Blog

Deaths attributed to this year’s “flu epidemic” are being reported with great drama and alarum by the press, as they are every year.

10 year-old hockey players. Marathon-running moms. 21 year-old fitness buffs. Infants. Children. Seniors.

The popular press would have us believe that influenza has people dying in record numbers. Be Afraid, Very Afraid is the message, Hurry, Hurry, Hurry, get your flu shot now!

But is it really the influenza virus that is killing people?

A closer look at the reports of deaths that are being attributed to “the Flu” shows that most of these people are really dying of pneumonia – and more specifically, usually streptococcal pneumonia which can result in sepsis and organ failure.

Now, to be sure, a death from strep pneumonia is no less tragic than a death from anything else, flu included.

Also to be sure, pneumonia is not always caused by a bacteria like streptococcus – it can also be caused by fungal infections and yes, viral infections. Approximately 30 percent of pneumonia in the US is caused by a variety of viruses from Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV), to coronaviruses, rhinoviruses, parainfluenza viruses, and adenoviruses, and, yes, even Influenza (flu) A and B viruses.

But flu vaccines do not prevent bacterial or fungal pneumonia or viral pneumonia caused by anything except the very specific strains of influenza A and B viruses that were included in this year’s flu vaccine.

Reports from Australia, which experiences it’s “flu season” 6 months earlier than we do in the US, indicate that flu vaccines there were only 10 percent effective, despite strong efforts to promote vaccination. When confronted with this, the CDC claims that our flu vaccine will be as effective as last year’s – that is, around 32 to 39 percent effective.

Wow – that’s a lot of vaccination for not much effectiveness…

So, how many people actually do die from influenza each year?

It is difficult to say, and getting more difficult as the CDC muddies it’s reporting by talking about flu deaths and pneumonia deaths combined – assuming that pneumonia is a complication of the flu and so flu and pneumonia are the same. Using this bit of creative reporting, they are able to tell us that some 36,000 people die each year from “the flu.” Fortunately, anyone with any medical knowledge whatsoever is well aware that the flu is not pneumonia, and pneumonia is not the flu. The influenza virus causes influenza, and pneumonia has many causes – both bacterial and viral – that frequently have nothing to do with the influenza virus.

In fact, a paper published in The British Medical Journal in 2005 “Are US flu death figures more PR than science?” (BMJ 2005; 331:1412) stated:

“[According to CDC statistics], ‘influenza and pneumonia’ took 62,034 lives in 2001 — 61, 777 of which were attributable to pneumonia and 257 to flu, and in only 18 cases was the flu virus positively identified.”

Well then. Perhaps we should be directing our efforts at preventing pneumonia? Maybe a vaccine against streptococcus?

Are we telling you to not get a flu shot? No. The decision to receive a flu shot is yours to make. We cannot, and will not try to dissuade you from getting a flu shot if you believe that it is in your best interest to do so.

We are simply pointing out that the much-hyped “flu deaths” are not actually caused by the influenza virus, but by other things like pneumonia.

Further, despite the assurances of the vaccine makers and the CDC, flu vaccines are not without their own risks. Everything from mild side effect such as fatigue, headache, fever, nausea, and muscle aches to potentially life-threatening allergic reactions, and even Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) a disorder in which a person’s own immune system damages their nerve cells, causing muscle weakness and even paralysis. Most people recover from GBS, but some people suffer long-term nerve damage. In some cases, people have died of GBS, usually from difficulty breathing.

Finally, is it a flu, or is it just a really nasty cold? Both are caused by viruses, both can make a sufferer feel miserable, and in susceptible individuals, both have the potential to cause life-threatening complications like pneumonia.

How to know the difference between a “flu” and a “cold”? Here’s a chart that will help.

Symptoms	Cold	Flu
Fever	Rare	Characteristic high fever (100-102 degrees F); lasts three to four days
Headache	Rare	Prominent
General Aches, Pains	Slight	Usual; often severe
Fatigue, Weakness	Quite mild	Can last up to two or even three weeks
Extreme Exhaustion	Never	Early and prominent
Stuffy Nose	Common	Sometimes
Sneezing	Usual	Sometimes
Sore Throat	Common	Sometimes
Chest Discomfort, Cough	Mild to moderate; hacking cough	Common; can become severe
Complications	Sinus congestion or earache	Bronchitis, pneumonia

Now for those of you who just want to know “What can I do about it?” here’s the short course:

1.) Eat an Immune-Boosting Diet. The two major dietary causes of immune suppression are sugar intake and food allergies.

• Sugar suppresses the activity of white blood cells for up to 5 hours. Avoiding sugar is the most important dietary step you can take to strengthen your immune system.
• Food allergies weaken the immune system. Check out the symptoms of food allergy to see if this might be a problem for you.

2.) Practice simple home and hygiene techniques.

• Wash your hands frequently. You don’t need expensive "hand sanitizers"  (and triclosan has now been banned): simple soap and water is fine and silver gel like ASAP 365 – 24 ppm Silver Gel is a highly effective, safe, everyday, natural alternative to chemical-laced hand sanitizers.
• Cover your mouth and nose — preferably with a tissue — when you sneeze or cough. And keep your hands away from your eyes and nose.
• If you are sick take the day off!
• Keep your house humidified. Viruses and bacteria are less able to travel in humidified air.
• Get regular exercise – it stimulates the immune system.

3.) Strengthen your immune system with supplemental nutrition.

• Take an optimal potency vitamin/mineral supplement every day.
  Here are the nutrients of particular immune-enhancing importance, and they should all be found in a good multiple nutrient formula:
  * vitamin C
  * vitamin E
  * beta carotene
  * vitamin A
  * vitamin D
  * zinc
  * selenium
  (Please Note: These nutrients and more are found in optimal amounts in Dr. Myatt’s Maxi Multi vitamins)
• Since many Americans are deficient you may wish to consider increasing your Vitamin D intake, especially during the winter months. Please learn more and find a full list of references for the benefits of vitamin D in this  Vitamin D Special Report
• Supplement with additional immune-boosting herbs including Echinacea, astragalus, medicinal mushrooms (Maitake, Shiitake, Reishi), Ligustrum, Goldenseal and Garlic. Learn more about Dr. Myatt’s Immune Support formula .

If you do catch something, (cold or flu) these supplements may help reduce the severity and even shorten the duration of your symptoms.

• Bromelain
• Vitamin C
• Whey protein
• selenium

What about an antibiotic – “Just in case”?

Here’s another look at colds and flu, and at whether or not an antibiotic is something that you really need: Hurry – Get An Antibiotic Before You Don’t Need It!

References and further reading:

CDC (Centers for Disease Control) Influenza information:

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/season/flu-season-2017-2018.htm

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/protect/vaccine/general.htm

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/protect/vaccine/guillainbarre.htm

BMJ (British Medical Journal) article questioning CDC flu death reporting methods:

“Are US flu death figures more PR than science?” (BMJ 2005; 331:1412)

By Dr. Dana Myatt

 

Gotta’ love the media. They are more concerned with entertaining us than with actual journalism. We call this "info-tainment." Please don’t bet your life on this kind of reporting.

They’ve done it again, this time with the recent report that "most vitamin supplements are worthless." Here’s what a recent mainstream news article said:

"The idea of a pill that can improve your overall health is an appealing one.

Unfortunately, no matter how colorful their packaging or hopeful their messaging, most vitamins and supplements fall prey to the same problem: We simply do not need them to be healthy. Some supplements — particularly those marketed for physical enhancement — can cause real harm."

While its true that there are unproven and over-hyped supplements, it is also true that many —- multi vitamins, fish oil, vitamin D and a number of herbs—-  have significant proven medical benefit.

 

Here’s what "they" (the Lamestream Media) said versus what the preponderance of scientific evidence shows.

1. What the Headline said: "Vitamin Pills a Waste of Money"

   What the research actually said:
   
   To quote the article directly: “Two large trials [with 27,658 individuals] reported lower cancer incidence in men taking a multivitamin for more than 10 years. High quality studies were scant…" (meaning: not enough data to draw good conclusions about the rest). (1)

   Dr. Myatt’s comment: It should be noted that the "multivitamins" examined in the study were low-potency ("one a day") supplements, something that has never been proven to be of much benefit to anyone except those who are severely deficient.

2. What the Headline said: "Multivitamins of no benefit to seniors."

   What the research actually said:
   
   To quote the article directly: "Multivitamins and mineral supplements were found to reduce the mean annual number of days spent with infection (three studies) by 17.5." (2)

   Dr. Myatt’s comment: Again, the "multivitamins" examined in the study were low-potency ("one a day") supplements, something that has never been proven to be of much benefit to anyone except those severely deficient. But even at low potency, there was a decreased risk of infection in the elderly.

3. What the Headline said: "Vitamins are linked to increased risk of death."

   What the research actually said:
   
   The study (if you can call it that) — asking folks to report from memory what supplements they had taken years previously — in fact found the following:

   B complex vitamins were associated with a 7% reduction in mortality
   Vitamin C intake associated with a 4% reduction in mortality
   Vitamin D intake associated with an 8% reduction in mortality
   Magnesium intake associated with a 3% reduction in mortality
   Selenium intake associated with a 3% reduction in mortality
   Zinc intake associated with a 3% reduction in mortality

   Dr. Myatt’s comment: This study was so poorly done, and the "findings" so misreported, that I wrote an entire article about it here: Vitamins Linked to Increased Risk of Death?

Now for the Positive Studies Your May Not Have Seen

1. Multivitamins Decrease Women’s Heart Disease Death.

   According to the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the "multivitamins don’t help" argument is far from over. Women who took multivitamin-mineral supplements for three years or more were significantly less likely to die from heart disease. (3)

2. Multivitamin users have lower risk of dying from stroke.

   To quote the article directly: "Conclusions— Multivitamin use, particularly frequent use, was associated with reduced risk of total and ischemic stroke mortality among Japanese people with lower intake of fruits and vegetables." (4)

 

The number of studies showing positive benefit in multivitamin use are so overwhelming that we have written about them numerous times. Please see the following articles with multiple references.

• A Dozen Proven Reasons to Take a Good Multiple
• Give Me One Good Reason to Take a Multiple

 

Dr Myatt’s Bottom Line and Summary

The preponderance of evidence is far in favor of taking a multiple vitamin/mineral supplement for health.

"One a day" multiples are of limited value in improving health. Please see "Maxi Multi" for a discussion of optimal potency multiple vitamin formulas.

Regular users have far more benefit than casual users. Take your multiple every day.

While conventional medicine and newspaper headlines continue to preach that nutritional supplementation isn’t important, the results of medical research shows just the opposite. Here are some medical findings that should convince you to keep taking a high-quality, optimal potency multiple vitamin/mineral supplement. If you’re not sure what an “optimal potency” formula consists of or what you should be taking for your age and sex, refer to The Wellness Club web site’s nutritional supplements page for an up-to-date ingredient list and optimal dose recommendations.

Harvard researchers have found that sub-optimal levels of folic acid, vitamins B6 and B12 are a risk factor for heart disease and colon and breast cancers.

(Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) June 19, 2002)

A six-month study showing that folic acid, vitamin B12 and vitamin B6 helped prevent recurrence of blocked arteries in patients who have undergone coronary angioplasty.

(Journal of the American Medical Association, August 28, 2002)

Vitamin K is a critical nutrient for skeletal integrity, with evidence of vitamin K supplementation reducing bone loss in healthy postmenopausal women and a significant positive relationship between vitamin K status and indices of bone health in men.

(24th Annual Meeting of the American Society of Bone and Mineral Research, September 20 – 24, 2002, San Antonio, Texas)

Alzheimer’s disease: Association with zinc deficiency and cerebral vitamin B12 deficiency.

(Journal of Orthol. Psychiatry (CANADA), 1984, 13/2 (97-104))

Supplementation of the elderly with vitamin E has been shown to enhance immune response, delay onset of Alzheimer’s disease, and increase resistance to oxidative injury associated with exercise.

(Proc Nutr Soc. 2002;61:165-171)

Vitamin E intake, from foods or supplements, is associated with less cognitive decline with age.

(Arch Neurol. 2002;59:1125-1132)

Researchers at Cambridge University in England looked at serum vitamin C and how long people lived. People who had the lowest levels of vitamin C were twice as likely to die compared to those with the highest serum vitamin C levels. This study was based on the findings from over 19,000 people.

(Lancet 2001; 357:657-63)

26.4% of esophageal and gastric cancers are attributable to low selenium levels.

(Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Mark et al., 2000)

Calcium supplementation is associated with a significant – though moderate – reduction in the risk of recurrent colorectal adenomas. The effect of calcium was independent of initial dietary fat and calcium intake.

(N Engl J Med (United States) Jan 14 1999, 340 (2) p101-7.)

Data from the Nurses’ Health Study conducted at the Harvard Medical School showed that long-term supplementation with folic acid reduces the risk of colon cancer by 75% in women! 90,000 women participated in the Nurses’ Health Study, making this an especially significant finding. The authors of this study explained that folic acid obtained from supplements had a stronger protective effect against colon cancer than folic acid consumed in the diet.

(Annals of Internal Medicine (1998; 129:517-524)

Regarding asthma, the lowest intakes of vitamin C and manganese (a trace mineral not to be confused with magnesium) were associated with more than five-fold increased risks of bronchial reactivity. Decreasing intakes of magnesium were also significantly associated with an increased risk of hyper-reactivity.

(Thorax (United Kingdom), 1997, 52/2 (166-170))

Antioxidant supplements reduce the risk of cataract. One study evaluated 410 men for 3 years to ascertain the association between serum vitamin E and the development of cortical lens opacities (cataracts). The men with the lowest level of serum vitamin E had a 3.7 times greater risk of this form of cataract compared to men with the highest serum level of vitamin E.

(American Journal of Epidemiology Sept. 1996)

Encouraging moderate exercise and dietary supplementation with calcium and vitamin D are the major nonpharmacological management measures used to prevent and treat osteoporosis.

(Drugs and Aging (New Zealand), 1996, 9/6 (472-477)

Nutrient intake of patients with rheumatoid arthritis is deficient in pyridoxine (vitamin B-6), zinc, copper, and magnesium.

(Journal of Rheumatology (Canada), 1996, 23/6 (990-994))

Bottom Line?

Despite the breathless pseudo-reporting and claims to the contrary, vitamin and mineral supplementation is not only NOT a “waste,”  it is essential for restoring, maintaining, and improving health – and countless studies have proven this to be true.

So, who are you going to believe? Me and the respected medical researchers and scientists that I’ve quoted in this and many other articles, or lamestream media ‘infotainment” produced by misreading and misquoting biased or poorly conducted pseudo-research?

That’s it – I knew you would go with the real science! Good for you!

References:

1. Fortmann SP, Burda BU, Senger CA, Lin JS, Whitlock EP. Vitamin and mineral supplements in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease and cancer: an updated systematic evidence review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2013 Dec 17;159(12):824-34.

2. El-Kadiki A, Sutton AJ. Role of multivitamins and mineral supplements in preventing infections in elderly people: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.BMJ. 2005 Apr 16;330(7496):871

3. Bailey RL, Fakhouri TH, Park Y, et al. Multivitamin-mineral use is associated with reduced risk of cardiovascular disease mortality among women in the United States. J Nutr. 2015 Mar;145(3):572-8.

4. Shigeki Yamada, MD; Akio Koizumi, MD; Hiroyasu Iso, MD; Yasuhiko Wada, MD, et al. Risk Factors for Fatal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: The Japan Collaborative Cohort Study.

Nurse Mark Says:

Lots of people write to us, knowing that we are on the leading edge of medical news and science. Often it’s to ask about things that others have written – things that maybe don’t seem quite right, or things that seem to be in contradiction with our recommendations.

There are endless streams of health-related e-books available on the internet, many of them free, and most of the free ones are thinly veiled sales pitches.

Many of these books are little more than armchair theory or personal experience monologues and they contain little, if any  verifiable science. If there is a smidgeon of science in the piece it is usually something that the author has cherry-picked, misinterpreted, and/or modified to suit a preconceived idea or to support a product.

Rarely do these books provide verifiable scientific references to back up their claims. Often any references given are to other e-books or print books which contain similarly vague references or you may find out that all the books mentioned as references use the same reference, quoted over and over until it takes on the cachet of “it is common knowledge”…

One of Dr. Myatt’s patients, who is a voracious reader of all things health-related, recently wrote to ask about something he found in a free e-book: The book’s author claimed that ascorbic acid is not really vitamin C but rather just some sort of “wrapper” surrounding all manner of other things that the author claims make up “real” vitamin C. Wow! Wouldn’t Dr. Linus Pauling be surprised!

Let’s see what Dr. Myatt has to say about all this:

 

Dr. Myatt Says:

“The Calcium Lie Part II”

When I was young ( a while ago!), my Mom, Grandma and even me as a small child used to chuckle at my Grandpa when he would read something in the newspaper that was preposterous. We’d point out the folly or falsehood and he would say, “But it’s in the newspaper! They couldn’t print it if it weren’t true!” To which we would roll our eyes and laugh.

Fast forward to today. I have a very few patients (not many) who, if they see it on the internet, “know” it surely must be true. Don’t do this. Look for the references and proof.

There aren’t enough hours in the day to respond to every “the earth is flat” claim without proof. “Some doctor said he observed…..” gives a start place to do some “proof research,” but hearsay alone doesn’t constitute good science or medicine. So when I got an email from someone who downloaded a free ebook titled “The Calcium Lie Part II” with a statement saying “this guy said ascorbic acid is like the wrapper on candy” and not a single reference to support that claim,I’m having flashbacks of my grandpa…

Folks, please don’t believe everything you read without demanding references and proof. Haven’t I taught you better than this???

I’ve got ascorbic acid in Maxi Multi?  You betcha. It is the form of vitamin C that is the “real deal.” If there was something better, I would put that in instead.

Anybody can write an ebook and say anything they want. But can they defend their claims with references? Show me the reference that concerns you and I will surely respond.

Here is an authoritative (that is, scientifically substantiated) page from the Linus Pauling Institute at Oregon Health Sciences medical school that discusses vitamin C: http://lpi.oregonstate.edu/mic/vitamins/vitamin-C

Vitamin C supplements are available in many forms, and there is little scientific evidence that any one form is better absorbed or more effective than another. (a references link for that statement is on the page at the above link)

The “other stuff” that occurs with vitamin C in nature are bioflavonoids. That’s the white rind part of a citrus fruit for example. Bioflavonoids have benefits independent of vitamin C. You will notice there are 100mg of bioflavonoids in Maxi Multi.

Surfing the internet does not constitute “research,” and just because someone makes a statement on the internet or in a book does not make it fact. I suspected the guy who wrote “The Calcium Lie Part II” was selling something.

The Vitamin C Myth (A Warning to the Health Conscious)

Vitamin C, also known as ascorbic acid and L-ascorbic acid, is a vitamin found in food and used as a dietary supplement. As a supplement it is used to treat and prevent scurvy.

Vitamin C is ascorbate, chemical name 2-Oxo-L-threo-hexono-1,4-lactone-2,3-enediol.

In an effort to set the record straight – vitamin C is ascorbate only.

Most commonly, vitamin C is ingested as ascorbic acid (hydrogen ascorbate) or sodium ascorbate. Vitamin C also occurs in different mineral forms, including calcium ascorbate, magnesium ascorbate, and others.

The Marketing Myth of "vitamin C complex"

The claim that vitamin C naturally exists as a multi-compound "complex" has never been scientifically documented. Vitamin C does occur in nature along with other compounds such as bioflavonoids. Some of these other substances have independent health benefits. But vitamin C does not depend on bioflavonoids or other co-factors to work its magic.

Some individuals, usually operating on the "Wild, Wild West” of the internet (where you can make just about any claim you please) are promoting fraud. I don’t know if this is deliberate or if they truly haven’t done their scientific research, but you will find that they are usually selling a version of the mythical "vitamin C complex." This is marketing hype, not science.

The argument says something like "ascorbic acid is not vitamin C" and has no effect by itself. The one study usually quoted by the hypesters claims that some doctor found he could not cure scurvy — the classic vitamin C deficiency disease — by using ascorbic acid alone. Unfortunately for the hypesters, there is no study to this effect to be found in the medical literature but there are plenty of studies showing that ascorbic acid (vitamin C) does indeed cure scurvy — and helps a long list of other conditions as well.

Side Note: You can find videos on YouTube discussing the "vitamin C complex." Some of these are very professionally made and look legit. The problem is, they are simply slick marketing pieces. They are not based on any peer-reviewed scientific studies. I know it can be difficult for laymen to sort science from hearsay, but always look for scientific reference. If there are none, run the other way. Or else stick around and see what the marketing angle is. Just like printing it in a newspaper, saying it in a video doesn’t necessarily mean it’s true!

If you find their marketing hype compelling, please do your due diligence on PubMed, the compilation of peer reviewed medical journal studies. Type ascorbic acid, ascorbate, or vitamin C into the search box. You will find 14,000+ studies on vitamin C, the vast majority showing the many positive effects of this vitamin. None of those studies refer to "vitamin C complex."

All the scientifically documented effects of vitamin C have been seen and achieved using ascorbic acid or another form of ascorbate by itself. No ancillary nutrients, co-factors or "complexes" were used. Again, that’s over 14,000 studies.

Now for the "No B.S." (Bad Science) discussion on vitamin C

Some vitamin C products are marketed to include bioflavonoids. I put bioflavonoids in my Maxi Multi because they have independent health benefits. But vitamin C does not require bioflavonoids in order to work.

Natural and synthetic L-ascorbic acid are chemically identical, and there are no known differences in their biological activity. Human studies have not shown any additional "bioavailbility" of so-called "natural" or "food forms." Here are just a few examples from PubMed” – these would be known as “references.”

• Pelletier, O. & Keith, M.O. Bioavailability of synthetic and natural ascorbic acid. Journal of the American Dietetic Association. 1974; 64: 271-275
• Mangels, A.R. et al. The bioavailability to humans of ascorbic acid from oranges, orange juice, and cooked broccoli is similar to that of synthetic ascorbic acid. Journal of Nutrition. 1993; volume 123: pages 1054-1061.  (PubMed)
• Gregory, J.F. Ascorbic acid bioavailability in foods and supplements. Nutrition Reviews. 1993; volume 51: pages 301-309.  (PubMed)
• Carr AC, Vissers MC. Synthetic or food-derived vitamin C-are they equally bioavailable? Nutrients. 2013;5(11):4284-4304.  (PubMed)
• Uchida E, Kondo Y, Amano A, et al. Absorption and excretion of ascorbic acid alone and in acerola (Malpighia emarginata) juice: comparison in healthy Japanese subjects. Biol Pharm Bull. 2011;34(11):1744-1747. (PubMed)
• Carr AC, Bozonet SM, Pullar JM, Simcock JW, Vissers MC. A randomized steady-state bioavailability study of synthetic versus natural (kiwifruit-derived) vitamin C. Nutrients. 2013;5(9):3684-3695. (PubMed)
• Jones E, Hughes RE. The influence of bioflavonoids on the absorption of vitamin C. IRCS Med Sci. 1984;12:320.

Finally, to be fair, one small study (8 people) in 1988 suggested a possible difference in bioavailability but this study has not been duplicated.

• Vinson, J.A. & Bose, P. Comparative bioavailability to humans of ascorbic acid alone or in a citrus extract. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 1988; volume 48: pages 501-604.  (PubMed)

Summary

Antioxidants and bioflaonoids are certainly healthy, but there is no convincing evidence that these ancillary nutrients are needed to improve the effect of vitamin C (AKA ascorbic acid or 2-Oxo-L-threo-hexono-1,4-lactone-2,3-enediol ).

Dr. Linus Pauling — the "Father" of vitamin C — found no evidence to suggest that additions to ascorbic acid improved effectiveness.

By the way, Dr. Pauling, a molecular biochemist, is the only person in history to have been awarded two unshared Nobel prizes. That’s two more Nobel prizes than the fellow who wrote “The Calcium Lie Part II.”  Just sayin’.

If there was a proven better form of vitamin C, or some ancillary nutrient that improved absorption or function, I would certainly tell you about it. I’d also make that the nutrient of choice in my own formulas. However, over 14,000 peer-reviewed studies have not been overturned by a couple of slick but spurious marketing pieces.

Oh, and that ebook that my patient wrote me about? I checked it out – and yup, it’s a sales-piece alright. Surprise, surprise…

Refences and further reading:

Buffered Vitamin C: http://www.drmyattswellnessclub.com/vitccrystals.htm

"Nobel Prize Facts". Nobelprize.org. Nobel Media AB. 2014. Retrieved 14 January 2017.

Are We Still Standing Behind Our Low Carb Diet Advice?

Nurse Mark says:

Every now and then someone writes us with what they really hope will be a "Gotcha!" that will simultaneously demonstrate their genius and place our ignorance on display for all the world to see.

Most of the time it is obvious that these folks have either spent far too much time studying at The University of Google, or that they have a particular agenda and "axe to grind" with their questions or comments.

We are not quite sure which of those is the case with the following letter we received since it is a little disjointed and hard to understand with its lack of punctuation and grammar. However, we think that the writer is taking us to task for favoring a Very Low Carbohydrate Ketogenic Diet.

An "Anonymous" writer recently asked:

"It’s 2017 lol do you still stand by the ‘carbs are bad for you’ ex-trend?
You know your articles written by some ‘doctors’ who got their degrees in some third-rated universities looks like word play on middle school science combined with things people promise in elections, right?"

(Here’s a request from us to you: If you are going to write us to tell us why we are wrong about something, please supply some supporting evidence and references – not just "everybody knows", or "I saw it on the internet." Real, actual citations like you will find at the end of all our scientific articles will be appreciated and will help support your case. Oh, and insults rarely achieve anything positive in swaying opinions – remember how well that recent "Basket of Deplorables" comment worked out…)

Dear Anonymous,

Welcome back from your year-long meditation retreat in the Himalayas! I can only assume that you have been in a cave the past year without television or internet connection. You are right, it is 2017.  And we stand by our recommendation of a ketogenic diet now more than ever.

Not only do we stand by our low carb dietary advice, we are finding more and more conventional scientific and clinical research and studies in the medical news every day that tells us that Dr. Myatt has been on the right track for 28 years. We recommend not just ‘low carb’ – but an out-and-out Very Low Carbohydrate Ketogenic Diet (VLCKD). I’ll let the Ketogenic Diet guru, Dr. Myatt, get you up to speed on the most recent science.

Dr. Myatt says:

Do we still stand by the low carb (ketogenic) diet in 2017?  You Betcha!  Evidence confirming the many health benefits of a VLCKD continues to unfold by the day. The use of a ketogenic diet is actually becoming well known in conventional medicine. Here’s what science shows to date.

For weight loss:

For weight loss, ketogenic diets have performed as well or better than low calorie/high carb diets. (1-4) The ketogenic diet is more effective than a low calorie diet for those with insulin resistance (IR), non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NFLD), atherogenic dyslipidemia (AD) – a blood fat profile that predisposes to coronary artery disease. Many overweight and obese individuals exhibit one or more of these problems. (5)

Many people find a ketogenic diet easier to stick with to than a low calorie diet because of the appetite-curbing effect of ketosis. A ketogenic diet has a stimulating effect on our appetite control hormones. Ketones may also have a direct appetite-suppressant action. Staying on a ketogenic diet will keep ghrelin (the hunger hormone) and appetite levels low as long as the dieter stays in ketosis A VLCKD causes a reduction in lipogenesis (fat cell creation) and increased lipolysis (fat cell "burning").
A VLCKD reduces the resting respiratory quotient and gives the body greater metabolic efficiency in consuming fats.

Because the ketogenic diet contains higher protein intakes than the S.A.D. (Standard American Diet), muscle tissue is typically well-preserved while weight is lost. Increased metabolic costs of gluconeogenesis (the process of making glucose from protein) and the thermic effect of proteins means that a VLCKD makes the body use more energy to process the food it takes in.

A one-year study of 311 overweight/obese premenopausal women comparing various weight loss diets found the that weight loss over the long-haul (12 months) was better in Atkin’s (a ketogenic diet) than all others compared, as follows:

Atkins solidly beat out the Zone, the Ornish, and the LEARN (55–60% carbohydrate, 10% saturated fat, energy restricted) diets. After 12 months, weight loss in the Atkins group was −4.7 kg compared with −1.6 kg on the Zone Diet, −2.2 kg on the Ornish and −2.6 kg on the LEARN groups. Blood HDL and  triglyceride concentrations were improved more in the Atkins group compared with all other diet groups.(6-7)

Type II Diabetes:

Multiple studies have shown that a ketogenic diet lowers blood sugar and improves glycemic control in type 2 diabetic patients better than a calorie restricted, low glycemic diet. Weight loss was also more substantial in the ketogenic diet group.(8-10)

More participants in the ketogenic diet group were able to discontinue all diabetic medications. (7)

Cardiovascular disease:

A VLCKD lowers both cholesterol and triglycerides in obese patients and increases the size and volume of the low-density lipoprotein molecules, such as triglycerides and LDL ("bad") cholesterol. A ketogenic diet was also found to protect the heart and improve recovery after a heart attack. Compared to a low calorie diet, the ketogenic diet has been seen in numerous studies to lower cardiac risk factors better. (11-14)

In one study of healthy college age male athletes researchers found that while total cholesterol increased in the VLCKD group, it was an increase in HDL (the “good cholesterol) that caused this response and that other values, such as testosterone levels and insulin response, improved significantly in the VLCKD group and the researchers praised the safety of the VLCKD. (104)

Ketogenic diets decrease small LDL particles (the size that causes atherosclerosis) and increases large LDL particles (the kind that doesn’t contribute to atherosclerosis). (15-20)

Epilepsy:

Having been used clinically since the 1920’s, the role of ketogenic diets in epilepsy treatment is well established. (21-22)

Cancer:

This is a red-hot “emerging” topic. Remember you probably heard it here first.

[Nurse Mark notes: There are so many references and substantiation for use of a ketogenic diet in cancer that Dr. Myatt is writing a book on the subject.]

Here’s the short-course. A ketogenic diet is beneficial in treating cancer by a number of different mechanisms including:

1. Decreasing the glucose substrate required for cancer cell metabolism. Most tumors express abnormalities in the number and function of their mitochondria. (23-28) Such abnormalities prevent the bioenergetic utilization of ketone bodies, which require functional mitochondria for their oxidation.
2. Decreasing insulin, a secondary growth factor for cancer cells. (29-30)
3. Decreasing inflammation. Inflammation acts to promote cancer by altering cell-to-cell communication and delaying local detoxification.(31-41) Metabolic ketosis has significant anti-inflammatory effects. (25, 42-45)
4. Decreasing ROS production. Reactive Oxygen Species are known to promote cancer (46-48); metabolic ketosis decreases ROS production. (49-52)
5. Reversing cachexia (the extreme wasting and weight loss of cancer) while simultaneously decreasing tumor weight. (53-55)
6. Decreasing angiogenesis. (56-57)
7. Inducing apoptosis. (27,45, 53)
8. Suppressing the p53 oncogene, the most common point mutation observed in human cancer; more than 50% of all human tumors examined to date have identifiable p53 gene point mutations or deletions. A ketogenic diet has been shown to suppress the p53 oncogene in animal models. (43)
9. Acting synergistically with chemotherapy and/or specific nutritional supplementation. (58-61)

Ongoing research into the use of ketogenic diets for cancer is very quickly proving that ketosis can have a profound, positive effect on slowing cancer growth even in advanced cancers. (62-82)

Neurological diseases:

Feared neurologic diseases including Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s, brain trauma and Lou Gehrig’s disease (ALS) have all been demonstrated to respond favorably to the metabolic changes created by a ketogenic diet. (83-101)

Other conditions which may benefit from a ketogenic diet include acne (102) and polycystic ovary disease. (103)

In Summary:

Not only is the medical use of ketogenic diets not an “ex-trend” as our questioner believes, it is actually an “emerging” trend that you will continue to hear more and more about. In fact, don’t be surprised if your doctor prescribes a ketogenic diet to you one day soon.

References

1.)  Bueno NB, De Melo IS, De Oliveira SL, et al. Very-low-carbohydrate ketogenic diet v. low-fat diet for long-term weight loss: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Br J Nutr2013;110:1178–87.
2.)  Santos FL, Esteves SS, Da Costa PA, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials of the effects of low carbohydrate diets on cardiovascular risk factors. Obes Rev2012;13:1048–66.
3.) Tobias DK, Chen M, Manson JE, et al. Effect of low-fat diet interventions versus other diet interventions on long-term weight change in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2015;3:968–79.
4.) Sackner-Bernstein J, Kanter D, Kaul S. Dietary intervention for overweight and obese adults: comparison of low-carbohydrate and low-fat diets. A meta-analysis. PLoS ONE2015;10:e0139817.
5.) Mansoor N, Vinknes KJ, Veierod MB, et al. Effects of low-carbohydrate diets v. low-fat diets on body weight and cardiovascular risk factors: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Br J Nutr 2016;115:466–79.
6.) Mark S, Du TS, Noakes TD, et al. A successful lifestyle intervention model replicated in diverse clinical settings. S Afr Med J 2016;106:763–6.
7.)  Gardner CD, Kiazand A, Alhassan S, et al. Comparison of the Atkins, Zone, Ornish, and LEARN diets for change in weight and related risk factors among overweight premenopausal women: the A to Z Weight Loss Study: a randomized trial. JAMA2007;297:969–77.
8.) Westman EC, Yancy WS Jr, Mavropoulos JC, et al. The effect of a low-carbohydrate, ketogenic diet versus a low-glycemic index diet on glycemic control in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Nutr Metab (Lond) 2008;5:36.
9.) Hussain TA, Mathew TC, Dashti AA, et al. Effect of low-calorie versus low-carbohydrate ketogenic diet in type 2 diabetes. Nutrition 2012;28:1016–21.
10.) Daly ME, Paisey R, Paisey R, et al. Short-term effects of severe dietary carbohydrate-restriction advice in Type 2 diabetes—a randomized controlled trial. Diabet Med2006;23:15–20.
11.) Bazzano LA, Hu T, Reynolds K, et al. Effects of low-carbohydrate and low-fat diets: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 2014;161:309–18.
12.) Yancy WS Jr, Olsen MK, Guyton JR, et al. A low-carbohydrate, ketogenic diet versus a low-fat diet to treat obesity and hyperlipidemia: a randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med2004;140:769–77.
13.) Tay J, Brinkworth GD, Noakes M, et al. Metabolic effects of weight loss on a very-low-carbohydrate diet compared with an isocaloric high-carbohydrate diet in abdominally obese subjects. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008;51:59–67.
14.) Feinman RD, Volek JS, Westman EC. Dietary carbohydrate restriction in the treatment of diabetes and metabolic syndrome. Clin Nutr Insight 2008;34:5.
15.) Volek JS, Phinney SD, Forsythe CE, et al. Carbohydrate restriction has a more favorable impact on the metabolic syndrome than a low fat diet. Lipids 2009;44:297–309.
16.) Aude YW, Agatston AS, Lopez-Jimenez F, et al. The national cholesterol education program diet vs a diet lower in carbohydrates and higher in protein and monounsaturated fat: a randomized trial. Arch Intern Med 2004;164:2141–6.
17.) Volek JS, Fernandez ML, Feinman RD, et al. Dietary carbohydrate restriction induces a unique metabolic state positively affecting atherogenic dyslipidemia, fatty acid partitioning, and metabolic syndrome. Prog Lipid Res 2008;47:307–18.
18.) Forsythe CE, Phinney SD, Feinman RD, et al. Limited effect of dietary saturated fat on plasma saturated fat in the context of a low carbohydrate diet. Lipids 2010;45:947–62.
19.) Wood RJ, Volek JS, Liu Y, et al. Carbohydrate restriction alters lipoprotein metabolism by modifying VLDL, LDL, and HDL subfraction distribution and size in overweight men. J Nutr2006;136:384–9.
20.) Volek JS, Sharman MJ, Forsythe CE. Modification of lipoproteins by very low-carbohydrate diets. J Nutr 2005;135:1339–42.
21.) Kessler SK, Neal EG, Camfield CS, Kossoff EH. Dietary therapies for epilepsy: future research. Epilepsy Behav. 2011;22:17–22. [PubMed]
22.) Kossoff E. The fat is in the fire: ketogenic diet for refractory status epilepticus. Epilepsy Curr. 2011;11:88–89. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
23.) Meixensberger J, Herting B, Roggendorf W, Reichmann H: Metabolic patterns in malignant gliomas. J Neurooncol 1995, 24:153-161
24.) Pedersen PL: Tumor mitochondria and the bioenergetics of cancer cells. Prog Exp Tumor Res 1978, 22:190-274.
25.) Seyfried TN, Sanderson TM, El-Abbadi MM, McGowan R, Mukherjee P.: Role of glucose and ketone bodies in the metabolic control of experimental brain cancer. Br J Cancer. 2003 Oct 6;89(7):1375-82.
26.) Fearon KC.: Nutritional pharmacology in the treatment of neoplastic disease. Baillieres Clin Gastroenterol. 1988 Oct;2(4):941-9.
27.) Skinner R, Trujillo A, Ma X, Beierle EA. Ketone bodies inhibit the viability of human neuroblastoma cells. J Pediatr Surg. 2009 Jan;44(1):212-6; discussion 216.
28.) Muti P, Quattrin T, Grant BJ, Krogh V, Micheli A, Schünemann HJ, Ram M, Freudenheim JL, Sieri S, Trevisan M, Berrino F. Fasting glucose is a risk factor for breast cancer: a prospective study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev, 2002 Nov;11(11):1361-8.
29.) Venkateswaran V, Haddad AQ, Fleshner NE, Fan R, Sugar LM, Nam R, Klotz LH, Pollak M. Association of diet-induced hyperinsulinemia with accelerated growth of prostate cancer (LNCaP) xenografts.J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007 Dec 5;99(23):1793-800. Epub 2007 Nov 27.
30.) Borugian MJ, Sheps SB, Kim-Sing C, Van Patten C, Potter JD, Dunn B, Gallagher RP, Hislop TG. Insulin, macronutrient intake, and physical activity: are potential indicators of insulin resistance associated with mortality from breast cancer? Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2004 Jul;13(7):1163-72.
31.) Khan G.: Epstein-Barr virus, cytokines, and inflammation: A cocktail for the pathogenesis of Hodgkin’s lymphoma? Exp Hematol. 2006 Apr;34(4):399-406.
32.) Dalgleish AG, O’Byrne K. Inflammation and cancer: the role of the immune response and angiogenesis. Cancer Treat Res. 2006;130:1-38.
33.) Schottelius AJ, Dinter H.: Cytokines, NF-kappaB, microenvironment, intestinal inflammation and cancer. Cancer Treat Res. 2006;130:67-87.
33a.) Wiseman H, Halliwell B: Damage to DNA by reactive oxygen and nitrogen species: role in inflammatory disease and progression to cancer. Biochem J 1996, 313:17-29.
34.) Otani T, Iwasaki M, Sasazuki S, Inoue M, Tsugane S.: Plasma C-reactive protein and risk of colorectal cancer in a nested case-control study: Japan public health center-based prospective study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2006 Apr;15(4):690-5.
35) Dobrovolskaia MA, Kozlov SV.: Inflammation and cancer: when NF-kappaB amalgamates the perilous partnership.Curr Cancer Drug Targets. 2005 Aug;5(5):325-44.
36.) Naldini A, Carraro F.: Role of inflammatory mediators in angiogenesis. Curr Drug Targets Inflamm Allergy. 2005 Feb;4(1):3-8.
37.) Ohshima H, Tazawa H, Sylla BS, Sawa T.: Prevention of human cancer by modulation of chronic inflammatory processes. Mutat Res. 2005 Dec 11;591(1-2):110-22. Epub 2005 Aug 3.
38.) Coussens LM, Werb Z.: Inflammation and cancer. Nature. 2002 Dec 19-26;420(6917):860-7.
39.) Stewart JW, Koehler K, Jackson W, Hawley J, Wang W, Au A, Myers R, Birt DF: Prevention of mouse skin tumor promotion by dietary energy restriction requires an intact adrenal gland and glucocorticoid supplementation restores inhibition.Carcinogenesis 2005, 26:1077-1084
40.) Zhu Z, Jiang W, Thompson HJ: Mechanisms by which energy restriction inhibits rat mammary carcinogenesis: in vivo effects of corticosterone on cell cycle machinery in mammary carcinomas. Carcinogenesis 2003, 24:1225-1231.
41.) Patel NV, Finch CE: The glucocorticoid paradox of caloric restriction in slowing brain aging.Neurobiol Aging 2002, 23:707-717.
42.)Gasior M, Rogawski MA, Hartman AL. Neuroprotective and disease-modifying effects of the ketogenic diet.Behav Pharmacol. 2006 Sep;17(5-6):431-9.
43.) Maalouf M, Rho JM, Mattson MP. The neuroprotective properties of calorie restriction, the ketogenic diet, and ketone bodies. Brain Res Rev. 2009 Mar;59(2):293-315. Epub 2008 Sep 25.
44.) Garai J, Lóránd T, Molnár V. Ketone bodies affect the enzymatic activity of macrophage migration inhibitory factor. Life Sci. 2005 Aug 5;77(12):1375-80.
45.) Seyfried TN, Kiebish M, Mukherjee P, Marsh J. Targeting energy metabolism in brain cancer with calorically restricted ketogenic diets. Epilepsia. 2008 Nov;49 Suppl 8:114-6.
46.) Shi DY, Xie FZ, Zhai C, Stern JS, Liu Y, Liu SL. The role of cellular oxidative stress in regulating glycolysis energy metabolism in hepatoma cells. Mol Cancer. 2009 Jun 5;8(1):32. [Epub ahead of print]
47.) Halliwell B. Oxidative stress and cancer: have we moved forward? Biochem J. 2007 Jan 1;401(1):1-11.
48.) Brown N., Bicknell R. Hypoxia and oxidative stress in breast cancer: Oxidative stress – its effects on the growth, metastatic potential and response to therapy of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res 2001, 3:323-327.
49.) Veech RL: The therapeutic implications of ketone bodies: the effects of ketone bodies in pathological conditions: ketosis, ketogenic diet, redox states, insulin resistance, and mitochondrial metabolism. Prostaglandins Leukot Essent Fatty Acids 2004, 70:309-319.
50.) Veech RL: Metabolic control analysis of ketone and insulin action: Implications for phenotyping of disease and design of therapy. Lecture: The Dynamic and Energetic Basis of Health and Aging Monday, Nov 11 – Wednesday, Nov 13, 2002, The Cloister’s, NIH, Bethesda MD.
51.) Masuda R, Monahan JW, Kashiwaya Y: D-beta-hydroxybutyrate is neuroprotective against hypoxia in serum-free hippocampal primary cultures. J Neurosci Res 2005, 80:501-509.
52.) Bough KJ, Rho JM. Anticonvulsant mechanisms of the ketogenic diet. Epilepsia. 2007 Jan;48(1):43-58.
53.)Beck SA, Tisdale MJ. Effect of insulin on weight loss and tumour growth in a cachexia model. Br J Cancer. 1989 May;59(5):677-81.
54.) Tisdale MJ, Brennan RA, Fearon KC. Reduction of weight loss and tumour size in a cachexia model by a high fat diet. Br J Cancer. 1987 Jul;56(1):39-43
55.) Beck SA, Tisdale MJ. Nitrogen excretion in cancer cachexia and its modification by a high fat diet in mice. Cancer Res. 1989 Jul 15;49(14):3800-4.
56.) Zhou W, Mukherjee P, Kiebish MA, Markis WT, Mantis JG, Seyfried TN. The calorically restricted ketogenic diet, an effective alternative therapy for malignant brain cancer.Nutr Metab (Lond). 2007 Feb 21;4:5.
57.) Seyfried TN, Mukherjee P. Targeting energy metabolism in brain cancer: review and hypothesis. Nutr Metab (Lond). 2005 Oct 21;2:30.
58.) Berrigan D, Perkins SN, Haines DC, Hursting SD.: Adult-onset calorie restriction and fasting delay spontaneous tumorigenesis in p53-deficient mice. Carcinogenesis. 2002 May;23(5):817-22.
59.) Marsh J, Mukherjee P, Seyfried TN. Drug/diet synergy for managing malignant astrocytoma in mice: 2-deoxy-D-glucose and the restricted ketogenic diet. Nutr Metab (Lond). 2008 Nov 25;5:33.
60.) Otto C, Kaemmerer U, Illert B, Muehling B, Pfetzer N, Wittig R, Voelker HU, Thiede A, Coy JF. Growth of human gastric cancer cells in nude mice is delayed by a ketogenic diet supplemented with omega-3 fatty acids and medium-chain triglycerides. BMC Cancer. 2008 Apr 30;8:122.
61.) Wargovich MJ, Cunningham JE.:Diet, individual responsiveness and cancer prevention. J Nutr. 2003 Jul;133(7 Suppl):2400S-2403S.
62.) Denley A, Carroll JM, Brierley GV, Cosgrove L, Wallace J, Forbes B, et al. Differential activation of insulin receptor substrates 1 and 2 by insulin-like growth factor-activated insulin receptors. Mol Cell Biol. 2007;27:3569–3577. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
63.) Giovannucci E, Harlan DM, Archer MC, Bergenstal RM, Gapstur SM, Habel LA, et al. Diabetes and cancer: a consensus report. CA Cancer J Clin. 2010;60:207–221. [PubMed]
64.) Rose DP, Vona-Davis L. The cellular and molecular mechanisms by which insulin influences breast cancer risk and progression. Endocr Relat Cancer. 2012;19:R225–R241. [PubMed]
65.) Renehan AG, Frystyk J, Flyvbjerg A. Obesity and cancer risk: the role of the insulin-IGF axis. Trends Endocrinol Metab. 2006;17:328–336. [PubMed]
66.) AA.VV. Research in cancer Science 192562x+xii+xiv.
67.) Warburg O, Wind F, Negelein E. The metabolism of tumors in the body. J Gen Physiol. 1927;8:519–530. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
68.) Hanahan D, Weinberg RA. Hallmarks of cancer: the next generation. Cell. 2011;144:646–674.[PubMed]
69.) Warburg O. On respiratory impairment in cancer cells. Science. 1956;124:269–270. [PubMed]
70.) Pelicano H, Xu RH, Du M, Feng L, Sasaki R, Carew JS, et al. Mitochondrial respiration defects in cancer cells cause activation of akt survival pathway through a redox-mediated mechanism. J Cell Biol. 2006;175:913–923. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
71.) Sandri M, Barberi L, Bijlsma AY, Blaauw B, Dyar KA, Milan G, et al. Signalling pathways regulating muscle mass in ageing skeletal muscle. the role of the IGF1-akt-mTOR-FoxO pathway Biogerontology 2013;. e-pub ahead of print 19 May 2013. [PubMed]
72.) Schwertfeger KL, McManaman JL, Palmer CA, Neville MC, Anderson SM. Expression of constitutively activated akt in the mammary gland leads to excess lipid synthesis during pregnancy and lactation. J Lipid Res. 2003;44:1100–1112. [PubMed]
73.) Klement RJ, Kammerer U. Is there a role for carbohydrate restriction in the treatment and prevention of cancer. Nutr Metab (Lond) 2011;8:75. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
74.) Tisdale MJ, Brennan RA, Fearon KC. Reduction of weight loss and tumour size in a cachexia model by a high fat diet. Br J Cancer. 1987;56:39–43. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
75.) Beck SA, Tisdale MJ. Effect of insulin on weight loss and tumour growth in a cachexia model. Br J Cancer. 1989;59:677–681. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
76.) Ho VW, Leung K, Hsu A, Luk B, Lai J, Shen SY, et al. A low carbohydrate, high protein diet slows tumor growth and prevents cancer initiation. Cancer Res. 2011;71:4484–4493. [PubMed]
77.) Otto C, Kaemmerer U, Illert B, Muehling B, Pfetzer N, Wittig R, et al. Growth of human gastric cancer cells in nude mice is delayed by a ketogenic diet supplemented with omega-3 fatty acids and medium-chain triglycerides. BMC Cancer. 2008;8:122. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
78.) Seyfried BT, Kiebish M, Marsh J, Mukherjee P. Targeting energy metabolism in brain cancer through calorie restriction and the ketogenic diet. J Cancer Res Ther. 2009;5 (Suppl 1:S7–S15. [PubMed]
79.) Zhou W, Mukherjee P, Kiebish MA, Markis WT, Mantis JG, Seyfried TN. The calorically restricted ketogenic diet, an effective alternative therapy for malignant brain cancer. Nutr Metab (Lond) 2007;4:5. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
80.) Schmidt M, Pfetzer N, Schwab M, Strauss I, Kammerer U. Effects of a ketogenic diet on the quality of life in 16 patients with advanced cancer: a pilot trial. Nutr Metab (Lond) 2011;8:54.[PMC free article] [PubMed]
81.) Nebeling LC, Lerner E. Implementing a ketogenic diet based on medium-chain triglyceride oil in pediatric patients with cancer. J Am Diet Assoc. 1995;95:693–697. [PubMed]
82.) Nebeling LC, Miraldi F, Shurin SB, Lerner E. Effects of a ketogenic diet on tumor metabolism and nutritional status in pediatric oncology patients: Two case reports. J Am Coll Nutr. 1995;14:202–208.[PubMed]
83.) Baranano KW, Hartman AL. The ketogenic diet: uses in epilepsy and other neurologic illnesses. Curr Treat Options Neurol. 2008;10:410–419. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
84.) Stafstrom CE, Rho JM. The ketogenic diet as a treatment paradigm for diverse neurological disorders. Front Pharmacol. 2012;3:59. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
85.) Bough KJ, Rho JM. Anticonvulsant mechanisms of the ketogenic diet. Epilepsia. 2007;48:43–58.[PubMed]
86.) Huffman J, Kossoff EH. State of the ketogenic diet(s) in epilepsy. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep. 2006;6:332–340. [PubMed]
87.) Garriga-Canut M, Schoenike B, Qazi R, Bergendahl K, Daley TJ, Pfender RM, et al. 2-deoxy-D-glucose reduces epilepsy progression by NRSF-CtBP-dependent metabolic regulation of chromatin structure. Nat Neurosci. 2006;9:1382–1387. [PubMed]
88.) Maalouf M, Rho JM, Mattson MP. The neuroprotective properties of calorie restriction, the ketogenic diet, and ketone bodies. Brain Res Rev. 2009;59:293–315. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
89.) Palop JJ, Mucke L. Epilepsy and cognitive impairments in alzheimer disease. Arch Neurol. 2009;66:435–440. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
90.) Roberson ED, Halabisky B, Yoo JW, Yao J, Chin J, Yan F, et al. Amyloid-beta/fyn-induced synaptic, network, and cognitive impairments depend on tau levels in multiple mouse models of alzheimer’s disease. J Neurosci. 2011;31:700–711. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
91.) Noebels J. A perfect storm: converging paths of epilepsy and alzheimer’s dementia intersect in the hippocampal formation. Epilepsia. 2011;52 (Suppl 1:39–46. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
92.) Kapogiannis D, Mattson MP. Disrupted energy metabolism and neuronal circuit dysfunction in cognitive impairment and alzheimer’s disease. Lancet Neurol. 2011;10:187–198. [PMC free article][PubMed]
93.) Henderson ST, Vogel JL, Barr LJ, Garvin F, Jones JJ, Costantini LC. Study of the ketogenic agent AC-1202 in mild to moderate alzheimer’s disease: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial. Nutr Metab (Lond) 2009;6:31. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
94.) Kashiwaya Y, Takeshima T, Mori N, Nakashima K, Clarke K, Veech RL. D-beta-hydroxybutyrate protects neurons in models of Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2000;97:5440–5444. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
95.) Van der Auwera I, Wera S, Van Leuven F, Henderson ST. A ketogenic diet reduces amyloid beta 40 and 42 in a mouse model of alzheimer’s disease. Nutr Metab (Lond) 2005;2:28. [PMC free article][PubMed]
96.) Vanitallie TB, Nonas C, Di Rocco A, Boyar K, Hyams K, Heymsfield SB. Treatment of parkinson disease with diet-induced hyperketonemia: a feasibility study. Neurology. 2005;64:728–730.[PubMed]
97.) Prins ML, Fujima LS, Hovda DA. Age-dependent reduction of cortical contusion volume by ketones after traumatic brain injury. J Neurosci Res. 2005;82:413–420. [PubMed]
98.) Appelberg KS, Hovda DA, Prins ML. The effects of a ketogenic diet on behavioral outcome after controlled cortical impact injury in the juvenile and adult rat. J Neurotrauma. 2009;26:497–506.[PMC free article] [PubMed]
99.) Schwartzkroin PA, Wenzel HJ, Lyeth BG, Poon CC, Delance A, Van KC, et al. Does ketogenic diet alter seizure sensitivity and cell loss following fluid percussion injury. Epilepsy Res. 2010;92:74–84.[PubMed]
100.) Siva N. Can ketogenic diet slow progression of ALS. Lancet Neurol. 2006;5:476. [PubMed]
101.) Zhao Z, Lange DJ, Voustianiouk A, MacGrogan D, Ho L, Suh J, et al. A ketogenic diet as a potential novel therapeutic intervention in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. BMC Neurosci. 2006;7:29.[PMC free article] [PubMed]
102.) Paoli A, Grimaldi K, Toniolo L, Canato M, Bianco A, Fratter A. Nutrition and acne: therapeutic potential of ketogenic diets. Skin Pharmacol Physiol. 2012;25:111–117. [PubMed]
103.) Mavropoulos JC, Yancy WS, Hepburn J, Westman EC. The effects of a low-carbohydrate, ketogenic diet on the polycystic ovary syndrome: a pilot study. Nutr Metab (Lond) 2005;2:35. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
104.) Silva Jeremy, The effects of very high fat, very low carbohydrate diets on safety, blood lipid profile, and anabolic hormone status. Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 2014 11 (Suppl 1):P39 DOI: 10.1186/1550-2783-11-S1-P39©