Todd Moody:
> Frankly, I would expect body fat, and especially abdomenal fat, to
> play some role. Obesity throws many things out of whack. This
> wouldn't, however, apply to Owsley "Bear" Stanley, who is by his own
> account very
> lean. I think Ray Audette has to be considered an outlier. He is a
> diabetic whose condition is sufficiently advanced that he was
> considered
> a candidate for insulin therapy. A person who produces
> little insulin
> *cannot* gain weight,
Good point. You're probably right about Audette being an outlier who is not
able to gain much weight now that I think about it, since he says he only
lost "a few pounds" when he went Paleo (though he claims that he added
muscle mass, but doesn't specify how much). He must produce a decent amount
of insulin now, however, since he doesn't require insulin injections. He and
Dr. Bernstein suggest that if type 1 diabetes is caught early enough and
treated with a low carb diet, the surviving islet cells can produce enough
insulin to not require injections, and this is apparently the case with
Audette, if his claim is true.
It's also possible that I'm an outlier. Maybe there's something peculiar
about or wrong with my system that doesn't allow me to gain much weight on
Paleo foods like I do on grains and dairy. Like I said, a couple of
anecdotal cases don't prove anything, they are just fodder for some
interesting speculations that may trigger some insights by others, or lead
nowhere. You're logical mind and discerning eye are helpful here. The
observations of traditional HG's and clinical studies provide better
evidence than the experience of a couple of people.
> and in fact I think Ray would be considered
> underweight on just about any scale.
Certainly on any American height-weight chart, but not by much. Whether Ray
would be considered underweight on a hunter-gatherer chart is another
question. Weight charts are not the best indicators either, because they
don't account for body fat or muscle mass. One needs to look at the larger
picture to get a better indication of whether a person is underweight or
overweight, healthy or unhealthy--particularly at body fat. His body fat is
low at 5.2%. It's within the range for serious endurance athletes (about
5-15%), but it is only slightly above the minimum considered necessary for
survival for adult males (2-4%). Also, he does not have big muscles, so one
could say he is under-muscled compared to other people from his ethnic
background.
Here are Ray's self-reported stats:
Height: 72"
Weight: 145 lbs.
Looks like he has a small (fine-boned) frame
BMI: 19.7
Body fat: 5.2%
According to the following American weight
chart--http://www.healthchecksystems.com/heightweightchart.htm--"normal"
weight for him would be within 149-160 lbs. So Ray would be considered 4
pounds underweight, which is not much considering that the chart is based on
the stats of Americans eating the SAD, and therefore considers higher levels
of body fat "normal" than what would be found in a H-G society.
When comparing to hunter gatherers, Ray's 19.7 BMI falls within the "normal"
range of 19-24, though it is toward the low end of the range. He would might
be "underweight" for a traditional Inuit, but "normal" for an Australian
aborigine or !Kung San. Given his fine bones, he could probably be
considered normal weight as compared to H-G's. He might have had larger
bones, more muscle mass and more significant fat pads from birth if his
mother had been a Paleo dieter during his fetal development. So from the
perspective of his theoretical genetic potential from conception he could be
considered underweight.
Here are the self-reported stats of a modified Paleo dieter
(Paleolithic-Mediterranean) who has claimed to have been fairly healthy his
whole life, and therefore may be more representative than Ray's:
Art De Vany http://www.arthurdevany.com/2005/03/an_introduction.html
67 years of age
Height: 6' 1"
Weight: 208 pounds "with a dense and athletic musculature"
Looks like he has a large frame
Less than 8% body fat
Blood pressure: 111/72; pulse 58
LDL: 118
HDL 87
Glucose tolerance: "excellent"
Blood insulin: 3.4 (vs. "normal" range of 6 to 27)
Biological age: 32
Based on the weight chart, his weight should be within 168 - 192, but his
body fat percentage and his photo indicate he is not even close to being
"overweight" in the health sense of too much body fat. De Vany also does not
look "underweight" in his photo, despite his body fat being far below the
"normal" American range of somewhere around 17-21% or so for a man his age.
The only poor stat is his LDL, which is higher than the latest clinical
"normal" range of <100 and the H-G range of 30-70. I've noticed from a
handful of cases that Paleo-type dieters who consume a lot of saturated fat
from grain-fed animals tend to have high LDL's. Perhaps that's the case for
him. I don't know. Clinically, his very high HDL offsets the risk from the
high LDL and also bodes well for his longevity.
I guess one question the American weight charts raise is whether thin
Australian aborigines, !Kung San and long-distance runners should also be
considered "underweight," despite no apparent ill health effects from their
low weight.
So what should be considered "underweight" for an individual like Ray
Audette? It's a good general question that I've pondered myself. Body fat
percentage appears to be regarded as the best indicator. There's not a lot
of information about what percentage of body fat is too low (suboptimal) for
men, but the article below indicates that 5% is "safe for good health." On
the basis of what I've covered here, it appears that Ray has a "healthy
weight" for him, since none of his stats indicate poor health and he is
within H-G and athlete ranges, but he is "underweight" from the perspective
of what is socially acceptable, as are most long-distance runners.
One other possible concern has been raised by someone I know, which is, the
possibility of getting seriously ill, losing weight, and not having enough
body fat to accommodate the weight loss. I haven't found any medical advice
on this. It seems like a valid concern.
---
From: Body Composition (Body Fat vs. Body Weight)
From Elizabeth Quinn
http://sportsmedicine.about.com/cs/body_comp/a/aa012599a.htm
"... What should your body fat percent be?
Your ideal weight and fat-lean ratio varies considerably for men and women
and by age, but the minimum percent bodyfat considered safe for good health
is 5% for males and 12% for females. The average adult body fat is closer to
15%-18% for men and 22%-25% for women.
Athletes tend to be at low end of this scale due to the increased lean
weight (muscle mass) of top athletes. While low levels of bodyfat seem to be
related to improved performance, body composition alone is not a great
predictor of sports success. A linebacker needs to have enough body mass
(lean and fat weight) to generate high forces and avoid injury. Bodyfat
amoung elite athletes vary largely by sport. There is little evidence
benefit when men drop under 8% and women drop under 14% bodyfat.
How Low Is Too Low?
While the average body fat percent in the United States and Europe is
increasing, low body fat percent is also a health problem. The female
athlete triad highlights the probelm. Women athletes who lose too much fat
risk injury, decreased performance and health issues. ..."
---
Todd, do you think that obesity was a problem among Paleolithic peoples, or
that they consciously restricted their calorie intakes? If not, then
assuming there is no existing digestive disfunction or other health problems
that would throw off normal physiology, following a similar diet and a
lifestyle that includes exercise should have similar results and it should
not be necessary to consciously restrict calories. Perhaps chronically high
blood sugar requires calorie restriction in some people, even on a Paleo
diet, until they get their body fat and blood sugar levels down? Or perhaps
their metabolism needs to be raised to HG levels before they can forego
calorie restriction? There are probably multiple factors that could result
in different effects from Paleo dieting on different individuals.
> It wouldn't surprise me to learn that an obese person has problems
> handling SFAs that a non-obese person doesn't have.
Perhaps even people who are not considered overweight by American standards,
but have more body fat than HG's, might have more trouble handling SFAs than
people with HG-type physiques.
|
