any cause were reduced by 40% in the surgery group, compare to the control group.  Surgery patients had less death from cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and cancer.

Surgery is definitely a roll of the dice.  Now you know why people play the game.

Steve Parker, M.D.

References:

Sjostrom, Lars, et al.  Effects of Bariatric Surgery on Mortality in Swedish Obese Subjects.  New England Journal of Medicine, 357 (2007):  741-752.

Adams, Ted, et al.  Long-Term Mortality after Gastric Bypass Surgery.  New England Journal of Medicine, 357 (2007): 753-761. 

6 Comments

Filed under Bariatric Surgery, Overweight and Obesity