Fibre - is it the high carb diet's last straw? Keto bashing in the mainstream. "There goes the keto diet!", predicted the celebrity doctor

fibre

#42

I finally got around to listening to this podcast and here’s what I believe is a key point:

Justin’s lab did publish that study that was picked up as kind of the mass extinction inside of our guts that progressively looked at four generations of the high-fiber diet or a low-fiber diet in an animal model. And so they found that by the fourth, at the end of the third generation, even if you switch back to a high-fiber diet, species and strains are gone that are irreversible.

First, this was a study done under lab conditions (mice) where there was no possibility of “contamination” with microbes from an outside source. Even then, it took 3 generations to wipe them out. I’m trying to imagine a scenario where 3 generations of humans are not exposed to common microbes.

Second, I think irreversible was in the context of they won’t reestablish themselves by dietary intervention alone. The whole last part of the podcast was about the company called Seed that produces probiotics reputed to reverse conditions where species are missing.

Third, if looking at microflora on an individual level, lack of diversity isn’t always a Bad Thing IMO. They criticize products that simply throw every species in the mix regardless of whether they are strains proven beneficial or not.

All in all, studying microbiome genetics and what effects various species have in symbiosis with other species and dependant on diet is a science in its infancy. Is it a good idea to be cautious? Sure.


#43

Fibre taken to another level.

Two main grouped types of fibre from fruits and vegetables.

  1. Insoluble fibre e.b. bran, grain husks

  2. Soluble fibre

Benefits of soluble fibre:

  1. Production of short chain fatty acids by colonic bacteria (discussed above)

  2. Can bind up potentially toxic digesta (biotoxins and inflammatory mediators) to pass it through the small intestine to the colon (discussed above. re: Dr. Fung)

  3. Absorbs bile acids released from the bile duct in the response to dietary fats. The bile acids are built from cholesterol. The cholesterol is bound up with the soluble fibre and removed from the body. This is not a cgeer squad for cholesterol lowering. The cholesterol in the bile acids comes from the break down of old LDL molecules (including oxidised LDL). The soluble fibre helps in clearing cholesterol and old LDL from the liver. This means less circulating oxidised and old LDL. The circulation contains healthier, younger LDL particles.

I only just learnt about that benefit of soluble fibre in fruits and vegetables in this podcast:

Soluble fibre specific info at about 47m40s.


(Bunny) #44

“…And so they found that by the fourth, at the end of the third generation, even if you switch back to a high-fiber diet, species and strains are gone that are irreversible. …” …More

That’s what mud pies are for? (we use to make them and actually try to eat them when we were kids) …lol

Dirt (microbes) in the soil belongs in our gut?

Soil based probiotics?

The more sterile your environment is from the womb the less resistant you are to infection from the surrounding geographical area?

Through many generations of so called civilized (sterilized) societies?

Footnotes:

[1] “…Soluble fiber is soluble in water. …” “…Good sources of soluble fiber include oats and oatmeal, legumes (peas, beans, lentils), barley, fruits and vegetables (especially oranges, apples and carrots). Insoluble fiber does not absorb or dissolve in water. It passes through our digestive system in close to its original form. …More


(KCKO, KCFO) #45

True confession, I did eat some of my mud pies when I was a kid.

Here is an interesting paper on eating mud pies.


#46

I want to discuss dietary fibre some more.

Fermentation into butyrate has been discussed.
Eating higher dietary fibre in conjunction with a standard recommended diet helps bind some of the ingested toxins in that diet (as per Dr. Fung). Then that was discounted for keto eaters because the processed junk foods are removed from a whole food, well formulated ketogenic diet.
The benefit of dietary fibre via bile for removal of oxidised LDL is an interesting nuance.

But this food “toxin” issue is interesting.

I was listening to Dr. Dale Bredesen talking on the Fat Emperor Podcast with Ivor Cummins and he made a point about bioaccumulation of toxins in increasing trophic levels of food. So that animal foods, in particular fatty meats, will accumulate toxins. Those fat soluble toxins then accumulate in the human eating the fatty meats.

Then with rapid weight loss these toxins are released from the body fat stores. The role of fibre in this context is to collect the excreted toxins in the GI tract and bind them into faeces for removal from the body. However, if dietary fibre is inadequate, then the toxins potentially will not be bound in the fibre load for excretion but perpetually recirculate into the blood stream maintaining a toxic state.

Fibre is not an essential nutrient. But it may move across to a medicinal purpose with roles in toxin removal. So in the case of people following nutritional ketosis for weight loss it may prove beneficial. Or in the case of budget restricted eating meats with potentially higher toxin levels in the dietary fats, the dietary fibre may be beneficial.


Cheryl's 90 Day Carnivore Challenge: Started on Nov 01 going through to Feb 29, 2020
(Edith) #47

These studies were included in a Peak Human podcast debunking fiber as a beneficial carbohydrate:

This paper shows an inverse relationship between fiber intake and diverticulosis:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3724216/

This paper shows that less fiber and less frequent bowel movements decreased the risk of diverticulosis:
https://www.cghjournal.org/article/S1542-3565(13)01056-2/abstract

Next, this study was a randomized controlled study and it shows that reducing dietary fiber reduced constipation and its associated symptoms:

Oh, and finally: This paper used an epidemiological study to show that less fiber did not increase risk of colorectal cancer

So, if lower fiber, in fact, causes less constipation, it seems it would be more prudent to eat less fiber so one can excrete their waste more frequently. I would imagine that would remove toxins better than worrying about having fiber. Fiber doesn’t necessarily help move things along or it may actually cause other health problems within the colon.

Once again, conflicting studies involving human physiology. Sigh.:pensive:


(mole person) #48

This sounds like more dodgy weak science to me. What science actually backs this hypothesis? You’d need first to support the idea that bioaccumulation of toxins from animal foods caused a toxin load higher than the plants that the fiber is packaged with. Remember, animals are also a source of detoxification of plant toxins before those nutrients are passed on to us. My suspicion is if this were tested the opposite result would be found.


(Bob M) #49

That toxin idea always made logical sense to me, but I think realistically and based on evidence, it doesn’t make much physiological sense.

And then you factor in that plants ARE toxins…:wink:


(Polly) #50

I have listened to the audible version many times, and I always hear something “new”.


(Bunny) #51

The Devils :smiling_imp: Advocate:

Here is the other problem when you eat too much meat (animal proteins), scientific cross-validated fact:

•Too much heme iron can strip electrons from your DNA?

•The more meat you eat, the more cancer precursor MicroRNA’s are produced in the lower Colon; the only known antidote is dietary resistant starch which reverses the process and decreases MicroRNA’s in numbers more than significantly. Dietary fiber does nothing, period to reduce cancer promoting MicroRNA’s and can actually promote the cancer causing MicroRNA proliferation of the cancer once it begins.

•Amino Acid - Amino = Amine ==>Ammonia (the only reason it does not kill you is because sulfur bonds in cysteine and methionine)

What are you going to do when a Vegan hits you with that?


#52

I read two papers about the physiology of dietary fibre.

There is the standard stuff about mucus and short chain fatty acids, plus mention of bacterial breakdown products, the lipopolysaccharides (LPS). More dietary fibre, more gut lining mucus. The mucus is in two layers, a layer that is easily shifted (providing lubrication) and a layer closer to the gut lining cells that is a bit more tenacious and performs more of a barrier function to pathogens and antigens.

The interesting stuff is about the manipulation of the gut microbiota and the species because of the biochemicals produced by certain bacteria that can act in pathways to signal the main detoxifying organs in the body, the liver and the kidney. That may mean dietary fibre, through it’s effects on gut bacteria in the large intestine, may enhance kidney function for removal of toxins via the urine, and it may enhance the function of the liver. The papers mention the effect on lowering cholesterol, but we are interested that within that the oxidised LDL is removed more readily by the liver. Other toxins are conjugated into bile acids and squirted out into the gut to be combined into faeces, possibly more effectively in the matrix of dietary fibre.

My search engine search term was “dietary fibre detox physiology”

I am still seeking to track down evidence of specific toxin removal, such as chelated heavy metals, or some measure of common pesticides or herbicides (Round-Up). But I haven’t tracked down those specifics yet, let alone any role of dietary fibre.

I reckon it’s too early to say that dietary fibre does not have a role in health, especially in a man-made-more-toxic world of contemporary times (even though it is not an essential nutrient).


(Ian) #53

In a recent video released by Biolayne, he claims that “people who eat a high amount of fiber, on average, live longer” and that this is supported “time after time, after time, after time, after time in the literature”.

I watched Zoe Harcombe’s video on fiber, which appears to have been well researched and there was no mention of a connection between fiber consumption and longevity. Is anyone else of all these literature references to the beneficial impact of fiber that Zoe appears to have overlooked?

The relevant section is at 4 minutes.


#54

The context would be important Ian. Fibre does seem to have benefit for people unable or unwilling to optimise their diet.


(Bunny) #55

Reminds of the ancient art of bandage swallowing (Vastra Dhauti; Shatkarma), the ultimate fiber cleanse…lol

I’ve also seen this done in reverse down and back up.


(Ian) #56

Definitely agree and understand, such as fiber moderating glucose uptake, providing volatile fatty acids etc. However, these benefits appear to be most significant in those with less than optimal diets and/or health and fiber may not be required for “healthier” individuals.

I was specifically wondering about Biolayne’s assertion that numerous studies have shown fiber to increase average longevity in humans. Considering he makes reference to many, many studies, I’m left wondering why I have not come across them and why people like Zoe Harcombe have not reported them?

If it is assumed that individuals who consume a SAD diet have shortened life expediencies, it could be speculated that they see an increase in average life expectancy if they eat more fiber, presumably associated with the consumption of more real food. Therefore, if this is the type of finding Biolayne is referring to, the conclusion of increased longevity may be confounded by the consumption of better quality food, rather than the fiber?

The theory that fiber may help to clear toxins is an fascinating one, but will be hellishly difficult to figure out. Toxins have many different physio-chemical properties that affect their interaction and partitioning between solids, aqueous and non-aqueous phase liquids (i.e. water and fats/oils). Throw in emulsification agents and enzyme strength/composition and it all becomes a very complicated problem to resolve and test. Also there will be different processes involved in clearing exogenous toxins as opposed to endogenous toxins, such as those released during fat burning and weight lose as opposed to those that are accidentally or incidentally consumed in food.

For example, I am an environmental chemist and when we assess potential exposure risk to human health from say arsenic or lead in soil, we will often run a Physiological Based Extraction Test (PBET). The soils are extracted with a synthetic gastric fluid to assess the biological availability of these metals within the human gastric system. Often only 40-60% of the metals identified in soil become bio-available and could be absorbed by the body. Their bio-availability typically depends on soil type, chemical composition of the metals and presence of chelating agents. When you add the octantal:water partitioning coefficients associated with different organic compounds, it becomes even more complicated. For example PCBs are very non-polar and therefore are hydrophobic and will prefer to stay dissolved in oils and fats. However, something like Glyposate (Roundup) is highly polar and is therefore water loving and will shun oils and fats to stay dissolved in water. How fiber would react or interact physically/chemically with these chemicals (toxins?) will be very different.


(Gregory - You can teach an old dog new tricks.) #57

I was reading an article by Dr Georgia Ede the other day ( I’ll try to track it down if it matters ) where she was critiquing a review that claimed 17 studies proved some point about about the benefits of some diet.

When she actually looked closely at the studies, nine out of the 17, actually concluded the opposite of what the review was claiming.


#58

Fibre won’t go away. Dr. William Davis MD talks about prebiotc fibre, at the 01hr:00min:38s mark of this podcast, that keeps the mucus producing microbes populous in human colons. The mucus being important for gut wall function.

Akkermansia muciniphila is a microbe that proliferates in a reduced fibre diet and it reduces the gut wall mucus layer thickness.

This makes me think of a chicken and egg scenario. If a person is eating clean keto, or optimised keto, maybe they don’t need so much protective mucus production on the intestinal lining?


(Alec) #59

Was there any science, or was it just his opinion?


(Bacon is a many-splendoured thing) #60

It’s possible, but I would advise extreme caution in advancing this view, until we have more data.

We do know, however, that one of the great benefits of eating fibre is apparently the butyrate produced by the microbes that consume the fibre; this butyrate is believed to be of great benefit to the intestinal lining. On the other hand, β-hydroxybutyrate, one of the ketone bodies, is just as beneficial to the intestinal lining as butyrate is, and possibly even more so. This may be why so many people find that they can dispense with fibre when on a ketogenic diet, and that the diet seems to help their irritable bowel syndrome, Crohn’s disease, and so forth.

So it is possibly not the mucus production on the intestinal lining that is relevant here, but rather possible added benefits from giving our intestinal linings β-hydroxybutyrate in place of butyrate. It will be interesting to see what future research reveals.


#61

No direct references. Lots of “the science says” line starters. The link to the podcast is time-stamped for the specific discussion about dietary fibre.

Apparently there is a book. One would hope it has the accumulated scientific references, to reconcile against the author’s interpretation.