Low Fat diet reduces Androgens

[DammitLetMeIn]

http://jcem.endojournals.org/cgi/reprint/90/6/3804.pdf

Low fat diet decreases urine and serum androgens and lowers prostate cancer risk (which often involves high DHT in prostate).

 

[Guest]

You know, DLMI, these no shampoo guys have actually made you look like a good poster in comparison.

 

[Bryan]

You know, DLMI, these no shampoo guys have actually made you look like a good poster in comparison.

LOL!!! That's true...

 

[DammitLetMeIn]

lmao, I was never a bad poster. You guys just didn't agree with me... which is cool. In fact its better sometimes because it means I have to back up what I post.

 

[Bryan]

DLMI, I respect you for the scientific evidence that you WERE able to provide. I had asked you to back-up certain specific claims that you had made about diet increasing androgen levels, and you did indeed do that to my satisfaction! :salut:

However, you still haven't provided anything to support your idea that such dietary changes make very MUCH of a difference in hairloss (other than the typical epidemiological arguments about Westernized Japanese, etc.), and that's why I remain unconvinced that diet has anything other than just a slight influence (maybe 5% or so).

Bryan

 

[DammitLetMeIn]

However, you still haven't provided anything to support your idea that such dietary changes make very MUCH of a difference in hairloss (other than the typical epidemiological arguments about Westernized Japanese, etc.), and that's why I remain unconvinced that diet has anything other than just a slight influence (maybe 5% or so).

Bryan

I don't feel I would ever be able to do that without conducting an experiment.

I would say this though, eating is something we do everyday and is a repeated assault on the body so over time i would contend it does have an effect.

I'm not saying its the whole answer as theres obviously a genetic element however, I feel it is impt. factor for many people. The amount of fat bald guys I've seen out and about outweighs the number of bald skinny guys (altho i recognize this is completely unscientific).

 

[docj077]

Dietary modifications will not lead to successful treatment or a physiological sound body.

Lowering fat and carbs is one thing, but in order to maintain caloric intake a person must increase their intake of protein. High protein intake is associated with an increased risk of cancer.

If you diminish the supply of sugar for the body, which by the way the majority of sugar in the body is produced by gluconeogenesis in the liver and only a small fraction is exogenous through diet, you will maintain a functional level of glucose no matter what the intervention happens to be.

This is the very reason why the Atkin's diet is a poor diet. You will lose a lot of weight, because it'll basically make you ketoacidotic, because you excrete ketones in your urine as you break down fatty acids. Unfortunately, the lower levels of carbohydrate and fat intake lead to an increase in growth hormone secretion to try and raise glucose levels, which will lead to a rise in IGF-1 levels. Undoubtedly, this is the reason for the increase in the risk of cancer associated with higher protein and low carb, low fat diets.


Think before you diet.

 

[Pondle]

I don't feel I would ever be able to do that without conducting an experiment.

I would say this though, eating is something we do everyday and is a repeated assault on the body so over time i would contend it does have an effect.

I'm not saying its the whole answer as theres obviously a genetic element however, I feel it is impt. factor for many people. The amount of fat bald guys I've seen out and about outweighs the number of bald skinny guys (altho i recognize this is completely unscientific).

What gets me about your theory, Dammit, is that it seems to violate the principle of Occam's razor - i.e. we should prefer a theory that is as simple as possible and makes the fewest possible assumptions. If genetics "explains" hair loss, why complicate the picture by adding a dietary component?

Besides, could we ever falsify your theory by making an observation or doing a physical experiment that would lead us to reject it? And I've certainly seen many bald (or receding) skinny guys (including me, my dad, my half-brother, a friend from school, numerous athletes, footballers and actors).

 

[DammitLetMeIn]

Dietary modifications will not lead to successful treatment or a physiological sound body. .

Your opinion. Don't say it like its fact.

Lowering fat and carbs is one thing, but in order to maintain caloric intake a person must increase their intake of protein..

Not true. One can eat a macronutrient diet of 40:30:30 or close.

High protein intake is associated with an increased risk of cancer. ..

As is a high carb diet as well as a whole list of other maladies. A balance of the correct macronutrients is key.

This is the very reason why the Atkin's diet is a poor diet. You will lose a lot of weight, because it'll basically make you ketoacidotic, because you excrete ketones in your urine as you break down fatty acids...

The original incarnation of the Atkins diet, was, I agree, a poor diet. However, there have been increasing recommendations to add low glycemic carbohydrates in the form of fibrous vegetables which improve upon this diet.

Unfortunately, the lower levels of carbohydrate and fat intake lead to an increase in growth hormone secretion to try and raise glucose levels, which will lead to a rise in IGF-1 levels....

Again, having the balance is key. Why are you talking like I've said remove carbohydrates completely from the diet? You everything I say to the extreme in a vain attempt to discredit it.

Listen, if you want to raise IGF-1 the best way to do it would be to eat a high-glycemic carb diet because this causes the huge releases of insulin which is at the root of so many health problems.

Undoubtedly, this is the reason for the increase in the risk of cancer associated with higher protein and low carb, low fat diets. .

No ones talking about low carb diet. I'm taking about a balanced and LOW-GLYCEMIC carb diet involving healthy amounts of carbohydrates which dont induce massive blood sugar highs followed by the bloodsugar lows in the way the breadstuffs do.

Think before you diet.

Think before you post. Especially before you go off on a rant. Ask questions if you need clarification.

Again its very misleading for people who reading your username think your a doctor when ur not.

 

[DammitLetMeIn]

What gets me about your theory, Dammit, is that it seems to violate the principle of Occam's razor - i.e. we should prefer a theory that is as simple as possible and makes the fewest possible assumptions.

I wouldn't be one for relying on a mere mortal's theory about theories, lol.
Thats like relying upon everything a doctor says. Its foolhardy to say the least.

But if you were looking for a simple explanation, then look no further than: 'you are what you eat'.

If genetics "explains" hair loss, why complicate the picture by adding a dietary component?.

Genetics is only part of the picture as always with humans. Environment is highly influential and that includes diet.

Besides, could we ever falsify your theory by making an observation or doing a physical experiment that would lead us to reject it?

Its hard to falsify a theory which is correct in fact. Thats not me trumpeting 'my' theory when it is not my theory but merely me repeating what others have said.

And I've certainly seen many bald (or receding) skinny guys (including me, my dad, my half-brother, a friend from school, numerous athletes, footballers and actors).

They all can have high insulin even though they are skinny. Moreover, the genetic component is stronger in some individuals than in others.

Interestingly though, I would say the vast majority (i.e. more than society) of footballers aren't remotely balding.

 

[docj077]

Dietary modifications will not lead to successful treatment or a physiological sound body. .

Your opinion. Don't say it like its fact.

Your lack of education. Don't counter the opinion of someone more qualified than you. Again, what are your qualifications for the assumptions you make?

Lowering fat and carbs is one thing, but in order to maintain caloric intake a person must increase their intake of protein..

Not true. One can eat a macronutrient diet of 40:30:30 or close.

Do you have proof that a balanced diet significantly lowers IGF-1 and DHT levels enough to make a difference in hair loss? If not, from where do you get such information and are you qualified to make such interpretations of the data provided?

High protein intake is associated with an increased risk of cancer. ..

As is a high carb diet as well as a whole list of other maladies. A balance of the correct macronutrients is key.

A balance is key to everything in the human body. That's why it is filled with negative feedback mechanisms to maintain homeostasis. If it's unable to do so, it's due to a genetic predisposition. That's all there is to it. Are you qualified to bring another opinion into these forums? Do you have studies that support your conclusions from medically based data bases and not secondhand websites that could be written by any given individual including misinformed doctors lacking in skills?

This is the very reason why the Atkin's diet is a poor diet. You will lose a lot of weight, because it'll basically make you ketoacidotic, because you excrete ketones in your urine as you break down fatty acids...

The original incarnation of the Atkins diet, was, I agree, a poor diet. However, there have been increasing recommendations to add low glycemic carbohydrates in the form of fibrous vegetables which improve upon this diet.

Low glycemic diets will decrease blood sugar causing an increase in the release of growth hormone to increase gluconeogenesis. This will also raise the levels of IGF-1.

Unfortunately, the lower levels of carbohydrate and fat intake lead to an increase in growth hormone secretion to try and raise glucose levels, which will lead to a rise in IGF-1 levels....

Again, having the balance is key. Why are you talking like I've said remove carbohydrates completely from the diet? You everything I say to the extreme in a vain attempt to discredit it.

Listen, if you want to raise IGF-1 the best way to do it would be to eat a high-glycemic carb diet because this causes the huge releases of insulin which is at the root of so many health problems.

IGF-1 improves blood sugar profiles in type II diabetics, prevents brain injury and disease, and promotes healing. Insulin does the same in certain situations.

Why do you keep coming on here and scaring people and threatening that these substances do harm to the body? They are there to keep the body functioning correctly and to heal the body when damage occurs.

Who are you to say such things? Why do you think that you can use only the information from the people that YOU think are right? That's not science. You're exploiting people.

Undoubtedly, this is the reason for the increase in the risk of cancer associated with higher protein and low carb, low fat diets. .

No ones talking about low carb diet. I'm taking about a balanced and LOW-GLYCEMIC carb diet involving healthy amounts of carbohydrates which dont induce massive blood sugar highs followed by the bloodsugar lows in the way the breadstuffs do.

Why do you think that there are massive shifts in blood sugar with high glycemic foods? The sugar baseline is established by the liver. Exogenous sugar intake only raises sugar levels a fraction.

Think before you diet.

Think before you post. Especially before you go off on a rant. Ask questions if you need clarification.

Again its very misleading for people who reading your username think your a doctor when ur not.

It's very misleading for people to read the opinion of a person that has no medical training whatsoever. Again, what are your qualifications? What is your educational background? Do you have any formal medical training? Do you even have a college education? Better yet, have you even completed high school? Do you have a G.E.D.?

 

[powersam]

just your second last comment there docj007, are you saying that high GI foods such as white bread and potato do not cause insulin and glucose spikes in susceptible people?

 

[DammitLetMeIn]

[
Your lack of education. Don't counter the opinion of someone more qualified than you. Again, what are your qualifications for the assumptions you make?

Listen dude, you're not a doctor as much as your username would like to indicate this is the case. And even if you were medicine has been extremely unsuccessful in the area of hairloss so it really doesn't count for very much.

Do you have proof that a balanced diet significantly lowers IGF-1 and DHT levels enough to make a difference in hair loss?.

Do you have evidence that it doesn't? Exactly, THATS why we're discussing the point.

A balance is key to everything in the human body. That's why it is filled with negative feedback mechanisms to maintain homeostasis. ...

I would contend that invoking these negative feedback mechanisms puts pressure on the body.

Are you qualified to bring another opinion into these forums? Do you have studies that support your conclusions that from medically based data bases and not secondhand websites that could be written by any given individual including poor doctors?...

As opposed to you who isn't even A doctor? So if any doctor disagrees with you they're automatically poor doctor?

Qualfiications aren't necessary for an individual to have an opinion. If that were the case so many things would never have been discovered.

Low glycemic diets will decrease blood sugar causing an increase in the release of growth hormone to increase gluconeogenesis. This will also raise the levels of IGF-1.

A low glycemic diet is the ideal and natural diet for the human body. Eating high-glycemic carbs is deleterious for health. If you want a link as to why written by a doctor, I am willing to give u one. I think you would actually find it fascintating if you were able to comprehend it.

IGF-1 improves blood sugar profiles in type II diabetics, prevents brain injury and disease, and promotes healing..?

Umm, why are you extoling the virtues of IGF-1 when earlier you were saying how it causes cancer? make up your mind where you stand on it.

Why do you keep coming on here and scaring people and threatening that these substances do harm to the body?

wtf are you talking about? YOU'RE the one that says IGF-1 can cause harm e.g. cancer etc.

I have stated that high insulin levels are bad for humans and lead to disease and inflammation.

You really need to stop trying to misrepresent what I say. Its very irritating and misleading - a common feature of your posts.

They are there to keep the body functioning correctly and to heal the body when damage occurs. .?

Who are you to say such things? Why do you think that you can use only the information from the people that YOU think are right? That's not science. You're exploiting people.

You really do display some idiotic tendencies. Firstly, I bring information relating to diet and hair loss from sources which provide the relevant information. They're free to read it and decide for themselves. You would deny them this freedom and take their liberty away from them because you supposedly and somewhat arrogantly 'know better'. Indeed, many of the sources which I have posted have already been utilised and posted by other members of HairLossTalk.com in the past so they have obviously seen the same virtues, value and merit in the information that I have. These people are free thinkers and are not dictated to by anyone else or a textbook.

Nobody is exploiting anyone and people are entitled to an opinion - grow up.

Why do you think that there are massive shifts in blood sugar with high glycemic foods? The sugar baseline is established by the liver. Exogenous sugar intake only raises sugar levels a fraction.

You CANNOT be serious. Go look up the meaning of glycemic index.

It's very misleading for people to read the opinion of a person that has no medical training whatsoever.

What the F? So no ones allowed to post a view anymore? Who are you Stalin?

Again, what are your qualifications? What is your educational background? Do you have any formal medical training? Do you even have a college education? Better yet, have you even completed high school? Do you have a G.E.D.?

What I post on here are merely scientific studies, M.D.'s opinions and my own opinion. You'll find the same kind of stuff all over this board and all over the internet throughout blogs.

You seem to want to take away peoples freedom to discuss things openly.

I would remind you that you are not a doctor and even if you were, it does not give you the right to take away someones freedom to talk and think for him or her self - something a messageboard is actually constructed for.

 

[DammitLetMeIn]

Docj077, I think you should read this from start to finish - the whole thing:

http://www.drbass.com/rosedale2.html

Its written by a doctor.

 

[Guest]

High protein intake is associated with an increased risk of cancer.

How much protein is too much? I've been on workout plans before where I've taken in 200 grams of it a day. Is this too much?

 

[docj077]

just your second last comment there docj007, are you saying that high GI foods such as white bread and potato do not cause insulin and glucose spikes in susceptible people?

Of course they do. In susceptible people. However, it's not like your blood glucose will go from 75 to 400 by eating a potato. If it does that, then high GI foods are not your problem. You have a physiological problem to worry about in such a situation.

 

[DammitLetMeIn]

Of course they do. In susceptible people. However, it's not like your blood glucose will go from 75 to 400 by eating a potato. If it does that, then high GI foods are not your problem. You have a physiological problem to worry about in such a situation.

Its the insulin response from the high-GI foods thats deleterious over time.

 

[docj077]

[
Your lack of education. Don't counter the opinion of someone more qualified than you. Again, what are your qualifications for the assumptions you make?

Listen dude, you're not a doctor as much as your username would like to indicate this is the case. And even if you were medicine has been extremely unsuccessful in the area of hairloss so it really doesn't count for very much.

Medicine is the only thing that gives you the basis for all the studies and websites that you post. Are you an idiot or do you not realize this FACT? Pick one. Either you use medicine to prove your point or you ignore it all together. There is no middle ground and their is no room for such hypocrisy here.

Do you have proof that a balanced diet significantly lowers IGF-1 and DHT levels enough to make a difference in hair loss?.

Do you have evidence that it doesn't? Exactly, THATS why we're discussing the point.

Your opinion requires medical evidence to support it. So far you've provided none and that's something that even Bryan has mentioned. Where is your evidence? I don't know about you, but I'm here to help people. Not take advantage of them by posting web addresses, editorials, and opinion pieces by doctors that might not even be practicing anymore. Do you have any idea how doctors retire after a short amount of time and just sit around and write books and make websites? There are a lot of them and most do not have an adequate research background to intepret the data before them or come to any sort of conclusion.

A balance is key to everything in the human body. That's why it is filled with negative feedback mechanisms to maintain homeostasis. ...

I would contend that invoking these negative feedback mechanisms puts pressure on the body.

Everything that a human being does puts pressure on the body. Every motion and every thought. Even eating is one of the most stressful experiences that a body can go through. The redistribution of blood, the secretion of numerous hormones, etc. all contribute to the stress. They are required to keep the body and check and the hormonal feedback mechanisms are working 24/7 to maintain homeostasis in the body. It's not like changing diet will suddenly allow these mechanisms to cease, so the body can somehow recharge itself. It doesn't work that way. These processes start from birth and continue until death.

Are you qualified to bring another opinion into these forums? Do you have studies that support your conclusions that from medically based data bases and not secondhand websites that could be written by any given individual including poor doctors?...

As opposed to you who isn't even A doctor? So if any doctor disagrees with you they're automatically poor doctor?

Qualfiications aren't necessary for an individual to have an opinion. If that were the case so many things would never have been discovered.

No, any opinion that you form based upon the writings of a doctor should not be taken as fact or even truthful. Your interpretations are one of a newcomer to this field, this forum, and this disease. I see no reason why anyone should trust you.

When it comes to giving people intructions that could potentially adversely affect their health, yes, you are required to have qualifications to have such an opinion. In case you didn't notice, people spend four years in college, four years in medical school, and countless years in residency to gain the ability to give such opinions. What are your qualifications? Answer me. I want to know. What gives you the right to tell people what is and what isn't good for them?

Low glycemic diets will decrease blood sugar causing an increase in the release of growth hormone to increase gluconeogenesis. This will also raise the levels of IGF-1.

A low glycemic diet is the ideal and natural diet for the human body. Eating high-glycemic carbs is deleterious for health. If you want a link as to why written by a doctor, I am willing to give u one. I think you would actually find it fascintating if you were able to comprehend it.

There is no such thing as a natural diet in American society. Everything has insecticides, perfumes, or other elements of processing within it. Even organic foods are not truly organic, and in fact, organic foods are rather unhealthy in terms of the diseases that they may potentially carry.

Also, you dare mock my intelligence? I'm sorry, I don't remember you being the top of your class and in the top 5% in the nation in terms of academic achievement? In fact, I don't remember that at all.

If you're going to continue to insult forumites on this site, then I suggest you go to a different site where your ignorance will be loved and supported like you need it to be. Afterall, you don't have hair loss anymore. Why are you here? Do you simply need to be recognized like some small child looking for adoration from its mother?

IGF-1 improves blood sugar profiles in type II diabetics, prevents brain injury and disease, and promotes healing..?

Umm, why are you extoling the virtues of IGF-1 when earlier you were saying how it causes cancer? make up your mind where you stand on it.

Because, I'm trying to demonstrate to you that the molecules that you think are bad are in fact REQUIRED for normal human functioning. Attempting to decrease them through diet will lead to far too many adverse effects if you truly desire to decrease them enough to make a difference.

Why do you keep coming on here and scaring people and threatening that these substances do harm to the body?

wtf are you talking about? YOU'RE the one that says IGF-1 can cause harm e.g. cancer etc.

I have stated that high insulin levels are bad for humans and lead to disease and inflammation.

You really need to stop trying to misrepresent what I say. Its very irritating and misleading - a common feature of your posts.

Do you have proof that insulin leads to inflammation? Do have proof that insulin directly causes an immune response within tissue without any needed exogenous antigen? I believe that insulin does just the opposite what you believe. In diabetes, the inflammation and generation is not causes by high insulin levels. In fact, in late stage type II diabetes the levels of insulin are decreased. So, where does that leave you? The damage with high blood sugar is due to osmotic damage secondary to reducing sugars entering non-insulin dependent cells and causing glycosylation of proteins and other cellular components. It's also caused by increased amounts of free floating fatty acids. It's not due to direct effects by insulin whatsoever. I have studies that say this right in the introduction, which means that it's an already understood phenomenon.

They are there to keep the body functioning correctly and to heal the body when damage occurs. .?

Who are you to say such things? Why do you think that you can use only the information from the people that YOU think are right? That's not science. You're exploiting people.

You really do display some idiotic tendencies. Firstly, I bring information relating to diet and hair loss from sources which provide the relevant information. They're free to read it and decide for themselves. You would deny them this freedom and take their liberty away from them because you supposedly and somewhat arrogantly 'know better'. Indeed, many of the sources which I have posted have already been utilised and posted by other members of HairLossTalk.com in the past so they have obviously seen the same virtues, value and merit in the information that I have. These people are free thinkers and are not dictated to by anyone else or a textbook.

Nobody is exploiting anyone and people are entitled to an opinion - grow up.

And, I counter everything that you say with adequate interpretations of the data that allows people to form their own opinions. How can you be so naive to think that the opinion of another overrides your opinion at all times. Most of the time I'm simply posting the opinion of a person that represents the scientific community. However, you seem to think that your lack of skills somehow trumps not only my thoughts, but the thoughts of others that post in your threads. It's very annoying.

Why do you think that there are massive shifts in blood sugar with high glycemic foods? The sugar baseline is established by the liver. Exogenous sugar intake only raises sugar levels a fraction.

You CANNOT be serious. Go look up the meaning of glycemic index.

I don't think that you understand the glycemic index. Personally, I don't think you have the mental capacity to form opinions based upon the work of others in the area of diet and nutrition.

It's very misleading for people to read the opinion of a person that has no medical training whatsoever.

What the F? So no ones allowed to post a view anymore? Who are you Stalin?

Nope, I'm merely pointing out that you shouldn't think that your opinion is gospel truth when in fact it's nothing more than the rantings of a person with a hobby.

Again, what are your qualifications? What is your educational background? Do you have any formal medical training? Do you even have a college education? Better yet, have you even completed high school? Do you have a G.E.D.?

What I post on here are merely scientific studies, M.D.'s opinions and my own opinion. You'll find the same kind of stuff all over this board and all over the internet throughout blogs.

You seem to want to take away peoples freedom to discuss things openly.

I would remind you that you are not a doctor and even if you were, it does not give you the right to take away someones freedom to talk and think for him or her self - something a messageboard is actually constructed for.

No, I've seen you post studies with your inadequate opinions and complete disregard for the conclusions of the authors. Also, I've seen you post information from websites that typically has the opinion of someone who may or may not be a medical professional. As you've so elegantly pointed out, how do you know that someone with Dr. or Doctor at the front of their name is truly a doctor? Have you called these people? Have you checked their credentials? Do you know if what you base your opinions on is still the basis for their personal opinions on the subject? Do you know if they are willing to defend what they believe in with regards to diet and hair loss? How many people in their field believe the same thing? Afterall, you post very few websites by very few doctors and researchers. There are hundreds of thousands of professionals that deal with medical issues in the world? Why can you only find so few?




Again, what are your qualifications and what makes you think that your opinion should be listened to by people on this forum?

 

[michael barry]

To Doctor and dammit (its funny to write that).,


I had a pal on Atkins way back in 97-98 or so. His breath got awful, and he literally carried around a mini-container of mouthwash in his car because of it. His skin got to looking clammy, he complained about his hair getting oily.

Did you know that women complain of excessive facial hair on Atkins, along with the usual bad breath, ennui, etc.?


Its a bad idea. All it really does is make one sacrifice most processed foods by using a bait and switch tactic of proferring them beef sticks like slim jims and cold cuts of meat instead. There isn't much of a chance of you overeating a big ol' steak too much as there is you eating too much beef tips, noodles, and cake................................so you lose weight on the damned thing.



If people would just TRY to go back to eating like we did before about 1970, and just walk for fifteen-twenty minutes a day, our skin would look better, we'd be thinner, our hair would look better (but there would still be baldness of course), we'd get less cancers and diseases.



If you look at someone and tell them to have a cut of lean meat with two small servings of veggies (perhaps a few slices of tomato and a few pieces of broccholi) and a small cup of blueberries for desert with a glass of orange juice....................................they'll act like your crazy. But humanity ate like this for a long time.......................

 

[docj077]

Of course they do. In susceptible people. However, it's not like your blood glucose will go from 75 to 400 by eating a potato. If it does that, then high GI foods are not your problem. You have a physiological problem to worry about in such a situation.

Its the insulin response from the high-GI foods thats deleterious over time.

Prove it. I contend that insulin prevents cellular damage and improves the cellular response to high-GI foods. Again, it's the sugar and free fatty acids that are the problem. Not the insulin. Insulin just happens to promote the storage of fatty acids and promote the uptake of sugars by cells so as to prevent osmotic damage. How is it that insulin causes damage again?