Stefano, 12. September 2009, 4:11
We once did a study (in fact, our clinic had the largest number of subjects in this study of any center in the world) on a fat blocking agent that ultimately passed the FDA and is now available. Subjects in this study could be on no medications. We had a terrible time keeping patients in the study because these subjects – on an artificial low-fat diet because the drug blocked fat uptake – got depressed, went to their regular doctors and got put on antidepressants. It was a common, common occurrence. It’s shouldn’t be a surprise, though, when you consider that the brain is primarily fat and contains an enormous amount of cholesterol. One would think – if one thought rationally – that depriving the brain of these substances would have consequences.
Walter Norris, 12. September 2009, 11:23
I don’t believe that increasing protein intake drives the production of sugar, unless you need the sugar. You require about 200 g of sugar per day. Protein converts to sugar at the rate of about 0.8g sugar per g of protein, so you would need to get 100 g of protein per day to make 80 g of sugar, which would still leave you short of the 200 g you need. Plus you need some protein just to replace the wear and tear on the tissues. By the time you add it all up, it’s difficult to get enough protein to make sugar and replace wear and tear and produce excess blood sugar. And that’s even if excess protein result in excess sugar, and I don’t think it does.
How do we know? Where does this come from (cognitively)? There is a broad, deep chain of reasoning behind these comments, taking us into biology, chemistry, physics, mathematics, and philosophy. Beautiful.