Science shows meat causes insulin spikes

[andyswarbs]

I would be interested in low-carbers take on the science presented here which shows how paleo and low carb diets cause insulin spikes by as much as just sugar, far more than carbohydrates. Please don't just criticise Dr Greger - I am talking about the science here, not the messenger. Also I don't want you to come back anecdotes or science promoted by the meat industry or some random website/blog without credible scientific backup! Good independent science to refute this is exactly what I am after.

nutritionfacts.org/video/fl...

Here are the scientific papers referenced in the video.

T Remer, K Pietrzik, F Manz. A moderate increase in daily protein intake causing an enhanced endogenous insulin secretion does not alter circulating levels or urinary excretion of dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate. Metabolism. 1996 Dec;45(12):1483-6.

C S Kuo, N S Lai, L T Ho, C L Lin. Insulin sensitivity in Chinese ovo-lactovegetarians compared with omnivores. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2004 Feb;58(2):312-6.

M Valachovicova, M Krajcovicova-Kudlackova, P Blazicek, K Babinska. No evidence of insulin resistance in normal weight vegetarians. A case control study. Eur J Nutr. 2006 Feb;45(1):52-4.

S H Holt, J C Miller, P Petocz. An insulin index of foods: the insulin demand generated by 1000-kJ portions of common foods. Am J Clin Nutr November 1997 vol. 66 no. 5 1264-1276.

F Q Nuttall, A D mooradian, M C Gannon, C Billington, P Krezowski. Effect of protein ingestion on the glucose and insulin response to a standardized oral glucose load. Diabetes Care. 1984 Sep-Oct;7(5):465-70.

C J Hung, P C Huang, Y H Li, S C lu, L T Ho, H F Chou. Taiwanese vegetarians have higher insulin sensitivity than omnivores. Br J Nutr. 2006 Jan;95(1):129-35.

K E Charlton, L C Tapsell, M J Batterham, R Thorne, J O’Shea, Q Zhang, E J Beck. Pork, beef and chicken have similar effects on acute satiety and hormonal markers of appetite. Appetite. 2011 Feb;56(1):1-8.

R J Bloomer, M M Kabir, R E Canale, J F Trepanowski, K E Marshall, T M Farney, K G Hammond. Effect of a 21 day Daniel Fast on metabolic and cardiovascular disease risk factors in men and women. Lipids Health Dis. 2010 Sep 3;9:94.

J F Trepanowski, M M Kabir, R J Jr Alleman, R J Bloomer. A 21-day Daniel fast with or without krill oil supplementation improves anthropometric parameters and the cardiometabolic profile in men and women. Nutr Metab (Lond). 2012 Sep 13;9(1):82.

H Noto, A Goto, T Tsujimoto, K Osame, M Noda. Latest insights into the risk of cancer in diabetes. J Diabetes Investig. 2013 May 6;4(3):225-32.

M M Smith, E T Trexler, A J Sommer, B E Starkoff, S T Devor. Unrestricted Paleolithic Diet is Associated with Unfavorable Changes to Blood Lipids in Healthy Subjects. International Journal of Exercise Science 7(2) : 128-139, 2014.

N B Bueno, I S de Melo, S L de Oliveira, T da Rocha Ataide. Very-low-carbohydrate ketogenic diet v. low-fat diet for long-term weight loss: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Br J Nutr. 2013 Oct;110(7):1178-87.

R J Barnard, E J Ugianskis, D A Martin, S B Inkeles. Role of diet and exercise in the management of hyperinsulinemia and associated atherosclerotic risk factors. Am J Cardiol. 1992 Feb 15;69(5):440-4.

D Rabinowitz, T J Merimee, R Maffezzoli, J A Burgess. Patterns of hormonal release after glucose, protein, and glucose plus protein. Lancet. 1966 Aug 27;2(7461):454-6.

N K Fukagawa, J W Anderson, G Hageman, V R Young, K L Minaker. High-carbohydrate, high-fiber diets increase peripheral insulin sensitivity in healthy young and old adults. Am J Clin Nutr. 1990 Sep;52(3):524-8.

[TheAwfulToad]

The short answer to your question is "Yes it does. So what?"

What is it that you want to refute?

The point here is this. People who eat lots of sugar and carbs get fat and unhealthy. Always. Without fail. People who do not eat that way (and I'm not going to say low-carbers specifically, because it turns out that healthy bodies can deal with quite a lot of carbs) do not get fat.

Meat has no impact either way, in either circumstance. Clearly, then the fact that "meat causes an insulin spike" is not a particularly useful observation, all by itself.

Although the weight gain associated with high-carb diets is often boiled down to "oh, it's because of the insulin spikes", this really isn't correct. In and of itself, an insulin spike is just a control signal telling your body to take glucose and amino acids out of the bloodstream. When glucose is entering your bloodstream faster than your muscles, bodyfat, and other organs can dispose of it: blood sugar rises in spite of the insulin spike, and when this situation persists over long periods of time (months to years) your body tries to recalibrate the parameters that drive blood sugar management. Eventually your body is backed into a dysfunctional corner where it is unable to meet the constraints on blood sugar because it is being continually hammered by carbs that it doesn't need, and it starts stashing fat away in bizarre places (eg., your liver) and/or becoming obese.

Why doesn't meat have the same result as high-carb diets? It's partly because protein/fat intake is self-limiting: few people can cope with a 16oz steak, but 16oz of ice-cream is often no problem at all. Mainly it's because insulin is a very odd hormone, with multiple functions. It's sometimes called the "master anabolic hormone", and that's pretty accurate. It tells your body's various subsystems that energy and building materials are available, and that they should respond accordingly. Its action is modified by glucagon - in fact insulin and glucagon are released in alternate pulses, forming a two-dimensional, pulse-amplitude-modulated control signal. Amino acids elicit a large glucagon response and a modest insulin response, because your body's intent is merely to do something useful with those amino acids (they are not usually burned for energy). Glucose, in contrast, elicits a large insulin response and almost no glucagon response; here, the primary intent is to store blood glucose as glycogen or fat, or to burn it if possible, to meet the constraint on blood glucose.

The phrase "can't see the wood for the trees" springs to mind here. If people who ate meat were getting as fat as high-carb vegans (and high-carb vegans get fat just like anyone else does) then there would be something to discuss. But they don't.

[andyswarbs in reply to TheAwfulToad]

Please give example of some a) high carb balanced diet vegans who b) didn't have pre-existing conditions who then failed? I have watched a fair number of "why I am no longer vegan" videos, and I have never seen one.

I've seen people who were raw vegans and failed. I've seen people who jumped around diets and failed.

You say, "The point here is this. People who eat lots of sugar and carbs get fat and unhealthy. Always. Without fail. " Well that statement is a completely incorrect . As an example from the Kempner Rice Diet peer-reviewed research your statement spectaculary fails.

Let's replace it with something like "people who slather butter & cheese on baked potatoes and then blame the potatoes for getting fat need are blinded by misinformation."

Not a good start!

[TheAwfulToad in reply to andyswarbs]

Kempner's subjects, IIRC, crashed and burned within weeks. Not one subject could stick with it for any length of time. He had to literally threaten people to get them to continue.

The study of bizarre diets that nobody can adhere to yields little useful information.

It's true that the picture is a little more complicated than "carbs make you fat". However, sticking with the subject of meat: I described the biochemistry to you in my post above, and this is all uncontentious stuff. The study you described is typical of many nutrition studies that observe surrogate outcomes (in this case insulin response) about which they have made certain assumptions (insulin spikes are like bad mmmkay). The experimenter has already made up his mind what result he wants to find (meat is bad for you) and has designed his experiment to "prove" it by drawing tenuous lines between the surrogate outcome and his beliefs. That's just bad science.