Comparison of Mediterranean, Low-Carb, and Low-Fat Weight-Loss Diets

The July 17, 2008, issue of the New England Journal of Medicine has a well-done study comparing the Mediterranean, low-carb, and low-fat weight-loss diets in an Israeli population over the course of two years.  The researchers conclude that “Mediterranean and low-carbohydrate diets may be effective alternatives to low-fat diets.  The more favorable effects on lipids (with the low-carbohydrate diet) and on glycemic control (with the Mediterranean diet) suggest that personal preferences and metabolic considerations might inform individualized tailoring of dietary interventions.”

How was the study set up?

Moderately obese participants (322) were randomly assigned to one of the three diets: 1) low-fat, calorie-restricted, 2) Mediterranean, calorie-restricted, or 3) low-carbohydrate, non-restricted.  Calories in the low-fat and Mediterranean diets were “restricted” to 1800 per day for the men, 1500 for the women.  Average age of participants was 52, and average body mass index was 31.  [A 5-foot, 10-inch man weighing 216 pounds (98.2 kg) has a BMI of 31.]  Nearly all participants – 277 or 86% of the total – were men.  So there were only 45 women.  Forty-six participants had type 2 diabetes.

The low-fat diet was based on the American Heart Association guidelines of 2000: 30% of calories from fat [this isn’t very low], 10% of calories from saturated fat, cholesterol limited to 300 mg/day.  [The AHA revised their guidelines in 2006.]  Low-fat dieters ”were counseled to consume low-fat grains, vegetables, fruits, and legumes and to limit their consumption of additional fats, sweets, and high-fat snacks.”

The Mediterranean diet was based on the recommendations of Walter Willett and P.J. Skerrett as in their book, Eat, Drink, and be Healthy: The Harvard Medical School Guide to Health Eating.  Mediterranean dieters ate 2 fish meals per week, a handful of nuts daily, 30-45 grams of extra virgin olive oil per day, etc.  [One tablespoon of olive oil is 14 grams.]  The AHA states that “this diet reflects the current recommendations from the American Heart Association.”  There were no specific recommendations regarding alcohol in any of the diets.

The low-carb diet was based on  Atkins’ New Diet Revolution of 2002.  The goal was to provide 20 grams of carbohydrate per day for the 2-month induction phase, with a gradual increase to a maximum of 120 grams daily to maintain weight loss.  Total calories, protein, and fat were not limited.  “Participants were counseled to choose vegetarian sources of fat and protein….”

Whole grains were recommended for the low-fat and Mediterranean cohorts.

All participants worked at the same nuclear research facility in Dimona, Israel.  They were given careful instructions, initially and periodically, regarding the diet to which they were assigned.  Lunch is the main meal of the day in Israel, and they all ate lunch at the facility’s self-service cafeteria, which prompted them to choose the proper food items.  I assume they were told to maintain the diet when off-duty.  Adherence to the diets was assessed by a food-frequency questionnaire.

Findings

  • After 24 months, how many participants were still involved?  90% in the low-fat group, 85% in the Mediterranean, 78% in the low-carb.
  • There was little change in the usage of medications, and no significant differences among the groups.
  • Daily energy intake (calories or kcal) decreased from baseline levels significantly – about 450 calories – in all groups at 6, 12, and 24 months compared with baseline, with no significant differences among the groups in the amount of decrease.
  • All groups started with 51% of energy intake (calories) from carbohydrate.
  • At 24 months, the low-carb dieters were getting 40% of their daily calories as carbohydrates.  The other two groups were eating 50% of energy intake from carbs. [This still seems like a lot of carbs on the Atkins diet.  A gram of carbs has 4 calories.  The stated carbohydrate goal was a maximum of 120 grams of carbs daily, on a diet of 1800 calories.  So 120 grams of carbohydrate should be 27% of total daily calories.  At no point did the low-carb group reduce their average percentage of calories from carbohydrates under 40%.  OK, maybe be in the first two weeks but those data are not reported.  On an 1800 calorie diet, 40% of calories from carbs would be 180 grams.]
  • At 24 months, the low-carb dieters were getting 39% of their daily calories as fat.  The other two groups were in the 30-33% range.
  • Baseline fat intake for all groups was 31-32% of total calories, with saturated fat being 10% of the fat calories.
  • The low-fat cohort dropped their fat calories from 31 to 30% of total calories, which is essentially no change from baseline percentage.
  • At 24 months, the low-carbers were getting 22% of their daily calories from protein.  The other groups were at 19%.  [The low-carb Atkins diet is often criticized as having too much protein.]
  • Only the low-carb group made major changes in macronutrient composition of their diet.  Macronutrients are protein, fat, and carbohydrates.  This Atkins group increased saturated fat from 10 to 12% of total calories, reduced carbs from 51 to 40% of calories, increased protein from 19 to 22% of calories, and increased total fat from 32% to 39% or total calories.
  • All cohorts lost weight, but losses were greater in the low-carb and Mediterranean groups.  For the 272 participants who completed the full 24 months of intervention, the losses averaged 3.3 kg (7.3 lb) for the low-fat group, 4.6 kg (10.1 lb) for the Mediterraneans, and 5.5 kg (12.1 lb) for the low-carb group.
  • Among the 45 women, the low-fat group lost only 0.1 kg (0.22 lb), the Mediterraneans lost 6.2 kg (13.6 lb), and the low-carbers lost 2.4 kg (5.3 lb).  There were only 15, 20, and 10 women in these groups, respectively.
  • All groups had significant blood pressure reductions: about 4 mmHg systolic and 1 mmHg diastolic.
  • HDL cholesterol (the “good cholesterol”) increased in all groups, 8.4 mg/dl in the low-carb group, about 6.3 in the others.
  • LDL cholesterol (the “bad cholesterol”) fell 5.6 mg/dl in the Mediterraneans, 3.0 mg/dl in the low-carbers, and none in the low-fat group.  But these were not statistically significant differences between the groups.
  • The ratio of total to HDL cholesterol decreased for all groups, but the relative 20% decrease in the low-carb group was statistically significant compared to the 12% relative decrease in the low-fat group.  The ratio fell 16% in the Mediterranean group.  [The total/HDL ratio is thought to reflect risk of developing atherosclerotic complications.  You want it under 5 to 1, and 3.5 to 1 may be ideal.]
  • The level of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein decreased significantly only in the Mediterranean and low-carb cohorts.  [C-reactive protein is felt to be a marker of the systemic inflammation that has a role in atherosclerosis or hardening of the arteries.]
  • Thirty-six of the diabetics had adequate lab studies for analysis – about 12 in each diet group.  Only those in the Mediterranean group had a significant decrease in fasting glucose – 33 mg/dl.  The low-fat group had an increase.  Glycated hemoglobin decreased in all three groups although to a significant degree (0.9%) only in the low-carb group.  [High glycated hemoglobin levels reflect poor control of blood sugar levels in diabetics.]
  • Insulin levels decreased significantly in all three groups, diabetic or not.  [Abnormally high insulin levels are felt to have adverse health effects.]

Limitations of the study

  • Relatively few women, making it difficult to reliably generalize results to women.
  • Relatively few people with diabetes, making it difficult to reliably generalize results to people with diabetes.
  • Israeli gene pool?  Results not applicable to others?
  • No change in physical activity recommended to participants.  Increased exercise should enhance weight loss.

Take-Home Points

  • Caloric restriction leads to weight loss.
  • Mild degrees of weight loss reduce blood pressure.
  • In this study, the low-carb/Atkins and Mediterranean diets were more effective than the “low-fat” diet.
  • Atkins dieters can lose weight without counting calories, by limiting carbohydrate intake.
  • You gotta wonder if the low-carb group would have been even more successful if they had actually limited carbs to 120 grams daily.
  • It’s possible a lower-fat diet may have been more efficacious than the one utilized here.
  • This study did not enroll enough women to prove that a calorie-restricted Mediterranean diet is superior to low-fat and Atkins diets.  The greater weight loss – 13.6 pounds for Mediterranean versus 5.3 with Atkins – is suggestive and requires further study.
  • The average amounts of weight loss are not much when you think about the effort expended over 24 months of intervention.
  • These dieters reportedly reduced their daily caloric intake from baseline levels by about 450 calories, over the course of two years.  Yet they lost relatively little weight.  The numbers do not jive.  Most likely there is a problem with the methodology.  I doubt the average daily calorie deficit was as high as 450.
  • The Mediterranean diet seems to have been better for the people with diabetes.  Confirmatory studies are imperative.  Insulin resistance is an important factor in type 2 diabetes.  Monounsaturated fats, which are prominent in olive oil and the Mediterranean diet, are linked to improvement in insulin resistance in other studies.
  • For people who need to lose excess fat yet refuse to consciously restrict overall caloric  intake, the low-carb Atkins diet is a reasonable option.
  • The traditional Mediterranean diet has demonstrable long-term health benefits: longer lifespan, less cancer (colon, prostate, breast, uterus), reduction of cardiovascular disease, less dementia, and prevention of type 2 diabetes.  The Atkins diet cannot make those claims in 2008.

Steve Parker, M.D.

Reference:  Shai, Iris, et al.  Weight Loss with a Low-Carbohydrate, Mediterranean, or Low-Fat Diet.  New England Journal of Medicine, 359 (2008): 229-241.

Additional information and critical analysis for health nuts like me:

Dr. Dean Ornish’s analysis in Newsweek online   Dr. Ornish is a leading low-fat diet advocate.

American Heart Association comments on the study in a July 19, 2008, news release

My additional comments:

The Mediterranean diet used in this study is based on Walter Willett’s 2001 book, Eat, Drink, and Be Healthy: The Harvard Medical School Guide to Healthy Eating.  From the author:

I wrote this book to show you where the USDA Pyramid is wrong and why it is wrong.  I wanted to offer a new healthy eating guide based of the best scientific evidence, a guide that fixed the fundamental flaws of the USDA Pyramid and helps you make better choices about what you eat.  I also wanted to give you the latest information on new discoveries that shuould have profound effects on our eating patterns. 

Dr. Willett made a conscious decision not to call his new eating plan a Mediterranean diet.  Elsewhere in the book he notes that the Mediterranean diet pyramid promoted by Oldways Preservation and Exchange Trust is a good, evidence-based guide for healthy eating.  The entire book promotes Harvard’s Healthy Eating Pyramid, not the Mediterranean diet per se.

Harvard’s Healthy Eating Pyramid:

Harvard's Healthy Eating Pyramid

So were the Mediterranean dieters in the study at hand even following the Mediterranean diet?  The most glaring difference is Harvard’s lack of emphasis on olive oil.  Of lesser note is Harvard’s recommendation to eat white rice, white bread, potatoes, and refined-flour pasta only sparingly.  However, the researchers for this study directed Mediterranean diet participants to ingest 30-45 grams of olive oil per day.  After comparing the Harvard pyramid with the Oldways Mediterranean pyramid and other Mediterranean diet descriptions, it is fair to say the dieters here were indeed instructed on a Mediterranean diet.  In fact, the Mediterranean diet in this study is quite similar to the Advanced Mediterranean Diet.

Traditional healthy Mediterranean diet pyramid of Oldways Preservation and Exchange Trust:

Traditional healthy Mediterranean diet pyramid of Oldways Preservation and Exchange Trust

 

1 Comment

Filed under Mediterranean Diet, Weight Loss

Do Vitamin D and Calcium Supplements Cut Risk of Diabetes?

Cliffs of Dover: Pure White Calcium Carbonate

Cliffs of Dover: Pure White Calcium Carbonate

Several studies have associated vitamin D and calcium intake with lower risk of developing type 2 diabetes.  After reading that the Institute of Medicine in 2010 will probably increase the recommended amounts of vitamin D for every one, I decided to review the literature pertinent to diabetes.

Over the last 10 years, studies have associated low blood levels of vitamin D with a higher risk of cardiovascular disease, death, type 2 diabetes, some cancers, infections, autoimmune diseases, frequent falls in the elderly, and dementia.

The Institute of Medicine (in the U.S.) currently recommends 200 IU (international units) per day for people under 50, 400 IU for people 50-70, with an upper intake level of 2,000 IU per day.  I assume those amounts refer to a combination of food (or supplements) and the vitamin D your skin makes (but how do we know that?). 

The new recommendation is expected to be around 1,000-2,000 IU per day.  It’s quite difficult to get close to that just with food.  With adequate sun exposure, we can make some vitamin D.  But the dermatologists have scared us out of the sun with horror stories of skin cancer.  I’ve seen some tragic cases in my own patients.  Skin covered with sunscreen doesn’t make vitamin D.  It can be difficult to get enough sun exposure, especially at higher latitudes in winter

I reviewed scientific articles pertinent to tyepe 2 diabetes via PubMed and list the best ones for you below.   The evidence in favor of using vitamin D and calcium supplements to prevent diabetes is weak, but may be correct. 

I found nothing to suggest that high vitamin D and calcium intake (whether food or supplements) helps control established cases of diabetes. 

Take-Home Points 

If you want to prevent type 2 diabetes with supplements, 1000 IU of vitamin D and 800-1000 mg of elemental calcium daily might help.  The evidence is not strong.  It might help; it might not.  But it’s unlikely to hurt.  Check with your personal physician first.  More studies are needed.  Calcium supplements are routinely recommended by expert nutrition panels for people over 60 to prevent osteoporosis.  The vitamin D supplement may be healthy in other ways.

Who, in particular, might want to prevent type 2 diabetes?  People with . . .

I’m sufficiently convinced about the nondiabetic vitamin D benefits that I’m going to start taking 1,000 IU per day.

Steve Parker, M.D.,

References:

Pittas, Anastassios, et al.  The effects of calcium and vitamin D supplementatinon on blood glucose and markers of inflammatin in nondiabetic adults.  Diabetes Care, 30 (2007): 980-9896.

Chowdhurry, T.A., et al.  Vitamin D and type 2 diabetes: Is there a link?  Primary Care Diabetes, April 21, 2009 (Epub ahead of print).

Pittas, Anastassios, et al.  Vitamin D and calcium intake in relation to type 2 diabetes in women.  Diabetes Care, 29 (2006): 650-656.

Knept, P., et al.  Serum vitamin D and subsequent occurrence of type 2 diabetes.  Epidemiology, 19 (2008): 666-671.

de Boer, I.H., et al.  Calcium plus vitamin D supplementation and hte risk of incident diabetes in the Womens’ health Initiative.  Diabetes Care, 31 (2008): 701-707. (Epub January 30, 2008).

2 Comments

Filed under Causes of Diabetes, Prevention of T2 Diabetes

Adverse Health Effects of Obesity

"I'm not fat, I'm chubby"

"I'm not fat, I'm chubby"

As a physician, I see many illnesses and conditions that are caused or aggravated by overweight and obesity.  Both terms refer to excess body fat; obesity is a greater degree of fat.

Body mass index (BMI) is used to define overweight and obesity.  Your BMI is your weight in kilograms divided by your height in meters squared.  A BMI between 18.5 and 25 is considered healthy.  BMIs between 25 and 30 are overweight.  Here’s an online BMI calculator.  For example, a 5-foot, 4-inch person enters obesity territory – BMI over 30 – when weight reaches 174 pounds (79 kilograms).  A 5-foot, 10-incher is obese starting at 208 pounds (94.5 kilograms).

People trying to lose excess fat typically have days when willpower, discipline, and commitment waver.  On those days, it can help to remember why they started this adventure in the first place.  The reasons for many involve improved health and longevity.  Even if you have just 20 pounds of excess fat to lose, it will often take twenty weeks.  Your weight-loss goal is one to one-and-a-half pounds a week. 

This race is won not by the swift, but by the slow and steady.

Here’s a laundry list of obesity-related conditions to remind you why you want to avoid obesity:

  • Premature death.  It starts at BMI of 30, with a major increase in premature death at BMI over 40.  The U.S. has 200,000 yearly deaths directly attributable to obesity.
  • Arthritis, especially of the knees.
  • Type 2 diabetes melllitus.  Eight-five percent of people with type 2 diabetes are overweight.
  • Increased cardiovascular disease risk, especially with an apple-shaped fat distribution as compared to pear-shaped.  Cardiovascular disease includes heart attacks, high blood pressure, strokes, and peripheral arterial disease (poor circulation).
  • Obstructive sleep apnea.
  • Gallstones are three or four times more common in the obese.
  • High blood pressure.  At least one third of cases are caused by excess body fat.  Every 20 pounds of excess fat raises blood pressure 2-3 points (mmHg).
  • Tendency to higher total and LDL cholesterol, higher triglycerides, while lowering HDL cholesterol.  These lipid changes are associated with hardening of the arteries – atherosclerosis – which can lead to heart attacks, strokes, and peripheral arterial disease.
  • Increased cancers.  Prostate and colorectal in men.  Endometrial, gallbladder, cervix, ovary, and breast in women.  Kidney and esophageal adenocarcinoma in both sexes.  Excess fat contributes to 14-20% of all cancer-related deaths in the U.S.  Over 550,000 people die from cancer in the U.S. yearly.  Twenty percent of us will die from cancer.
  • Strokes.
  • Low back pain.
  • Gout.
  • Varicose veins.
  • Hemorrhoids.
  • Blood clots in legs and lungs.
  • Surgery complications: poor wound healing, blood clots, wound infection, breathing problems.
  • Pregnancy complications: toxemia, high blood pressure, diabetes, prolonged labor, greater need for C-section.
  • Fat build-up in liver.
  • Asthma.
  • Low sperm counts.
  • Decreased fertility.
  • Delayed or missed diagnosis due to difficult physical examination or weight exceeding the limit of diagnostic equipment.

I hope you find this information motivational rather than depressing.  For those already obese, weight loss can significantly improve, alleviate, or prevent these conditions.  Many obesity-related medical conditions and metabolic abnormalities are improved with loss of just five or 10% of total body weight.  For instance, a 240 pound man with mild diabetes and high blood pressure may be able to reduce or avoid drug therapy by losing just 12 to 24 pounds.  He’s still obese, but healthier.

Steve Parker, M.D. 

3 Comments

Filed under Overweight and Obesity

Low-Carb Diet Beats Low-Fat, Calorie-Restricted Diet

Body mass index 38

Body mass index 38

I found one of the early studies (2003) demonstrating the effectiveness and safety of an Atkins-style diet in the severely obese.  Doctors traditionally have been hesitant to recommend the Atkins diet out of concern for tolerability and potential increased atherosclerosis complication such as heart attacks, strokes, and poor circulation.

Methodology

The study enrolled 132 subjects with an average body mass index of 43, including 77 blacks and 23 women.  39% had diabetes, 43% had metabolic syndrome.  They were randomly assigned to either . . .

  1. a low-carb diet without caloric restriction (carbohydrates limited to 30 gm/day; vegetables and fruits with high ratios of fiber to carbohydrate were recommended), or
  2. a low-fat, calorie-restricted diet. 

Subjects followed their diets for six months.  The researchers never specified, but I’m assuming the diabetics were all type 2. 

Results

The drop-out rate was equally high in both groups: only 79 subjects completed the study.  The low-carb group lost 5.8 kg (13 lb); the low-fat group lost 1.9 kg (4 lb).  Analysis included the drop-outs, for reasons unclear to me.  White subjects lost more weight than blacks: 13 versus 5 kg (29 versus 11 lb).  Total cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, and LDL cholesterol levels did not change significantly within or between groups.  [HDL usually rises on a low-carb diet.]   Triglycerides fell 20% in the low-carb group and 4% in the other group.  For subjects with diabetes, glucose levels fell 26 mg/dl in the low-carb group compared to 5 mg/dl in the low-fat group.  Uric acid levels didn’t change in either group.  [Elevated uric acid levels can cause gout.]  No significant adverse reactions attibutable to the diets were recorded in either group.  Glycosylated hemoglobin fell from 7.8 to 7.2% in the low-carb group, with no change in the low-fat group.   

Take-Home Points  

It’s a small study, so results may not be very accurate or generalizable to other populations.

In this cohort with a high prevalence of diabetes, the low-carb diet was more effective than the low-fat/calorie-restricted diet for weight loss, with no adverse lipid changes to suggest increased long-term cardiovascular risk.  The low-carb diet helped control diabetes. 

Steve Parker, M.D. 

Reference:  Samaha, Frederick, et al.  A low-carbohydrate as compared with a low-fat diet in severe obesity.  New England Journal of Medicine, 348 (2003): 2,074-2,081.

2 Comments

Filed under Carbohydrate, Overweight and Obesity, Weight Loss

Fiber and Systemic Inflammation

Over three grams of fiber

Over three grams of fiber

High dietary fiber intake helps prevent constipation, diverticular disease, hemorrhoids, irritable bowel syndrome, and perhaps colon polyps.  Soluble fiber helps control blood sugar levels in people with diabetes, and it reduces LDL cholesterol levels, thereby reducing risks of coronary heart disease.

An  article in the journal Nutrition suggests how fiber may have beneficial effects in atherosclerosis (the cause of heart attacks and strokes), type 2 diabetes, and some cancers.  These conditions are felt to be related to underlying systemic inflammation.

Systemic inflammation can be judged by blood levels of inflammatory markers such as interleukin-6, tumor necrosis factor-alpha-receptor-2, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein.

Researchers looked at 1,958 postmenopausal women in the Women’s Health Initiative Observational Study, comparing inflammatory marker levels with dietary fiber intake.  They found that high fiber intake was associated with significantly lower levels of inflammatory markers interleukin-6 and tumor necrosis factor-alpha-receptor-2.  This association was true individually for total fiber, insoluble fiber, and soluble fiber.  The researchers found no association with C reactive protein.

Bottom line?  High intake of dietary fiber seems to reduce chronic inflammation, which may, in part, explain the observed clinical benefits of fiber.

Rest assured that the Mediterranean diet is naturally high in fiber.

Steve Parker, M.D.

Reference:  Ma, Yensheng, et al.  Association between dietary fiber and markers of systemic inflammation in the Women’s Health Initiative Observational Study.  Nutrition, 24 (2008): 941-949.

1 Comment

Filed under Fiber

Quote of the Day

MPj04340430000[1]

Good Morning!  This is God.

I will be handling all of your problems today.  I will not need your help.   So relax and have a great day!

 

[I keep a poster of this above my desk.  It’s comforting to re-read it when I start to worry too much.  I hope it does the same for you.]

 -Steve Parker, M.D.

Comments Off on Quote of the Day

Filed under Quote of the Day

Mediterranean Diet + Nuts = Reversal of Metabolic Syndrome

MPj04031620000[1]An article published December 8, 2008, by Bloomberg.com presents results of a recent scientific study in Spain that showed reduction in “metabolic syndrome” by the Mediterranean diet supplemented with nuts.  CBSnews.com, Reuters, and others helped spread the news.  The Bloomberg article was written by Nicole Ostrow.

Metabolic syndrome is a constellation of clinical factors that are associated with increased risk of type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic complications such as heart attack and stroke.  [Sometimes metabolic sydrome is called Syndrome X, which I sorta like.  Oh, the mystery!]  One in six Americans have the syndrome.  Diagnosis requires at least three of the following five conditions:

  • High blood pressure (130/85 or higher, or using a high blood pressure medication)
  • Low HDL cholesterol:  under 40 mg/dl in a man, under 50 in a women (or either sex taking a cholesterol-lowering drug)
  • Triglycerides over 150 mg/dl (or taking a cholesterol-lowering drug)
  • Abdominal fat:  waist circumference 40 inches or greater in a man, 35 inches or greater in a woman
  • Fasting blood glucose over 100 mg/dl

The scientific study at hand is part of the PREDIMED study being conducted in Spain.  For this portion of the study, 1,224 participants at high risk for cardiovascular disease were randomized to follow a 1) low-fat diet (considered the control group), 2) Mediterranean diet plus 1 liter virgin olive oil per week, or 3) Mediterranean diet plus 30 gm daily of mixed nuts.

Note that the nuts used in this study were walnuts, almonds, and hazelnuts.  Half of all nuts were walnuts; a quarter of the nuts were almonds and a quarter were hazelnuts.

Participants were 55-80 years old, and 61% had metabolic syndrome at baseline.  Participants could eat all they wanted, and there was no increase in physical activity for any of the groups.  Participants were given instructions at baseline and quarterly.

After one year of intervention, the prevalence of metabolic syndrome  was reduced by 14% in the Mediterranean diet plus nuts group compared to the control, low-fat diet group.  The Mediterranean diet plus extra olive oil group reduced prevalence of metabolic syndrome by 7%, but this did not reach statistical significance (P=0.18).

New cases of metabolic syndrome continued to develop at about the same rate in all three groups.  I.e., incident rates were not significantly different.  So, the lower prevalence of metabolic syndrome after one year reflected reversion or clearing of the syndrome in many people who had it at baseline.  Compared to the control group, people in the nutty group were 70% more likely to resolve their metabolic syndrome.  Individuals in the oily group were 30% more likely than controls to resolve the condition.

[Feel free to consult a dictionary for definitions of “prevalence” and “incidence.”]

The researchers conclude that:

A traditional Mediterranean diet enriched with nuts could be a useful tool in the management of the metabolic syndrome. 

My Comments:

Thirty grams (daily) of nuts is a decent-sized snack of about 180 calories.  Thirty grams of almonds formed a heap in the palm of my hand, not touching my fingers.  This is more than the “two tablespoons” reported by CBSnews.com December 9.

If you have metabolic syndrome, you might want to try reversing it with all the usual methods (e.g., lose excess fat weight, exercise more) along with a traditional Mediterranean diet enriched with 30 gm of mixed nuts daily.  As usual, check with your personal healthcare provider first.  Be aware that many of them won’t know about this study.

The puzzling thing to me is:  If the Mediterranean diet plus extra nuts is so effective in reversing metabolic syndrome, why didn’t that study cohort see fewer new cases of metabolic syndrome?

Steve Parker, M.D., author of The Advanced Mediterranean Diet

Additional reference:  Salas-Salvado, Jordi, et al.  Effect of a Mediterranean Diet Supplemented With Nuts on Metabolic Syndrome Status: One-Year Results of the PREDIMED Randomized Trial.  Archives of Internal Medicine, 168 (2008): 2,449-2,458.

4 Comments

Filed under Causes of Diabetes, Mediterranean Diet

TZDs Associated With Broken Bones

You do NOT want this hip bone to break!

You do NOT want this hip bone to break!

A study presented at the 2009 Scientific Sessions of the American Diabetes Association associated thiazolidinedione drugs with a 40% higher fracture risk. 

Thiazolidinediones used in the U.S. are rosiglitazone (Avandia) and pioglitazone (Actos).  “Thiazolidinedione” is so hard to pronounce that my physician colleagues refer to them as “TZDs” or “glitazones.” 

The researchers examined the Medco database – more than 13 million people – looking for people with diabetes between the ages of 43 and 63 at study onset who were using TZDs, metformin, exenatide (Byetta), or a sulfonylurea (e.g., glipizide, glyburide, glimiperide).

Note that this study has not yet undergone the peer-review process and been published in a medical journal.

Take-Home Points 

These results are prelimary and require confirmation and peer-review by experts in the field.  Nevertheless, if I had diabetes and were at risk of broken bones –  presence of osteoporosis, for example – I would ask my doctor about alternatives before taking TZDs.  Stay alert for developments.   

Steve Parker, M.D.

Reference:  Wood, Shelley.  More evidence links glitazones to broken bones.  TheHeart.org, June 12, 2009.

Comments Off on TZDs Associated With Broken Bones

Filed under Drugs for Diabetes

Misleading “Mediterranean Diet” Headline at the Washington Post

Perhaps you read the December 17, 2008, Washington Post (online) article, “Mediterranean-Style Diet Best for Blood Sugar Control.”

The same headline was used by MedlinePlus: Trusted Health Information for You, a service of the U.S. government.  The two articles may be exactly the same.

A physician spokeswoman for the American Heart Association is quoted in the story saying that “…the best diet is a Mediterranean-type diet…”

I mention this only because the Canadian study to which she refers is not a test of the Mediterranean diet in people with diabetes.

[Did you know that some people with diabetes are offended if you call them “diabetics”?  To call them diabetics defines them by their disease.  They’re not diseases, they’re individual humans.]

There are certainly some studies indicating that the traditional Mediterranean diet may be a good one for people with diabetes, and that the Mediterranean diet can prevent type 2 diabetes, but this Canadian study is not one of them.

Steve Parker, M.D.

Reference:  Jenkins, David,  et al.  Effect of a Low-Glycemic Index or High-Cereal Fiber Diet on Type 2 Diabetes: A Randomized Trial.  Journal of the American Medical Association, 300 (2008): 2,742-2,753.

Comments Off on Misleading “Mediterranean Diet” Headline at the Washington Post

Filed under Causes of Diabetes, Mediterranean Diet

Health Benefits of Nuts

You just don't see sickly squirrels.  Hmmm . . .

You just don't see sickly squirrels. Hmmm . . .

I frequently check in at CalorieLab for up-to-date nutrition news.

Karen Collins, M.S., R.D., C.D.N., was a guest contributor there March 14, 2009, writing about the potential health benefits of nuts.  I was aware of the cardiovascular benefits; she taught me about possible salutary effects on cancer and diabetes.

From my own literature review, the cardiac benefits are associated with a nut “dose” of three to five 1-ounce servings a week.

Last December, I blogged about reversal of metabolic syndrome with a Mediterranean Diet supplemented with nuts.

I recommend Ms. Collins’ article to you. 

Steve Parker, M.D.

Reference:  Albert, Christine, et al.  Nut consumption and decreased risk of sudden cardiac death in the Physicians’ Health StudyArchives of Internal Medicine, 162, (2002): 1,382-1,387.

2 Comments

Filed under Health Benefits, Mediterranean Diet