Lex's Journal

[lex_rooker]

Phil,
Since I'm not really into fish, I've never tried fermented fish oils.  From your description it doesn't sound real appetizing so I think I'll pass, at least for now.

What I do enjoy is a 12 oz (350ml) cup of hot butter broth in the morning.  I start with 10oz (300ml) of hot water.  I mix in a teaspoon (5ml) or so of concentrated beef or chicken broth extract paste. I then add 2-3oz (50g-75g) of grass-fed butter (straight from the refrigerator, you don't have to melt it first) and whip it into the broth with an immersion blender which can be done right in the cup.  The whole thing takes about 3 minutes to make.  Really nice way to start the day.  Others have coffee and I can join in socially with my cup of hot butter broth.

I use a product called "Better Than Bouillon" here in the US.  It is the only concentrated beef or chicken base that I've found that has zero MSG.  It does have a bit of other junk, but the main ingredients are meat and meat stock.  Most of the popular bouillon products are nothing but MSG with some food color and artificial flavors so if you want to try this read the labels

I use KerryGold grass-fed butter.  It is expensive but tastes wonderful.

You can also use coffee or tea as the base and just whip in the butter.  If you use coffee or tea as your base I suggest that you use unsalted butter.  I use salted butter in my broth because part of my reason for drinking the broth is to increase my salt intake.  My version is sort of a blend of Dave Asprey's idea for Bullet Proof Coffee, and Phinney & Volek's suggestion that VLC'ers and ZC'ers increase sodium intake by drinking one or two cups of meat broth everyday.

Lex

[aLptHW4k4y]

That whipping results in a lot of AGEs as far as I know. I'd just stir it with a spoon, it will anyway melt.

[PaleoPhil]

Phil,
Since I'm not really into fish, I've never tried fermented fish oils.  From your description it doesn't sound real appetizing so I think I'll pass, at least for now.

LOL, understandable. I found it both tough to handle and strangely  appealing from the start, a la whiskey (the "water of life") and other strong, beloved sustenance, but it turns a lot of folks off, of course. Also strangely, I'm still not a big fan of butter, despite experimenting again with it recently, trying it with some warm French-press coffee in the morning, or mixing it into one of my homemade broths. I don't find it gives me as much of a taste or health kick and seems like Milquetoast in comparison to good 'ol stinkfish oil, though it's fattiness is mildly pleasant.

Despite the minor differences, it is interesting how similar your recent experiments are to mine. Butter and other animal fat, broth and salt are there in both cases. Except you tend to have more butter broth and red meat I tend to have more butter coffee and fish. I would actually prefer the red meat too, but I found it too constipating in my case. I never moved beyond that phase like you did, instead it just got progressively worse for me. Switching to emphasizing eggs, fish, organs and broths seems to have helped me. I do suspect that you're right about red meat being more of a natural food for humans than seafood, though, I'm just still too screwed up to take advantage of that, unfortunately.

Speaking of red meat, there's a bit of a backlash against it in the Paleo blogosphere recently due to concerns about ferratin overload. It's being blamed by Danny Roddy, Anthony Colpo, Chris Kresser and others for carb intolerance, insulin resistance, early mortality, etc. I know that doesn't bother you in the slightest, but did you tell me whether your ferretin levels have ever been tested and what they are? If you did, I apologize for forgetting. Personally, I don't notice any differences in carb tolerance and blood sugar if I eat fish vs. red meat, but maybe I'm just not paying enough attention?

I use a product called "Better Than Bouillon"

Heh, I tend to avoid any product that has "better than" in the name or advertising (maybe I've been spooked by "better than butter" products that turn out to be WAY worse ). Currently I make my own broths, though I do use a gelatin product to add extra collagen to my broths, as connective tissue problems are one of my strongest negative historical health tendencies.

It is the only concentrated beef or chicken base that I've found that has zero MSG.

Cool.

Most of the popular bouillon products are nothing but MSG with some food color and artificial flavors so if you want to try this read the labels

Wow, thanks for the tip.

I use KerryGold grass-fed butter.  It is expensive but tastes wonderful.

I'm using a local product. I've found that Vermont has some of the highest quality food products in the USA. It's like Vermont is becoming the gourmet hippie state. Just wish they weren't so expensive.

You can also use coffee or tea as the base and just whip in the butter. If you use coffee or tea as your base I suggest that you use unsalted butter.  I use salted butter in my broth because part of my reason for drinking the broth is to increase my salt intake.  My version is sort of a blend of Dave Asprey's idea for Bullet Proof Coffee, and Phinney & Volek's suggestion that VLC'ers and ZC'ers increase sodium intake by drinking one or two cups of meat broth everyday.

Wow, what a coincidence. That's basically what I've been doing--I've been semi-participating in the Bulletproof butter-coffee experiment going on. Can't say I've noticed any difference so far, other than increased jitteriness (which he attributed to alfatoxin-contamination, but I've also noticed from his allegedly splendiferous coffee--interestingly, his is the greenest coffe I've seen, though he doesn't mention heat/temperatures), but it's been fun. I suspect that one reason I haven't noticed benefits following his protocol, is that I was already eating plenty of animal fat.

Slàinte mhath!

As for AGEs in butter, Chris Masterjohn has another take, FWIW (I have no idea how on-target it is, but I try to consider all the credible opinions): http://blog.cholesterol-and-health.com/2010/10/is-butter-high-in-ages.html

[lex_rooker]

That whipping results in a lot of AGEs as far as I know. I'd just stir it with a spoon, it will anyway melt.

Hmmmm, If AGEs (Advanced Glycation End Products), are by definition created through the breakdown of sugars reacting with protein and amino acids, I'm unclear on how whipping pure fat into water can create them when neither sugar or protein is present. 

Lex

[lex_rooker]

Phil,
I grew up in a household where no one drank coffee, tea, or alcoholic beverages.  I just never learned to like them so I don't drink them.  We drank milk, which I gave up years ago, water, and stuff like homemade lemonade in the hot summer months.  To this day I still drink mostly water and prefer water over everything else.  Even when I was drinking some fruit juices and soda years back, I had to dilute them with lots of water - usually at least 2 parts water to 1 part juice or soda.

Caffeine also seemed to play a role in the migraine headaches that I suffered for so many years that I avoided anything that contained caffeine and still avoid it today even though I haven't had a migraine for several years now.

As for the red meat controversy:  It gives the bloggers something to talk about.  Most will soon become bored and move on to the next hot topic chasing whatever seems fashionable at the moment.  All the bloggers you mentioned seem to cycle through topics at a rapid clip.  I guess I'm just to old and tired to try to keep up with the frantic pace.  Anyway, bottom line here is that "this too shall pass".... and we'll soon be on to something even more worrisome. 

I have no idea what my ferritin level is.  If it isn't in my annual labs then I haven't been tested for it.  I've never bothered to look. 

Seems that everyone has a different take on AGEs.  I can't see them, measure them, or even control them other than try not to eat them which would mean that I would probably starve to death, (which would have the positive effect of saving me from accelerated aging from AGEs!).  Our bodies make the darn things so we can't avoid them.  I've also never seen "Died from AGE overdose" on a death certificate.  I prefer to spend my time on things that I can control and that have a measurable effect on my daily life.  Sorry, but AGEs don't make my list of the top 10 things to worry about. Come to think of it, if butter made from fresh cream is so bad, wonder what the AGE content of your rotten stinking fish oil is?  You might be the first to officially die from AGE overdose!

Lex

[aLptHW4k4y]

Hmmmm, If AGEs (Advanced Glycation End Products), are by definition created through the breakdown of sugars reacting with protein and amino acids, I'm unclear on how whipping pure fat into water can create them when neither sugar or protein is present. 

Lex

There's certainly protein in butter, and somehow whipped butter, mayonnaise and similar whipped stuff have the most AGEs.

[cherimoya_kid]

As for the red meat controversy:  It gives the bloggers something to talk about.  Most will soon become bored and move on to the next hot topic chasing whatever seems fashionable at the moment.  All the bloggers you mentioned seem to cycle through topics at a rapid clip.  I guess I'm just to old and tired to try to keep up with the frantic pace.  Anyway, bottom line here is that "this too shall pass".... and we'll soon be on to something even more worrisome. 

This is pretty much my thought.  Keeping things in your diet simple, unprocessed, and Paleo is, I think, waaaay more important than worrying about the "toxin du jour".

[PaleoPhil]

... Come to think of it, if butter made from fresh cream is so bad, wonder what the AGE content of your rotten stinking fish oil is?  You might be the first to officially die from AGE overdose!

Heh, heh, yeah, if I die from it I'll let you know.  As you can tell from my current consumption of both fermented CLO and pastured butter (experimentally), I'm not overly concerned about AGEs either. Not that I'm ruling out all possibility of harm from excess either. If there is harm from AGE overload, I suspect that the overall picture is highly complex, with many interacting and offsetting factors, such as glutathione. I looked for Chris Masterjohn's article on glutathione, but the WAPF site that hosts it is down, reportedly from being hacked.

I think the default starting position is little or no dairy and so the burden of proof is on making the positive case for adding dairy products to the Paleo template, but I also don't think that the fact that it was likely not a staple Paleolithic food means it cannot possibly be beneficial in any form to anyone today. It seems the case has yet to be proven sufficiently that any or all dairy (whether raw, fermented, pastured, just butter, etc.) is either "the perfect food" or "poison." So we're left with personal experimentation to find out what works for us as individuals, and I doubt that experimentation has to include sophisticated lab equipment or double-blind placebo controls to be useful.

This is pretty much my thought.  Keeping things in your diet simple, unprocessed, and Paleo is, I think, waaaay more important than worrying about the "toxin du jour".

That's how I've been playing it, though by coincidence I reduced my red meat intake recently anyway for other reasons than insulin sensitivity (though I increased my intake of beef fat, liver and bones), so if I happen to notice consistently improved blood glucose that seems to indicate better insulin sensitivity, I'll try to remember to report it, though there will be confounding factors (like how much of my BG levels and spikes are due to poor insulin sensitivity and how much due to natural, normal effects from eating relatively LC, effects from other foods like raw honey, which is supposed to improve insulin sensitivity, and so on).

Interestingly, despite all the hooplah about the benefits of lowering high ferretin levels, Danny Roddy reported that after giving blood to the max to get his levels down, he didn't notice any health benefits.

[lex_rooker]

There's certainly protein in butter, and somehow whipped butter, mayonnaise and similar whipped stuff have the most AGEs.

I just checked the label on my butter and there is no protein listed.  Nor is there any carbohydrate of any form listed.  My butter says 100% of calories from fat.

If you wish to spend your time worrying over AGEs be my guest, but I'd rather spend my limited time on other things. That's just my personal choice. 

Lex

[lex_rooker]

.... I suspect that the overall picture is highly complex, with many interacting and offsetting factors, such as glutathione.

...dairy (whether raw, fermented, pastured, just butter, etc.) is either "the perfect food" or "poison." So we're left with personal experimentation to find out what works for us as individuals, and I doubt that experimentation has to include sophisticated lab equipment or double-blind placebo controls to be useful..

How on earth did our species make it this far?  For hundreds of thousands of years we didn't know anything about AGEs, metabolic pathways, double blind testing or glutathione.  We ate whatever food was available in our natural environment and lived our lives.

As for dairy being a perfect food:  There is no such thing as a perfect food.  Since we're all going to die eventually I suppose you could make the case that everything we eat is poisonous to some extent, else how do you explain that we die?  (If I get the gist of the common theory of perfection the belief is that if we just find the perfect food and live in the perfect environment then we'll live forever.  Unfortunately there is no evidence to support this belief.)

...so if I happen to notice consistently improved blood glucose that seems to indicate better insulin sensitivity, I'll try to remember to report it, though there will be confounding factors (like how much of my BG levels and spikes are due to poor insulin sensitivity and how much due to natural, normal effects from eating relatively LC, effects from other foods like raw honey, which is supposed to improve insulin sensitivity, and so on).

And therein lies the rub.  How do you know what's really going on in our complex bodies, and if you could accurately measure it, on what basis do you decide what is good or bad? 

Interestingly, despite all the hooplah about the benefits of lowering high ferretin levels, Danny Roddy reported that after giving blood to the max to get his levels down, he didn't notice any health benefits.

This surprises you? 

Lex

[Chris]

That whipping results in a lot of AGEs as far as I know. I'd just stir it with a spoon, it will anyway melt.

I found this info on the website below. The testing for AGES was flawed, check it out. The below quote was from the author. For a full accounting click on the link below.
http://blog.cholesterol-and-health.com/2010/10/is-butter-high-in-ages.html

"So what's the true CML content of butter as measured by mass spetrometry?  A study published last year showed that whole milk contains 40% more CML than butter.  Wow, big difference, huh? 

Which do you believe?  The immunoassays that say butter has 5,000 times more CML than whole milk?  Or the mass spectrometry that says whole milk, which has more precursors, has 40% more CML than butter?

The same study found that evaporation of milk increased AGEs 10-fold, and that evaporated milk and various types of bread crust all had about 10 times the AGE content of butter and over five times the AGE content of beef.  Boiling beef increased the AGE content 7-fold, while frying the beef increased the AGE content 15-fold.

In addition to more posts on honey, fructose, and fatty liver, expect lots more information on AGEs in the coming months.

In the meantime, enjoy your butter!  Yum. "

[aLptHW4k4y]

I just checked the label on my butter and there is no protein listed.  Nor is there any carbohydrate of any form listed.  My butter says 100% of calories from fat.

If you wish to spend your time worrying over AGEs be my guest, but I'd rather spend my limited time on other things. That's just my personal choice. 

If it was pure fat then melting butter would result in pure liquid, not fat + some solid residue.

Let me put it in your philosophy: for hundreds of thousands of years people didn't have that machine to whip their food. They used a spoon or whatever else.

[PaleoPhil]

For hundreds of thousands of years we didn't know anything about AGEs, metabolic pathways, double blind testing or glutathione.  We ate whatever food was available in our natural environment and lived our lives.

Yup

As for dairy being a perfect food:  There is no such thing as a perfect food.

Yup

(If I get the gist of the common theory of perfection the belief is that if we just find the perfect food and live in the perfect environment then we'll live forever.

Some do seem to take it to that extreme--a recent variant of this is the Transhumanist movement. Some of them seem to believe that if we pop hundreds of vitamin/mineral pills and eat a healthy diet that we can live to be well over 100, by which time artificial bodies with sophisticated computer brains will be available to program our minds into, which will be the stepping stone onto immortal, formless energy beings. From what they say amongst themselves (but not so much to the mass media) it sounds like only the wealthiest elites will be able to afford the cybernetic bodies and then energy-being transformation, and the rest of the people will be vastly inferior serfs to be despised that can either be ignored, exploited or exterminated by the super-beings, at their whim. I may have some of the details wrong, but that's the rough sense I get from what I've read and heard from some leading Transhumanists.

And therein lies the rub.  How do you know what's really going on in our complex bodies, and if you could accurately measure it, on what basis do you decide what is good or bad?

Yeah, that's why I think the reductionist approach of trying to figure out how every molecule in our body works and interacts is largely a waste of time. Simple personal experimentation with real foods seems more fruitful, in general.

This surprises you?

No, not much, though others like Colpo have reported benefits. Different people reporting very different results seems like par for the course.

[aLptHW4k4y]

Yeah, that's why I think the reductionist approach of trying to figure out how every molecule in our body works and interacts is largely a waste of time. Simple personal experimentation with real foods seems more fruitful, in general.

You think trial and error is better? Come on, we have huge brains and can do better than that!

[cherimoya_kid]

a From what they say amongst themselves (but not so much to the mass media) it sounds like only the wealthiest elites will be able to afford the cybernetic bodies and then energy-being transformation, and the rest of the people will be vastly inferior serfs to be despised that can either be ignored, exploited or exterminated by the super-beings...

Actually, if Moore's Law continues for at least another 30-40 years or so, I would guess that even those technological advancements would trickle down to poor people in 3rd-world countries. Think about it, even very poor people in most of the world have televisions.  They got them 30-40 years later than people in the US, but they have them.

[lex_rooker]

You think trial and error is better? Come on, we have huge brains and can do better than that!

If you believe in Darwinism then that large brain you are so proud of was produced by genetic trial and error so this method does work. 

Let me put it in your philosophy: for hundreds of thousands of years people didn't have that machine to whip their food. They used a spoon or whatever else.

Yup, yer right but I'm not a purist.  I live in the modern world and I take advantage of many of the modern conveniences available to me.

Lex

[aLptHW4k4y]

If you believe in Darwinism then that large brain you are so proud of was produced by genetic trial and error so this method does work. 

If you have millions of years yeah, it may work. But probably it won't, e.g. just think of all the other animals that didn't really become so smart and successful.

[PaleoPhil]

You think trial and error is better? Come on, we have huge brains and can do better than that!

If you've got a better method, feel free to share it.

Actually, if Moore's Law continues for at least another 30-40 years or so, I would guess that even those technological advancements would trickle down to poor people in 3rd-world countries.

A "trickle" doesn't sound like it would include everyone. Presumably cyborg technology would not trickle down to those with no money, nor those who don't wish to become cyborgs. The Transhumanists even have a term for those who will not become cyborgs: "Mostly Original Substrate Humans (MOSHs)." At any rate, I'm not convinced that Transhumanist Ray Kurzweil is going to live to 97 plus (so he can be alive in 2045, by which time he predicts the Singularity will have occurred that will enable a massive leap in technology) by popping "250 pills of nutritionals a day," like he claimed in his book, Fantastic Voyage: Live Long Enough to Live Forever.

[lex_rooker]

If you have millions of years yeah, it may work. But probably it won't, e.g. just think of all the other animals that didn't really become so smart and successful.

I suppose this depends on your definition of smart and successful.  I'm not convinced that we are as smart and successful as we'd like to think we are.  Most of the problems we face today we've created ourselves, and we are forced to use much of that lauded brain power to try to figure out how to extricate us from the mess we've created.     

You are quite correct, no other animal has been smart or successful enough to artificially alter their environment enough to create the problems we have.  On the other hand, they seem to do better in their natural environment without tools and technology than we do. 

Only time will tell if we are ultimately smart enough to avoid extinction as have all previous species that rose to dominate their environment, or if our intelligence and success are the seeds of our destruction.

Lex

[lex_rooker]

There's certainly protein in butter, and somehow whipped butter, mayonnaise and similar whipped stuff have the most AGEs.

In thinking this over I have two problems with hysteria over AGEs.

First, the fact that AGEs exist in the presence of pathology does not mean that the AGEs caused the pathology. Just as white blood cells accumulate around an infection does not mean that they caused the infection.  I have seen no research that shows that AGEs are the cause of any specific disease, only that they are present in both healthy and diseased tissues, often with higher concentrations in the diseased tissues.  This can also be said of white blood cells.

Second, what evidence do we have that the AGEs present in our bodies come predominantly from dietary sources?  Research seems to indicate that our bodies manufacture copious amounts of AGEs and free radicals through the basic metabolic processes of life.

Research also shows that every animal, regardless of their diet or environment, accumulates AGEs as they age.  In fact, AGE concentration is often used to determine the biological age of captured wild animals.  This indicates that there is a correlation with AGE concentration and age, but does not prove that AGEs cause aging or pathology.

Lex 

[PaleoPhil]

And as Chris and I pointed out in this thread, the validity of the study finding high AGEs in butter has been questioned:

As for AGEs in butter, Chris Masterjohn has another take, FWIW (I have no idea how on-target it is, but I try to consider all the credible opinions): http://blog.cholesterol-and-health.com/2010/10/is-butter-high-in-ages.html

And there's more:
http://blog.cholesterol-and-health.com/2011/10/trouble-with-measuring-ages-butter-and.html
http://blog.cholesterol-and-health.com/2011/10/where-do-most-ages-come-from-o.html

And there's the problem of lack of much detailed knowledge about AGEs in general, which could mean they are either less or more of a problem than the current general consensus expects:

Glycation in food and metabolic transit of dietary AGEs
http://www.biochemsoctrans.org/bst/031/1383/0311383.pdf
"Above all, however, it has to be realized that the term ‘AGE’ comprises a large number of individual amino acid derivatives, of which only a minority have been identified and quantified either in foods or in vivo."

Second, what evidence do we have that the AGEs present in our bodies come predominantly from dietary sources? 

Re: that, there is this:

"the major part of AGEs measured in urine is of dietary origin. Similar results were observed for PD-effluates. This gives the preliminary indication that dietary AGEs might significantly contribute to the total AGE load of the human body. The kidney, as well as the peritoneal membrane, has to deal with a "continuous" exposure to dietary AGEs. Therefore, biologic effects of these exogenously formed compounds have to be considered, in addition to AGEs formed endogenously."
Henle T. AGEs in foods: do they play a role in uremia? Kidney Int 2003;63(suppl 84):S145-S147.
http://www.nature.com/ki/journal/v63/n84s/full/4493792a.html

[cherimoya_kid]

If you've got a better method, feel free to share it.
A "trickle" doesn't sound like it would include everyone. Presumably cyborg technology would not trickle down to those with no money, nor those who don't wish to become cyborgs. The Transhumanists even have a term for those who will not become cyborgs: "Mostly Original Substrate Humans (MOSHs)." At any rate, I'm not convinced that Transhumanist Ray Kurzweil is going to live to 97 plus (so he can be alive in 2045, by which time he predicts the Singularity will have occurred that will enable a massive leap in technology) by popping "250 pills of nutritionals a day," like he claimed in his book, Fantastic Voyage: Live Long Enough to Live Forever.

I think upper-middle-class people in developed countries will have the ability to stop aging by 2035 or so, maybe even earlier.  Why?

Because computer components are going to being single-atom-sized in around 2025 or thereabouts, according to Moore's Law, if it continues.

If you can control single atoms, surely you will soon afterwards be able to control the chemical process inside cells, right?  Those processes are just atoms interacting.

[PaleoPhil]

I think upper-middle-class people in developed countries will have the ability to stop aging by 2035 or so, maybe even earlier.

Are we agreed then that cybernetic immortality won't be something that's free to all, if we even live to see anything like it? I'm old enough that it does bring to mind the World's Fair and futurist predictions of decades ago (which Lex may also remember) that we would all be flying around in Jetson air-cars, using robot-servants and getting our daily nutrition from a pill by now (and Lex has already commented on the latter). I would be more interested in a world that has more folks in it like Lex than has another gazillion whiz-bang gadgets.

Why?

Why what?

Because computer components are going to being single-atom-sized in around 2025 or thereabouts, according to Moore's Law, if it continues.

If you can control single atoms, surely you will soon afterwards be able to control the chemical process inside cells, right?  Those processes are just atoms interacting.

It wouldn't particularly surprise me. No offense intended, but I'm just not particularly excited by Kurzweil's fantasies of nerdvana. Not surprising, I suppose, as Star Trek conventions also don't appeal to me particularly and I'm probably older than the avg Internet user at this point. In my early youth, whiz-bang gadgets held some appeal for me, but the older I get, the less the excitement from synthetic novelties. I'll just try to make the best of whatever comes, not worry about that which I have no control over, and try to focus on what I can control. The Internet is pretty neat, even to an old-timer like me, so maybe there will be other new phenomena I find interesting.

[PaleoPhil]

Well, well, it looks like scientists are starting to come round, and perhaps the lack of fear of stinkfish/oil from me, the Inuit, Chuckchi, Nenets, Scandinavians, Sami, etc. was not so off-base:

Some Things Fishy: Oxidized Fish Oil Totally Benign!? Plus: The Inflammatory Side of EPA and Peroxide & Alkenal Levels in Commercial Fish and Vegetable Oils.
http://suppversity.blogspot.com/2011/12/some-things-fishy-oxidized-fish-oil.html

Maybe I won't be dying soon after all?  Surströmming anyone?

[cherimoya_kid]

Are we agreed then that cybernetic immortality won't be something that's free to all, if we even live to see anything like it?

i think it'll take at least 10 years to go from "available" to "available to poor people in 3rd-world countries", and, honestly, maybe more like 15 or 20.  i think it will happen, though.

I'm not saying it will be awesome in every way, assuming it happens.  We might miss being analog creatures, to a certain degree.