Here's another study I stumbled across while investigating the milk and cancer link that keeps cropping up.

Dairy Products, Calcium, and Vitamin D and Risk of Prostate Cancer

Coincidentally, Tara over at the New York Times' Well Blog just posted this:
Low-Fat Diet May Cut Prostate Cancer Risk, NYTs Well Blog, May 16 2008.

It's based on this study:
Effect of Low-Fat Diet on Development of Prostate Cancer and Akt Phosphorylation in the Hi-Myc Transgenic Mouse Model, Cancer Research, April 2008

Where mice were fed:

• High-fat diet (HF: 42% of calories from fat)

Many of my ancestors came to this country less than a generation ago. (Many have yet to make the trip!) One thing I have in common with them (not a brogue, but my father could slip into his with ease) is insanely low cholesterol.

That's why this study caught my eye:

An Association Between Hypocholesterolaemia And Colorectal Carcinoma In An Irish Population

Would it were that cancer in the real world could be so readily switched off.

Here's another study. On rats. After administering a carcinogen (aflatoxin), researchers fed rats a high-protein diet. The rats' cancer grew. Researchers switched to a low-protein diet, the rat's cancer regressed. Researchers switched back to the high-protein diet. The rats' cancer came back, with a vengeance.

This is a follow-up to my post, Dietary Fat Raises Insulin Levels.

Warren asked:"I am curious whether there is any detail provided in these studies regarding the types of fat, or is all fat, i.e., saturated, unsaturated, etc. lumped together?"The type of fat matters. The more saturated the fat, the more often it's associated with reductions in insulin sensitivity. The following study is often cited:

Substituting Dietary Saturated For Monounsaturated Fat Impairs Insulin Sensitivity In Healthy Men And Women: The KANWU Study, Diabetologia, 2001

I've been meaning to post this for months and now is a good time, given my previous post about deaths linked to an intensive diabetes drug regimen. This study shows that diet, and diet alone, can affect a change in glycemic measures, e.g. HbA1c, that rivals what can be had with drug therapy.

It's one of the studies Melinda mentioned in comments. I like it because it's a diet study, not a nutrient study. Diet studies are harder to conduct than nutrient interventions. But to me they're more real. They're about foods and what people eat, and how that day-to-day behavior can affect health.

Given the heated interest in resistant starch (RS) these days, lab rats' diets have been getting pretty darn starchy. And by the looks of it, their colons are healthier for it.

Score another point for a plant-based diet!

The American Association of Cancer Research (along with its co-sponsors and supporters, the American Cancer Society, the National Cancer Institute, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Susan G. Komen for the Cure, and the Cancer Research Prevention Foundation) held its very popular Frontiers In Cancer Prevention Research meeting last December.

It's described as "the only comprehensive conference on cancer prevention in the world."

I was browsing through its abstracts (hundreds) and came across a number that discussed the benefits of raspberries ... raspberries!

Here was Part 1.

I'm surprised by what I'm discovering about the possible carcinogenic effects of meat. I'm also surprised that these points weren't raised in any of the literature I read so far surrounding low-carb diets, which almost universally promote meat consumption. I've been experimenting with low-carb diets as a way to manage my blood sugar. But with the recent diagnoses of cancer in my family, I'm revisiting their safety.

I was perusing research on hormone-related cancers - breast, endometrial, prostate - looking for therapies to complement conventional treatments (surgery, radiation, drugs).

I saw this (pdf):
Intensive Lifestyle Changes May Affect The Progression Of Prostate Cancer, The Journal of Urology, 2005

Men (n=93) with early, biopsy-proven prostate cancer were randomly assigned to one of two groups:

Control Group (n=49):

• Did not plan to undergo any conventional treatments (6 did owing to cancer progression).
• Employed lifestyle changes (diet, exercise, stress management) recommended by their physicians.

Treatment Group (n=44):

• Did not plan to undergo any conventional treatments (none did).

Some diagnoses of cancer have hit my family in the last few months. It's been a trying time. I've been especially keen to understand why, so I've been pouring over research. One dietary item keeps popping up ... meat. I don't know what it is about meat ... heme-iron, hormones, a type of fat, environmental toxins that are dissolved in animal fat, carcinogens produced via cooking, etc. But the association is common in my reading.

My previous post showed how high-protein foods can raise post-meal insulin levels higher than high-complex-carbohydrate foods (Beef Raises Insulin More Than Oatmeal).

This post shows how higher-fat diets raise post-meal insulin (and glucose) levels higher than lower-fat, higher-carb diets.

I'm finding more and more evidence for the benefits of eating a lower-fat, lower-protein, higher-complex-carbohydrate diet. This is not what I expected ... having read the rational for, and experimented with, low-carb Atkins-like diets.

Here's the study:
Effects Of Isoenergetic High-Carbohydrate Compared With High-Fat Diets On Human Cholesterol Synthesis And Expression Of Key Regulatory Genes Of Cholesterol Metabolism, American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 2001

It was a small randomized crossover study that compared:

• High-fat diet (40% carbohydrate, 45% fat) (HF)

And ...

• Fish raises insulin more than popcorn.
• Cheese raises insulin more than white pasta.

This is not news. These findings appeared 11 years ago:

An Insulin Index Of Foods: The Insulin Demand Generated By 1000-kj Portions Of Common Foods, American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 1997

Among the foods tested, breakfast cereals as a group (Cornflakes, Special K, Honeysmacks, Sustain, All-Bran, muesli, oatmeal porridge) produced a lower insulin score* than protein-rich foods as a group (beef, white fish, cheese, eggs, lentils, baked beans). Foods of equal caloric content were compared.

* Insulin score was calculated as the area under the 120-minute insulin response curve for 1000 kJ of test food, relative to a reference food (white bread). (1000 kJ is about 240 calories.)

A strong insulin response is not always desirable.

Every day, a little bit of my faith blows away ...

Cancer Docs Profit From Chemotherapy Drugs
Situation begs the ethical question: Are they overprescribing?"The significant amount of our revenue comes from the profit, if you will, that we make from selling the drugs," says Dr. Peter Eisenberg, a private physician who specializes in cancer treatment.________

The following are excerpts from the book, "Healthy At 100", by John Robbins, 2006. I was struck by how long people from Abkhasia live, and by how vigorous and healthy they remain throughout their lives. And, of course, I wondered what they ate.________

I sure am glad it's not my job to come up with the best eating plan for all Americans, let alone the world.1 (The World Health Organization has my sympathy.) The choices and defenders of those choices are numerous and polarized.

Regarding carbohydrates, it may be that a low-carbohydrate diet, around 10% of calories, is the best eating plan for overall health for everyone. Alternatively, it may be that a high-carbohydrate diet, above 45% of calories, is. Research has not sufficiently compared and contrasted the two.

This is another in my series of posts on low-carb diets. I've been reducing the amount and changing the type of carbohydrate I eat, which by default changes the amount of fat and protein I eat. I'm wondering what the long-term effect of this pattern of eating is.________

Here's the thing about cancer ... Our energies are placed on either detection (expensive, profit-generating, and sometimes invasive screenings) or treatment (expensive and toxic drugs, radiation, and removal surgeries). Blasting good tissue along with cancerous tissue seems crude. Even cruder is excising whole swaths of good, usable organ. I would rather see energies placed in prevention (inexpensive, although hard to gage its effectiveness) and tumor-containing/shrinking therapies. Both of those respect the human body and its ability to heal itself.

This is another in my series of posts on low-carb diets. I've been reducing the amount and changing the type of carbohydrate I eat, which by default changes the amount of fat and protein I eat. I'm wondering what the long-term effect of this pattern of eating is.________
Jimmy Moore on his Livin' La Vida Low-Carb™ Blog, posted the following YouTube of a 2002 Charlie Rose program this week.

Sauerkraut!

But it has to be unpasteurized (Don't heat it above ~130 degrees F. either.) - Or else all those species of beneficial Lactobacillus will sacrifice their lives for a sterile kraut.

As a source for probiotics, fermented cabbage is a great alternative to fermented dairy foods. And the levels of good bacteria are typically higher in raw sauerkraut than in cultured milk products.

Sauerkraut is also high in vitamin C:"In 1776, Captain James Cook was awarded the Copley Medal for demonstrating that sauerkraut could be used to allay scurvy in British crews on long sea voyages."

You may not know about, or you may know and may not agree with, the conclusions drawn by the data presented in the recently released book, The China Study: The Most Comprehensive Study of Nutrition Ever Conducted and the Startling Implications for Diet, Weight Loss and Long-term Health. On the other hand, maybe you've already embraced them.

Mark Bittman, author of the popular How To Cook Everything , New York Times' food writer, and host of the YouTube video that accompanied my post New York Times' No Knead Bread (probably the most-visited post in my entire blog archive) has a new NYTs article out. From yesterday's paper:

I wondered how much of the weight I lost when I reduced my carbohydrate intake this summer was a result of water loss. You may recall I was losing a pound a day without changing my caloric intake. I suspect that rate would have slowed.1 Still, I wasn't happy with the goings-on in the mirror. So I ate an apple. Then 2 tablespoons of brown rice. And an entire 1.5 oz (31 g of carbs!) box of Sunmaid raisins. OK, 2 boxes. I was on a roll, not literally.

Or at least I thought I did. Last summer my fasting blood sugars were pushing 120 mg/dl. (100-125 is prediabetes, 126 or more is full-fledged diabetes). I went on a very low-carbohydrate, Atkins diet. My fasting sugars came down, hovering near 100.

I went off the Atkins diet when I experienced some precancer, and when others in my family were diagnosed with cancer. I went on an animal-free, high-carbohydrate diet. Now, over 70% of my calories come from carbohydrate.* And my fasting blood sugars are always in the 70s!

October is National Breast Cancer Awareness Month, which I'm sure most of you know. I always like to contribute to the cure by purchasing many of the items available at stores and online, but here is one thing I would like to do as well. I saw an ad for it on TV....it's Lee's National Denim Day . The only thing to do is on October 5th, put on your favorite pair of jeans and donate $5 to the fight against breast cancer. Simple right? Good I thought so too!!

"No," says Gary Taubes.

Just for the fun of it, and because I've been reading studies like my previous post, I looked to see how much casein is in typical dairy foods.

Modification of Bovine β-Casein to Improve the Characteristics and Manufacturing Properties of Cow's Milk

I was as confused as hell today when I first read this in the New York Times, then I checked out this week's NEJM and read this (abstract only for you uncredentialed scum).

Item One:

For decades, researchers believed that if people with diabetes lowered their blood sugar to normal levels, they would no longer be at high risk of dying from heart disease. But a major federal study of more than 10,000 middle-aged and older people with Type 2 diabetes has found that lowering blood sugar actually increased their risk of death, researchers reported Wednesday. . . .

Among the study participants who were randomly assigned to get their blood sugar levels to nearly normal, there were 54 more deaths than in the group whose levels were less rigidly controlled. The patients were in the study for an average of four years when investigators called a halt to the intensive blood sugar lowering and put all of them on the less intense regimen.

Item Two: