So What did I Eat?

Several people have asked me about what I ate on my 30-day clean Paleo experiment that helped me to bust through my stall. So I thought I would elaborate.

First of all, let me say I am a tall (6'3"), 50-year-old male. My goal weight is between 215-220 pounds. Also, I tried to keep it simple. I ate very palatable foods, but choices low on food reward. For example, steak, which is very palatable, but does not cause me to want more, as more rewarding foods do. So here is the menu.

Every morning, I ate two fried eggs (cooked in coconut oil) and either some homemade sausage or thick sliced bacon. Plus water.

Lunch was a bit more varied. I would often take a soup made with beef or chicken stock, that contained some meat, but lots of veggies and a safe starch (white potatoes or rice). I tried to have something made with bone broth every day. I would also take a salad, with tuna fish, olives, olive oil, and Balsamic vinegar. Sometimes, I would take a piece of meat that was leftover from dinner (e.g., chicken or ribs) instead of either the soup or salad.

For dinner, I would eat a piece of meat (beef, pork, chicken, salmon or other fish) plus vegetables. If I hadn't eaten a safe starch for lunch, I would also include a small sweet potato. The only condiments I used were salt and pepper.

I rarely snacked, but if I did, it was usually berries of some sort. Upon occasion, I had some herbal mint tea, unsweetened. And I made sure I drank adequate water.

In addition to all of that, I would eat two to three Brazil nuts per day, plus take liver pills. That is, frozen pieces of raw liver that I had chopped up into pill-sized shapes that I could swallow (thanks Chris Kresser for that great idea; I have a hard time with liver). I would also supplement with other vitamins, as per the Perfect Health Diet.

Whenever possible, I practiced intermittent fasting. Sometimes for as much as 24 hours, but mostly I would go 13 to 16 hours between eating. Once dinner was over (usually around 6:00 p.m.), I didn't eat anything else until breakfast the next morning (around 7:00 a.m.; later on weekends).

And it worked beautifully.

Eating Safe Starches Lowers my Blood Glucose Levels

Recently, I have been aggressively monitoring my blood glucose levels and I have noticed a very interesting pattern. On days when I do not eat safe starches, my fasting blood glucose level the next morning is approximately 105. However, when I do eat safe starches (usually a sweet potato, regular potato, or white rice), the next morning my fasting blood glucose level is approximately 95.

So I have been testing this idea by purposefully not eating any safe starches one day and checking my fasting blood glucose level the next morning. Like clockwork, my blood glucose levels are higher the next morning. When I eat safe starches, the fasting reading the next day goes down to 95. I am getting a 10-point drop the next day by eating safe starches. This is a very consistent finding.

Even more curious, on days when I forego the safe starches, I am actually consuming fewer calories than the days when I eat them. My menus have been very consistent across all of these tests (I am trying to eat simple and dull meals, as suggested by Jenny Ruhl and Stephan Guyenet). So if I am eating less food, why are the fasting readings always higher? For purposes of full disclosure, my one hour readings are almost always below 125 and two hour readings are almost always below 100. Not bad for a type II diabetic. The Perfect Health Diet has effectively controlled my disease.

So is the consumption of safe starches actually contributing to lowering my blood glucose levels? That is what it looks like to me.

See my previous entries on safe starches here, here, and here.

Safe Starch Update

As I have previously mentioned, I am a type II diabetic, as well as a Perfect Health Diet adherent. I have been following the PHD quite rigorously for a while now and wanted to report on the progress.

First, I eat safe starches every day as part of my Paleo diet. Usually a half a cup of rice or a small- to medium-sized baked potato. Lately, I have been eating sweet potatoes (small to medium sized) most every evening, without anything added. And I check my blood sugar regularly. Two hours after eating a dinner of baked salmon with lemon infused olive oil, salad, balsamic vinegar, olive oil, and a medium sized sweet potato, my blood sugar was 95. My fasting blood sugar was 101 the next morning (my morning readings have always been high; Jenny Ruhl calls this the "dawn phenomenon"). Now these are not "normal" readings, but they are very good for me, especially given my history.

What is interesting is that my blood glucose levels have consistently fallen since adding in safe starches (and following the other aspects of the Perfect Health Diet), especially my fasting blood glucose readings. So I still reject the safe starch exclusion for type II diabetics. If it helps, like it does for me, eat safe starches, even if you are a type II diabetic.

Taking Refuge in the Asylum

So why have I been silent for the past few weeks? The safe starch debate really got to me, especially the smug, sanctimonious responses of many low carbers.

I have decided I no longer want to be identified as a "low carber" and prefer the "Paleo" moniker instead, at least the Perfect Health Diet version of it. Which means I am at a crossroads as to what to do with my blog, as it is called "Low Carb Wisdom." I am seeing there is no wisdom in low carb circles, just dogma. So it's time to hit the exits. I'm not saying I am abondoning the blog, but I am taking... a pause.

In the mean time, I have sought refuge in the Carb Sane Asylum. You might want to check in if you show any sign of these symptoms.

Credibility and the "Safe Starch" Debate

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his

salary depends upon his not understanding it."  --Upton Sinclair

Are all carbohydrates bad? No. In a post today on Robb Wolf's blog about meat and potatoes, Matt Lentzner said:  "Judging a food solely by its macronutrient composition is stupid. It’s hard to believe it has taken us 50 years to figure that out. We have good fats (saturated and omega-3’s) and bad fats (omega-6’s), good carbs (starch) and bad carbs (fructose), good proteins (meat) and bad proteins (gluten). It’s the quality of the macronutrient, not it’s classification, that makes it good or bad."

I agree with Lentzner that it is quality, not classification, and that it is stupid to judge a food solely by its macronutrient composition. I didn't always believe this, but I do now.

Why is it so hard to understand that there might be "good carbs," or, in the parlance of the debate du jour, "safe starches?" Why is the idea of a "safe starch" so threatening to so many people?  The whole safe starch debate was really surprising to me, until I stumbled across the quote above by Upton Sinclair. Then, all of a sudden, a light went on.

It appears to me that the major proponents of the "all carbs are bad" school of thought (I won't name names, but it isn't too hard to do) all make a good portion of their livelihood (if not all of their livelihood) from promoting this idea. It also appears to me that the major defenders of the safe starch debate, Paul and Shou-Ching Jaminet, do not make their livelihood promoting the Perfect Health Diet, so they are more flexible in and open to accepting new information. The same is true with Kurt Harris and his Archevore diet and for others. Their livelihood does not depend on defending a certain belief or viewpoint at all costs, so they are able to go against the grain when strong evidence is available.

The idea that there may be "safe starches" (good carbs) must be incredibly threatening to those whose livelihoods depend on not believing this idea. So they reflexively defend it at all costs. As a professor at a state-sponsored university, I do the same thing when people suggest cutting state funds for higher education. I am not immune to the impulse. Even if I intellectually understand the arguments about out-of-control higher education spending, I am viscerally against them, as my livelihood is at stake. So I am not throwing stones, just seeking more wisdom on the topic.

But it does lead me to this conclusion: arguments made by those without a vested interest in the debate are more credible than those made by people whose income is threatened by the debate. Just as I lack credibility on questions of funding for higher education.

Safe Starch Debate: A Diabetic's Perspective

There is a debate raging in the low carb blogosphere about the concept of "safe starches." Here is the start of the debate; here is Paul Jaminet's initial response, and here is the latest installment, featuring Dr. Ron Rosedale, with an response coming on Tuesday from Paul Jaminet.

One thing all sides have said: We do not necessarily recommend "safe starches" for diabetics. Well, I am a type II diabetic and a Perfect Health Diet follower, so I want to chime in with my experience.

First off, I have lost about 62 pounds, but 55 of that came following the diet described in the back of Gary Taubes' book, Why We Get Fat, which I later learned was the Atkins Induction phase. This helped to stabilize my blood glucose levels in about three weeks time, as well as returning my blood pressure to a normal range. But then I stalled and started reading more broadly about low carb diets. I discovered Gary Taubes didn't have all the answers, and I switched from the Atkins Induction diet to the Perfect Health Diet. I have been eating rice, potatoes, bananas, and other safe starches ever since, as well as fermented dairy products, such as plain, whole milk yogurt. I have also slowly lost another seven pounds. I enthusiastically recommend the book, Perfect Health Diet by Paul and Shou-Ching Jaminet.

Today, my fasting blood glucose reading was 105. Note that since following the Perfect Health Diet, my fasting blood glucose reading has gone down. Previously, I was suffering from the "dawn phenomenon." My blood glucose levels overall were well below 140 one hour after a meal and 120 two hours after a meal. Only my fasting BG reading was out of whack, usually between 120 and 130, first thing in the morning.

For dinner tonight, I had a fatty pork rib, green beans, and a small baked potato with butter and sour cream. For dessert, I had a half cup of vanilla ice cream. One hour after eating, my blood glucose level was 128 and two hours after, it was 112.

So not only am I losing weight on the Perfect Health Diet, my blood glucose levels have actually improved, thanks to the increased carbs counteracting the dawn phenomenon, just as Dr. Kurt Harris (another proponent of safe starches) said it would.

So for me, as a type II diabetic, this "safe starches" exclusion is pointless. I realize that I have greatly helped my diabetes situation by losing a lot of weight prior to switching to the Perfect Health Diet.  And I am taking Metformin Extended Release pills every day. Nevertheless, despite the type II diabetes, I am doing just fine on the Perfect Health Diet, thank you. I reject the diabetic exclusion of safe starches.