As the reviews of professor Behe’s new book Darwin Devolves continue, many who participate in the discussions on many blogs or websites may have noticed the seeming paradox involving high fat, high cholesterol diet and heart disease issues… Dr. Behe devoted a good portion of his book to the issue of the devolution of the polar bear, which supposedly evolved, or rather devolved according to Behe, to tolerate the drastic switch from the dietary habits of its ancestors some 400 000 years ago…This particular issue I’m planning to cover in one the upcoming OPs…
This OP is more of an introduction to the fat/cholesterol/heart disease issue that while it seems complicated at the first glance, it really isn’t…
Some members on TSZ have already alluded to this issue, so I will cover just the very fundamentals:
- cholesterol is a fatty substance produced by the liver (about 80%)
- only 20% of cholesterol enters the bloodstream via diet
- if more cholesterol is consumed, the liver slows down its production
- cholesterol is essential to life as cell membranes require it (among others)
- if cholesterol is not produced in sufficient amount by the liver the organism dies
- people who consume little cholesterol still develop heat disease, including atherosclerosis–the fatty deposits of cholesterol (and other, like calcium) in arteries
- people with low blood cholesterol levels develop heart disease;
patients with advanced heart failure often have low cholesterol, which is associated with a poor prognosis for survival
If people and many animals who consume little cholesterol develop heart disease, one might also ask whether people who consume a lot of fat and cholesterol are at the same risk…
The simplest answer is no.
That’s why the issue of high fat and cholesterol consumption diets in humans with low rates of heart disease have been labeled as the cholesterol paradox, because, from at least one point of view, it just doesn’t make sense…
As the side point, the great majority of Cell article Behe explores in his book Darwin Devolves is based on the assumption that high fat, high cholesterol diet causes heart disease (arteriosclerosis) therefore the polar bear must have evolved the adaptation to eat seal blubber and have no atherosclerosis…
Behe just plays along and simply exposes the assumptions that if polar bear evolved to eat high fat, high cholesterol diet, it has done so by breaking or blunting gene functions…This will be covered in the upcoming OP…
Why cholesterol paradox?
Because there are many groups of people (not as many anymore) all over the world that seem to be the exception to the assumed rule that high fat, high cholesterol diet cases heart disease, like atherosclerosis…Some of them are called hunter-gatherers but others, like Canadian Inuit, could be called seal blubber eaters, just like the lowly poplar bear at issue between evolutionists and ID…
Inuit eating seal blubber
If there are exceptions or paradoxes to the rule among those groups of people, are they due to adaptive mutations, just like it has been claimed in the Cell article that Behe explored regarding polar bears?
Or, is there another possible explanation?
You tell me… 😉
there is no cholesterol paradox. Hunter gathers, e.g.. inuit, suffered from extensive atherosclerosis and remains of these people, frozen thousands of years, were found to have extensive hardening of the arteries due to atherosclerosis.
the Inuit diet was (traditionally) a fairly balanced diet between fat, protein, and carbohydrates albeit leaning a bit towards a higher fat content (~50% of daily calories) than the average US citizen.
The simplest, and correct, answer would be Yes!
Have you ever considered doing some research into the subjects of your OP’s or is it easier for you to just wildly speculate on the subject matter?
Shhh, quiet, you’ll ruin how funny J-Mac’s OPs are!
J-mac has a talent to misread according to his prejudices. It’s not uncommon for J-Mac, like Salvador, to quote something that contradicts their supposed point. I have told them, but no matter how clearly you show them, they just won’t get it. I think they cannot even read what we explain.
Where did the Inuit get the carboihydrates from?
glycogen in the raw meat they ate.
Also gluconeogenesis via protein metabolism in the liver.
Easy to find out if you had bothered to even look at any of the readily available resources/literature on the subject.
Children!
Not possible. We’re talking certainty here!
The French paradox: key points
A high intake of dietary cholesterol and saturated fat but low CHD death rates define the French paradox
Variability of CHD rates is the rule, and low CHD rates are observed in southern or Mediterranean European countries
Classical risk factors do not embrace the totality of CHD risk, particularly in France and in other countries
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14676260
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_paradox
Sweden Becomes First Western Nation to Reject Low-fat Diet Dogma in Favor of Low-carb High-fat Nutrition
“Health markers will improve on a low-carbohydrate diet:
…a greater increase in HDL cholesterol (“the good cholesterol”) without having any adverse affects on LDL cholesterol (“the bad cholesterol”). This applies to both the moderate low-carbohydrate intake of less than 40 percent of the total energy intake, as well as to the stricter low-carbohydrate diet, where carbohydrate intake is less than 20 percent of the total energy intake. In addition, the stricter low-carbohydrate diet will lead to improved glucose levels for individuals with obesity and diabetes, and to marginally decreased levels of triglycerides.”
https://healthimpactnews.com/2013/sweden-becomes-first-western-nation-to-reject-low-fat-diet-dogma-in-favor-of-low-carb-high-fat-nutrition/
The Noakes Foundation – The dietary revolution to reverse the global epidemics of obesity and type 2 diabetes
We seek to answer the following questions:
How do we correct the dietary errors of the past fifty years?
How do we determine the optimal diet for individuals?
How do we change individual eating and exercise patterns to prevent type 2 diabetes & minimise the effects of insulin resistance?
How can we help everyone eat better to feel better and live better lives?
https://thenoakesfoundation.org
Prominent oncologist to study potential of “keto + drugs” to fight cancer
Keto =high fat high cholesterol diet
https://www.dietdoctor.com/prominent-oncologist-to-study-potential-of-keto-drugs-to-fight-cancer
It’s Time to Study Whether Eating Particular Diets Can Help Heal Us
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/05/magazine/its-time-to-study-whether-eating-particular-diets-can-help-heal-us.html
The Inuit Paradox
How can people who gorge on fat and rarely see a vegetable be healthier than we are?
Nooooooo… coz of “science” 🤣
http://discovermagazine.com/2004/oct/inuit-paradox
How could vegans get atherosclerosis if they eat little or none of fat and cholesterol???
“People who follow a vegan lifestyle — strict vegetarians who try to eat no meat or animal products of any kind — may increase their risk of developing blood clots and atherosclerosis or “hardening of the arteries,” which are conditions that can lead to heart attacks and stroke. That’s the conclusion of a review of dozens of articles published on the biochemistry of vegetarianism during the past 30 years. The article appears in ACS’ bi-weekly Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry.”
Turns out they need FAT and cholesterol to prevent heart disease…
Another fat and cholesterol paradox!!!
Praise the lard! 😉
https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/pressroom/presspacs/2011/acs-presspac-february-2-2011/vegans-elevated-heart-risk-requires-omega-3s-and-b12.html
Is there any OP you have made that isn’t an instant joke for it’s intergalactic magnitude of ignorance and incompetence? Is there some possible world where some version of me is asking this question non-rhetorically?
Unless you have some kind of evidence…your ignorance has been noted and overruled…😅
I hope that people realize the implications of all this supposed bear evolution..
It’s a catch 22 for Darwinists/evolutionists…
1. If polar bear evolved the “white” camouflage against smaller predators then it was by breaking genes and preventing the hair follicle cells from producing pigment.
2. The high fat, high cholesterol diet evolutinary adaptations are also questionable…
Many mammals, like humans, do fine on high fat high cholesterol diet without any “helpful” mutations in the cholesterol transportation proteins…
Brown bears in Alaska that feed on higher fat higher cholesterol diet are a perfect example of that…The brown bear hybrids develop “white” fur coats within one or few generations…
Here is another kicker:
“Bears breed across species borders
Summary:
Scientists have sequenced the entire genomes of four bear species, making it now possible to analyze the evolutionary history of all bears at the genome level. It shows that gene flow, or gene exchange, between species by extensive hybridization, is possible between most bear species, not only polar and brown bear. The DNA samples of different bear species came from different European zoos, underlining their importance not only for conservation, but also for research. The study also questions the existing species concept in general, because other genome studies have frequently found gene flow among species.”
So, no matter how one looks at it, the 400 000 years of “fast evolution” of polar bear since its separation from its ancestor could very well be another evolutionary bluff…
So common descent within “kind” from one common ancestor on Noah’s Ark looks good to me..😁
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/04/170419093151.htm
Brown bear hybrid picture:
Not all plant based diets are equally healthy?
Not all fat is equal?
Whether that’s true or not it doesn’t matter…
What’s important here is the obvious conclusion that even if one doesn’t eat fat containing cholesterol diet, he is not free from atherosclerosis…
On the other hand, high fat high cholesterol diet doesn’t cause atherosclerosis either…actually it seems that one eating fatand cholesterol is better off than vegans…
How could this be?
Here is another kicker: Statins, the 50 billion + dollar per year industry to prevent heart disease from the killer cholesterol extend life expectancy by…???
Sure…transfats are defindefinitely bad…
Near as I can tell this is jmac’s guidelines for OP creation and content.
In other words as someone recently claimed “truth isn’t truth” !
Who ever said otherwise?
Atherosclerosis across 4000 years of human history: the
Horus study of four ancient populations
https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/www/external/labor/aging/rsi/rsi_papers/2013/finch1.pdf
Outside of a profound confusion on jmac’s part concerning dietary and serum cholesterol levels the research seems to come down to this:
and this
Where’s the paradox?
edited to remove question marks from newton’s posts since there is really no question(s) on those issues.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8IkbCeZ9to
Brave Sir Robin!
I am low level skeptical about this chorestral equals heart disease problems issue.
The bible says man is given 70 years, 80 with health. It doesn’t mention diet.
It does seem meat eating populations always lived just as long in same numbers.
Anyways its not a issue for evolutionism i think.
Jmac made the above claim(s) about me in the Moderation thread.
Here I invite him to back up his claims if he thinks he is correct alleging that I ’embarrassed myself with any claims of ‘trans fats’.
Never mentioned ‘trans fats’ in any comments on your notoriously misinformed OP. Feel free to quote the comments that you think I should find embarrassing. Won’t hold my breath waiting for you to do so.
Let’s see if jmac has the courage of his convictions to back up his allegations or rather, as I suspect, we will see another example of unsubstantiated bluster of his part. Balls in your court, jmac, let’s see what you have!
It is true, that is why we think some vegans have a higher rate of heart disease vegetarians when other variables are equal.
No there are other ways, that since meat eaters have the highest rate, eating fatty meats is a very good way.
Falty logic, that diet is is worse than a vegetarian diet. While vegans do get atherosclerosis, not sure they have a higher incidence than meat eaters.
If you have already had a heart attack’s or stroke the evidence is good they extend your life.Nowadays the generic versions are coming on the market which lowered the costs.
The OP fails to address the actual question raised by the research. Do the mutations in the polar bear ApoB gene improve clearance of cholesterol from the blood stream?
Perhaps J-Mac could actually address the science.
Did I say statins don’t extend one’s life? Did you even bother to look it up by how much? You, like PeterP, try desperately to engage in conversation but you make me roll my eyes so much I need eye drops…😨
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4513492/
For those who are not familiar with the theme:
https://drmalcolmkendrick.org/2015/10/27/how-much-longer-will-you-live-if-you-take-a-statin/
What? You must be joking?!
Let’s see: How did the researchers of the original paper in Cell prove their conclusion exactly? I quote:
” We suggest that the shift to a diet consisting predominantly of fatty acids in polar bears induced adaptive changes in APOB, which enabled the species to cope with high fatty acid intake by contributing to the effective clearance of cholesterol from the blood.”
Please don’t waste my time!
As predicted jmac fails to address the issue in any way shape or form.
First thing you should attempt, jmac, is to point out where I made any comment whatsoever about trans fats where I embarressed so badly in your eyes.
It is hard to conclude that you have even the most basic grasp of the subject matter and your evasions reinforce that doubt. Surprise us all and point out the importance of the issue to your OP. I’m sure everyone will be relieved ( and no doubt surprised) to have you clarify this issue.
Go ahead give it a go you can do it…..can’t you?
Yet your are incapable of mounting anything resembling a refutation of what either newton or I have posted. The eyedrops are likely needed as a result of furious googling on your part to find something…anything…that supports your previous false claims. I was really surprised you did not know that glycogen is a carbohydrate after claiming the topic was so simple and uncomplicated and easy to understand.
Apologies, was unaware your questions were rhetorical. Or your responses to my answers was you just being …
Now a dilemma, you seem to be asking questions I will try to be as brief as possible
One never knows exactly what …?? means. Yes looked it up and have some personal experience in the area.
Yes , there is disagreement about the efficacy of statins.
Yes ,you love the woo.
Between you and me, Malcolm seems to be a bit on a nut.
Once again , deepest apologies.
I did enjoy this bit:
Good idea, not going into details there, Malcolm…
LOL
Here’s an unsurprising fact: If, over the course of your trial, 2% of your subjects suffer a major CV event, then on average the effect of the treatment will be slight. Hey, I’ll use the RMST technique on the SPAF trials (ARISTOTLE, RE-LY & ROCKET AF).
What a great idea!
Where is the evidence that ApoB devolved?
I don’t think you can google or even worse, I don’t think you have ever researched scientific literature…
You can move my comment to guano… I don’t care…
Here is an opportunity for all those believers in… to pove their beliefs…
I have a prediction: Nobody will because blind faith has no evidence to support itself…none
Bit like Jesus then.
Question: What’s your brain made of?
ETA: What’s the brain of thinking creatures made of mainly?
Why on earth would I do that? There’s no rule against self-deprecation.
😉
Dr. Swamidass Webinar with Jonathan M:
Special interest questions at 1:25.00 and 1:44.00
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10156682500176943&id=653956942&refsrc=http%3A%2F%2Fdiscourse.peacefulscience.org%2F&_rdr
I think Dr. Swamidass needs some help with very basic anatomy of polar bears as well as his how cholesterol levels and transport work 😉
Let me know what you think…
Here is some support for your position
Question What proportion of recommendations in current American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) and European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines are supported by evidence from multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and how has this changed over the past 10 years?
Findings In this systematic review of 51 current guideline documents that included 6329 recommendations, 8.5% of recommendations in ACC/AHA guidelines and 14.3% of recommendations in ESC guidelines were classified as level of evidence A (supported by evidence from multiple RCTs), compared with 11.5% of recommendations in a systematic review of ACC/AHA guidelines conducted in 2009.
Meaning Among recommendations in major cardiovascular society guidelines from 2008 to 2018, the proportion supported by evidence from RCTs remains small.
Alexander C. Fanaroff, MD, MHS1; Robert M. Califf, MD2,3,4; Stephan Windecker, MD5; et al Sidney C. Smith Jr, MD6; Renato D. Lopes, MD, PhD, MHS1
Author Affiliations
JAMA. 2019;321(11):1069-1080. doi:10.1001/jama.2019.1122
J-Mac,
I think that you are wrong.
Impress me. Explain, in your own words, why the RMST technique is appropriate (…or inappropriate, pick your poison) for the analysis of the Heart Protection Study that your buddy Dr. Malcolm Kendrick performed.
E2 clarify who I was responding to…
DNA_Jock and Newton,
Did you both understand my question Swamidass first didn’t know how to answer at 1:44?
The follow up was related to first question but referred to the original Cell article reg. ApoB and cholesterol levels in polar bears…
I don’t think you understand what I’m trying to prove here, Jock… Be patient!
Swamidass is an old fox. He is very careful when he answers questions that are a matter of interpretation… He made one serious mistake though… But I had set him up… 😉
Frankly no, just thought the study would be helpful in the goal to overturning the accepted knowledge about humans. I will keep an eye peeled for research into heart disease and treatment of it in polar bears.
That is the advantage in using geometric logic, good luck.
My questions are not clearly read by JonathanM but Swaidass can read them and answers accordingly…
I think Behe is right: Swamidass and Lents are incompetent and the webinar and Lents’ book and blog comments prove that beyond any doubt…
J-Mac,
You are correct that I do not understand what you are trying to prove here.
You could move the conversation along wonderfully if you would simply state your case, clearly and precisely, citing the literature that supports your position.
I can see an argument that could be made that Liu et al are over-concluding; however, if you want to make that argument, then (by the same standards of evidence) Behe is sunk without a trace. So I am eager to see an IDist make that argument…
Pay attention to the video and my questions… Swamidass dug a hole for himself, “tentatively”…;-)
I believe the main reason why Behe has ignored Swamidass and Lents is not because they are less known in comparison to Lenski… They have embarrassed themselves to the point that if Behe responded to them, it would be like you responding to Byers…
Lents with Human Erros, polar bears being white and 17 mutations being not damaging…
Swamidass has no clue about the difference between dermis and epidermis pigmentation vs hair follicle pigmentation…
Same applies to the cholesterol “paradox”… Why would Swamidass support the conclusion of the authors of the original Cell paper that the ApoB mutations improved the clearance of LDL cholesterol, if the same paper clearly says that polar bears cholesterol levels are extreme?
Someone is not being truthful… If cholesterol levels in polar bears are extremely high, how could the clearance of cholesterol be improved by the beneficial mutations?
The authors of the Cell paper and Swamidass are wrong and Behe might be right after all…
You are right, J-Mac!
The observation that polar bears have elevated plasma cholesterol completely refutes Behe’s argument re APOB.
Remember, Behe’s argument that the polar bear’s ApoB mutations are ‘damaging’ devolution relies on Farese, which purports to show that heterzygote null mice are resistant to diet-induced hypercholesterolemia, as in they do not experience elevated blood cholesterol when placed on a high fat diet, viz:
But the polar bears have elevated plasma cholesterol. So they cannot have reduced ApoB function per Behe’s logic.
Thank you for the clarification!
Have you let Behe know yet?