There is SO much here and from scientists who deeply understand their specialties, thank you! I especially like the NAFLD topic as it is not as commonly addressed. Not surprising, but fascinating, the connections between diabetes, NAFLD, and CVD. It is SO important to maintain a healthy weight, holy cow! As a 63 year old, this was hardly discussed in my 20's, except from a beauty aspect. I am so glad people like you and others are providing this information in such a digestible form, it is definitely saving lives.
@@TheProofWithSimonHill Thanks for sharing and caring! I was wondering what your opinion about dr Ray Peat and his articles on pro metabollic health was? Ray Peat has lots of articles on thyroid issues and esp women's health issues and prometabollic nutrition . Now could be seen an increase of his followers and many influencers started applying his meal advices, like eating white sugar and refined rice and drinking regular cola but avoiding PUFA and pulsins like beans for ex. Thanks in advance!
Wow what an epic episode. I was keenly interested to learn the relationship of inflammation to NAFL as I manage Ankylosing Spondylitis and NAFL. I have an excellent diet and correct body weight and exercise 60 mins x 6 days per week BUT STILL have a fatty liver. I’m in search for an answer. Thanks again for your work. It’s invaluable.
@@jellybeanvinkler4878why would you refuse to be vegan? Do you agree it's wrong to hurt animals? Saying you'll never be vegan is like saying you'll never support non-violence.
@@VeganLinked dude cmon... don't strawman her. Hitler was a vegetarian. Saying you support vegan is like saying you support Hitler.... SMH, like c'mon. This is an evidence based channel
As others have noted, researchers go deep with a narrow focus on the specialties. Weaving together these interviews to broaden learning about cell function, metabolism, fat production, and the like is no easy task. Well done!👏👏👏 I do wish, however, that more clarity would be given to sample diversity (specifically whether younger or older women were included) and differential outcomes. For example, zone 2 training may not be as beneficial for women. There's a cultural bias against women, particularly post-menopausal women, in the research. Not every finding is generalizable to all groups.
Fantastic! Love these masterclasses - great way to repurpose content, review the highlights even after listening to the original longform videos, and further integrating all of this info. You are a great teacher in how you summarize these experts' teachings - gracias 🙏
What an epic compilation of experts! Thanks so much for putting this together 💚💪💚 And what perfect timing after Chris with Plant Chompers just put a video out on diabetes. And I just happened to release several interviews with people who reversed their diabetes. The evidence is overwhelming and inescapable that a well-planned vegan way of eating is the best in every way 😊
Let's not make this a tribal thing. We aren't (or shouldn't?) be rooting (pun intended) for one specific diet or to be "the best in every way." But furthermore, the evidence doesn't say what you are saying -- 'well planned vegan is best in every way'. More importantly though, the "well planned" part is probably the hardest part when we are talking about this at a population level. Not everyone can or even want to plan out their nutrition. And that can be ok too. They may just need something really simple. "Fibre+protein at every meal, reduce saturated fat, mostly a diverse selection of whole plants, most of the time." That could work for a lot of people without it becoming "team vegan" "team carnivore" "team keto" " team Mediterranean" "team 'who cares'"
Follow up, I'm not against vegan diet by any means. A well planned vegan diet can absolutely be one of the healthiest for a lot of people. But vegan doesn't stand above other 'well planned' diets for nutrition. It shines in the environmental and moral debate, which is where the vegan "tribe" should be making their arguments in my opinion (which probably means nothing in a TH-cam comment section)
@@darthsmokester4759 Numerous scientific studies have provided evidence supporting the idea that a plant-based diet can contribute to a lower risk of heart disease. The Adventist Health Study-2, which included a large population of Seventh-day Adventists, found that individuals following a vegetarian diet (including both lacto-ovo vegetarians and vegans) had a lower risk of developing coronary heart disease compared to non-vegetarians. The study highlighted the protective effects of plant-based diets. EPIC-Oxford Study: The EPIC-Oxford study, part of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition, examined the diets and health outcomes of over 65,000 participants. It found that vegetarians had a significantly lower risk of coronary heart disease compared to meat-eaters. Nurses' Health Study and Health Professionals Follow-Up Study: These long-term cohort studies in the United States involved over 200,000 participants. They found that a higher intake of plant-based foods, such as fruits, vegetables, and whole grains, was associated with a lower risk of coronary heart disease. The emphasis on plant-based sources of protein was particularly noteworthy. Interheart Study: The Interheart Study, a global case-control study, investigated risk factors for acute myocardial infarction (heart attack) in various populations. It found that a high intake of fruits and vegetables was associated with a lower risk of heart attack, emphasizing the cardiovascular benefits of plant-based foods. Hypertension (DASH) Trial: While not exclusively plant-based it can be done vegan, the DASH diet emphasizes fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and low-fat dairy. The DASH trial demonstrated that this dietary pattern can significantly lower blood pressure, a key risk factor for heart disease. Meta-analyses and Reviews: Several meta-analyses and systematic reviews have summarized the existing evidence on plant-based diets and cardiovascular health. These analyses consistently suggest that plant-based diets are associated with a lower risk of heart disease, including a reduction in blood pressure, cholesterol levels, and inflammation.
@@darthsmokester4759 While we see research supporting a plant-based diet as protective against chronic disease and all cause mortality we see the opposite for eating animals. Here are a few studies you might find relevant: 1. "Red and processed meat consumption and risk of prostate cancer: A dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies"** - This meta-analysis, published in the International Journal of Cancer in 2016, found a positive association between red and processed meat consumption and the risk of prostate cancer. It suggested that higher consumption of these meats may be associated with an increased risk of developing prostate cancer. 2. "Dairy products, calcium, and prostate cancer risk: A systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies"** - This systematic review and meta-analysis, published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition in 2015, examined the association between dairy product consumption, calcium intake, and prostate cancer risk. It concluded that high intake of dairy products and calcium may be associated with an increased risk of prostate cancer. 3. "Egg consumption and risk of prostate cancer: A dose-response meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies"** - Published in the British Journal of Nutrition in 2016, this meta-analysis investigated the association between egg consumption and prostate cancer risk. It suggested that higher egg consumption may be associated with an increased risk of prostate cancer. These studies provide valuable insights into the potential relationship between the consumption of meat, dairy, eggs, and the risk of prostate cancer. Here are a few more studies that demonstrate the correlation between higher meat consumption and increased health risks: 4. The European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC): This large-scale study followed over half a million participants from ten European countries for an average of 12.7 years. It found that higher intake of red and processed meats was associated with an elevated risk of mortality from all causes, particularly cardiovascular diseases and cancer. The study emphasized the importance of reducing meat consumption and replacing it with plant-based foods for overall health benefits. 5. The Health Professionals Follow-up Study and Nurses' Health Study II: These long-term cohort studies followed over 120,000 men and women in the United States for up to 28 years. They consistently showed that higher consumption of red meat, especially processed red meat, was associated with an increased risk of mortality from cardiovascular disease, cancer, and other causes. The findings underscored the importance of dietary choices in preventing chronic diseases and promoting longevity. 6. The Multiethnic Cohort Study: This prospective study included over 215,000 participants from Hawaii and California, representing various ethnic groups. It found that higher intake of red and processed meats was associated with an elevated risk of colorectal cancer, particularly among men. The study highlighted the need for population-wide strategies to reduce meat consumption and promote healthier dietary patterns to mitigate cancer risk. These studies provide further evidence of the dose-response relationship between meat consumption and health outcomes, demonstrating that as meat intake increases, so does the risk of various chronic diseases and mortality. 7. The Nurses' Health Study and Health Professionals Follow-up Study: These long-term studies followed over 100,000 participants for several decades. They found that higher consumption of red meat, particularly processed red meat, was associated with an increased risk of heart disease, cancer (especially colorectal cancer), and type 2 diabetes. The findings emphasized the importance of substituting healthier protein sources, like nuts, legumes. 8. The EPIC-Oxford Study: This large prospective study examined the diets and health outcomes of over 65,000 people in the United Kingdom. It found that vegetarians had a lower risk of developing coronary heart disease, certain cancers (such as colorectal and breast cancer), and type 2 diabetes compared to meat-eaters. The study also highlighted that the risk increased with higher consumption of red and processed meats. 9. The World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research (WCRF/AICR) Continuous Update Project This ongoing project analyzes and synthesizes global research on diet, nutrition, physical activity, and cancer prevention. It has consistently found strong evidence linking high consumption of red and processed meats to an increased risk of colorectal cancer. The project recommends limiting the intake of red meat and avoiding processed meats to reduce cancer risk.
@@darthsmokester4759 These studies provide robust evidence supporting the association between high meat consumption, especially red and processed meats, and various health risks. 10. Cardiometabolic Risk Factors: Reference: Micha R, Peñalvo JL, Cudhea F, et al. Association Between Dietary Factors and Mortality From Heart Disease, Stroke, and Type 2 Diabetes. JAMA. 2017;317(9):912-924. Findings: This study linked high consumption of processed meats to an increased risk of mortality from heart disease, stroke, and type 2 diabetes. 11. Type 2 Diabetes: Reference: Pan A, Sun Q, Bernstein AM, et al. Red meat consumption and risk of type 2 diabetes: 3 cohorts of US adults and an updated meta-analysis. Am J Clin Nutr. 2011;94(4):1088-1096. Findings: This study found an association between higher red meat consumption and an increased risk of type 2 diabetes. 12. Colorectal Cancer: Reference: World Health Organization. IARC Monographs evaluate consumption of red meat and processed meat. Press Release. 2015. Findings: The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), part of the World Health Organization, classified processed meat as Group 1, meaning there is sufficient evidence to conclude that it causes colorectal cancer. Red meat was classified as Group 2A, meaning it is probably carcinogenic to humans. 13. Cardiovascular Disease: Reference: Micha R, Wallace SK, Mozaffarian D. Red and processed meat consumption and risk of incident coronary heart disease, stroke, and diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Circulation. 2010;121(21):2271-2283. Findings: This meta-analysis suggested that higher intake of red and processed meat is associated with an increased risk of coronary heart disease. Furthermore eating animals results in the most violent jobs, the most atrocious living circumstances for animals including violently slaughtering them, the most invasive and destructive industry that causes deforestation, desertification, concentration feeding operations (200,000 of which are in the US alone) that are toxic to surrounding communities, result in aquatic dead zones, deadly pathogens and zoonotic diseases that kill millions, antibiotic resistant bacteria, tainting water, air, and soil with anaerobic lagoons spewing ammonia, hydrogen sulfide, pathogens, all while being gravely inefficient as it only results in 20% global food intake yet uses 80% of agricultural land. Meanwhile China owns Smithfield so the US is essentially becoming a cesspool of pig and chicken feces, all so people can continue business as usual with their infantile habituated, vile and sadistic, outdated, behaviors that insidiously increase risk for chronic disease and all cause mortality with yet another death-based, elimination fad diet that's essentially a last ditch effort after the failed weight watchers, Atkins, Paleo, and failing keto that ranks lower than a whole list of plant-based diets like Mediterranean, Ornish, Dash, etc. Eating animals is just dumb, deadly and destructive at this point. This is all why all of the leading health organizations and largest scientific bodies of evidence like the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, National Academy of Science, Kaiser Permanente, American College of Cardiology, American Heart Association, American Cancer Association, World Health Organization, etc. all support a well planned plant-based diet as reducing risk for cardiometabolic diseases while being healthy and appropriate for every stage of life. And this is why the vegans are far more successful at showcasing the evidence. There is no carnivore equivalent to American College of Lifestyle Medicine, Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, nutritionfacts, Ornish program that's supported by Medicare for non-invasive treatment of cardiometabolic diseases, Hippocrates Wellness, True North, we even have more relevant doctors like you can see on my channel such as many long time vegan cardiologist, long time general practitioners, scientist, nephrologist, pediatricians, gastroenterologist, oncologist, nutritionist, dietitians, If someone's really looking it's clear to see that the plant-based and vegan way of eating is like a century ahead of this so-called carnivore fad diet that's really emulating a necrovore, scavenger based diet. Even TH-camrs on the vegan side have been around longer, actually show science instead of saying there is and then not showing any and then later saying it's accumulating but not showing any evidence of this. Meanwhile ours keeps accumulating decade after decade ahead of death-based diets. Even my channel is better than any of the carnivore channels. I showcase interviews with hundreds of long time vegans, lifelong vegans, athletic vegans beating non-vegans, long time world renowned doctors, scientists, Farmers, and the most compassionate people seeking to simply make this a healthier, sustainable, non-violent world.
What are the dietary recommendations that these doctors are suggesting? As a lay person that’s what I’m interested in. The interviewer keeps asking about exercise and resistance training. Is that how you achieve metabolic health? But the doctors keep saying no.
As a fellow lay person, my understanding is that reducing fat %, resistance training (build muscle), and some form of high intensity for brief periods along with a diet that induces a caloric deficit (if fat loss is needed) and stays away from saturated fat and refined sugars (the latter is a little more complex, pun intended)
@@christinesullivan6417 yes it's one way you achieve metabolic health, and this is because when you exercise you're helping stop or control insulin resistance and when you stop eating you're also helping your metabolic health by reducing the glucose spike. Hope this helps Thanks! 😊
Excellent questions and answers. Two points, research in Japan shows interval exercise in walking is better than walking the same speed, how about doing 3 minutes of higher part of the zone 2 and 3 minutes of the lower part zone 2 ? 20 minutes HIIT in the beginning,of exercise makes my heart beat more sensitive to exertion.
@@TheProofWithSimonHill The most interesting thing to me is that some lucky people can end up obese and never get T2 diabetes. Genetics does seem to play a decent factor. Just wish there were more actionable findings. I do think I'll double down on reducing saturated fat though.
In one of Simon's podcast's I heard a doctor (can't remember the name) say that muscles are like glucose sponges therefore more muscle leads to better glucose absorption. Dr. Donald Layman in this video however does not support this point. He says that more muscle leads to lesser mitochondria per unit of muscle therefore it does not really complement more glucose absorption. Dr Layman however emphasizes on healthy muscles over muscle volume but does not quantify what healthy muscles is. Please correct me if I have misunderstood. Thanks.
Excellent questions and answers. Two points, it seems interval exercise even in walking is better than same speed, how about doing 3 minutes of higher part of the zone 3 and 3 minutes of the lower part zone 3 ? 20 minutes HIIT in the beginning, my heart is more sensitive to my exertion.
Lactate is converted to pyruvate which is then converted to acetyl coenzyme a, beginning the Krebs cycle. You are correct in saying that lactate can be used for energy metabolism and does so at a rate higher than previously thought (being shared between muscles or going into the blood stream to be used by the brain), but it is not doing so in contrast to pryuvate; rather, it is converted to pyruvate and then used
@@isaacmasquelier1664 Here, we show that lactate activates the ETC to increase mitochondrial ATP production independent of its metabolism. The ability of lactate to stimulate the ETC is independent of LDH and also does not depend on pyruvate entry into the mitochondria or the TCA cycle but requires oxygen availability. This is what I was referring to..the article stated that extra lactate need not convert to pyruvate to produce energy. Thank you for your reply.
Does the higher blood pressure in zone 5 exercise increase the probability of driving more apoB lipids into the artery cell wall? It seems reasonable that it should be a function of apoB density, blood pressure and the health of the cell wall.
Yoyo dieting in my experience raises your fat set point in a stepwise fashion.. The amount of fat your body thinks it needs to survive the next apocalyse (diet). Each time I plateaued/asymptoted at a higher level.
Worked for 11/12%. A further upto 88% either could not hack the 400 Cal pd diet, the diet did not work, regained all the weight, went on to Type II diabetes and were too embarrassed to say, had a heart attack, died...... There are are still a lot of invisible individual patients with unique biochemistry to consider in there.
No that’s not accurate! Keep listening - zones refer to energy substrate (carbs vs fat) being used. Not to what exercise intensity results in body fat loss (that comes down to energy balance)
One needs only look at how the best actors can, with the help of the best trainers, achieve major body transformation in 6 months. My dream is for apps powered by AI, to bring this knowledge to the masses.
They usually have the best genetics and their jobs literally depend on the transformation but then they go back to baseline when the role is over. Also there’s a bit of pharmacology involved.. 🫠
Would highly recommend seeking out a qualified nutritionist. Possibly at your local university (that's where I found mine, and was able to be confident she was evidence based... She also had a PhD and cost was reasonable). Internet advice could potentially be harmful given your unique situation. That said, my father had type 1 diabetes. He was advised to eat complex carbs, lots of fibre and protein.
I'm very confused. Fiber is a carbohydrate (a complex carbohydrate). So to me a low carbohydrate diet means a low fiber diet. The only way a low carbohydrate makes sense to me as a means to improve health is if by definition it means a low simple carbohydrate diet. People seem to use the term carbohydrate to mean simple ie sugar carbohydrates. Can someone help me out.
Cycling is bro science. Mitochondria health Requires consistency. Why would anyone do cycling in the diet... you are dipping in and Out of metabolic health. You can STAY in metabolic health and experience consistent good comfort.
This was actually uninformative! He didn’t explain how food works with the metabolism or against it. I listen to a LOT of doctors and have done so for as long as they’ve been doing podcasts. He doesn’t explain metabolic syndrome well at all? The reason the metabolism is damaged is because of processes crappy food, especially high fructose corn syrup…which turns directly into fat in the liver and interstitial fat. Carbs cause this, not saturated fat.
@TheProofWithSimonHill I checked the shownotes to look for references, but didn't see any. Not sure if it's feasible for a compilation like this, but would be helpful to be able to provide the references for the claims so that if there is any confusion, someone can compare what they heard elsewhere with the evidence you and your guests are providing
Professional athletes are over working machines can't be termed as perfect machines, i think there metabolism may be using both efficient and inefficient process for their bodies to be working at such high levels
Dr. Ben Bikman is pro-animal-based protein, not afraid of Saturated fat. And the host is more plant-based. So there are some conflicts. Either side can show you tons of research to support their views.
I enjoy the conversation around the zone 2 training, however, the more I watch the more I notice the activist vegan bias with climate change connotation which were confirmed when I visit your website. If the bias is coming from your beliefs, it’s fine but if it is financed by a certain industry or product you sell then you just lose all your credibility. Still going through your videos for now.
Excellent questions and answers. Two points, it seems interval exercise even in walking is better than same speed, how about doing 3 minutes of higher part of the zone 3 and 3 minutes of the lower part zone 3 ? 20 minutes HIIT in the beginning, my heart is more sensitive to my exertion.
Excellent questions and answers. Two points, it seems interval exercise even in walking is better than same speed, how about doing 3 minutes of higher part of the zone 3 and 3 minutes of the lower part zone 3 ? 20 minutes HIIT in the beginning, my heart is more sensitive to my exertion.
There is SO much here and from scientists who deeply understand their specialties, thank you! I especially like the NAFLD topic as it is not as commonly addressed. Not surprising, but fascinating, the connections between diabetes, NAFLD, and CVD. It is SO important to maintain a healthy weight, holy cow! As a 63 year old, this was hardly discussed in my 20's, except from a beauty aspect. I am so glad people like you and others are providing this information in such a digestible form, it is definitely saving lives.
@@neilquinn I'm 5 foot 6 and weight 54 kg, sometimes 53. Pretty slim but good muscle for my 67 female years.
already listend to most of the interviews, and still learn so much by listening to all this again
Would like timestamps when you have several guests. Thanks for the great content Simon.
Done!
@@TheProofWithSimonHill Thanks for sharing and caring! I was wondering what your opinion about dr Ray Peat and his articles on pro metabollic health was? Ray Peat has lots of articles on thyroid issues and esp women's health issues and prometabollic nutrition . Now could be seen an increase of his followers and many influencers started applying his meal advices, like eating white sugar and refined rice and drinking regular cola but avoiding PUFA and pulsins like beans for ex. Thanks in advance!
He missed a lot, esp regarding liver health and how it is related to thyroid function
Wow what an epic episode. I was keenly interested to learn the relationship of inflammation to NAFL as I manage Ankylosing Spondylitis and NAFL. I have an excellent diet and correct body weight and exercise 60 mins x 6 days per week BUT STILL have a fatty liver. I’m in search for an answer. Thanks again for your work. It’s invaluable.
Though I am not a vegan and never will be for any extended time, I follow your podcasts with enthusiasm. Thank you for caring. 🎉
Same not a vegan but like the info ℹ️
i think Hill is mostly pescatarian
Why aren’t you vegan?
@@jellybeanvinkler4878why would you refuse to be vegan? Do you agree it's wrong to hurt animals? Saying you'll never be vegan is like saying you'll never support non-violence.
@@VeganLinked dude cmon... don't strawman her. Hitler was a vegetarian. Saying you support vegan is like saying you support Hitler.... SMH, like c'mon. This is an evidence based channel
As others have noted, researchers go deep with a narrow focus on the specialties. Weaving together these interviews to broaden learning about cell function, metabolism, fat production, and the like is no easy task. Well done!👏👏👏 I do wish, however, that more clarity would be given to sample diversity (specifically whether younger or older women were included) and differential outcomes. For example, zone 2 training may not be as beneficial for women. There's a cultural bias against women, particularly post-menopausal women, in the research. Not every finding is generalizable to all groups.
Well said. Thank you!
Fantastic! Love these masterclasses - great way to repurpose content, review the highlights even after listening to the original longform videos, and further integrating all of this info. You are a great teacher in how you summarize these experts' teachings - gracias 🙏
Dr. Richard Johnson is my favorite! I watch every interview and lecture he does on TH-cam. ✨️
What an epic compilation of experts! Thanks so much for putting this together 💚💪💚 And what perfect timing after Chris with Plant Chompers just put a video out on diabetes. And I just happened to release several interviews with people who reversed their diabetes. The evidence is overwhelming and inescapable that a well-planned vegan way of eating is the best in every way 😊
Let's not make this a tribal thing. We aren't (or shouldn't?) be rooting (pun intended) for one specific diet or to be "the best in every way."
But furthermore, the evidence doesn't say what you are saying -- 'well planned vegan is best in every way'.
More importantly though, the "well planned" part is probably the hardest part when we are talking about this at a population level. Not everyone can or even want to plan out their nutrition. And that can be ok too. They may just need something really simple. "Fibre+protein at every meal, reduce saturated fat, mostly a diverse selection of whole plants, most of the time." That could work for a lot of people without it becoming "team vegan" "team carnivore" "team keto" " team Mediterranean" "team 'who cares'"
Follow up, I'm not against vegan diet by any means. A well planned vegan diet can absolutely be one of the healthiest for a lot of people.
But vegan doesn't stand above other 'well planned' diets for nutrition. It shines in the environmental and moral debate, which is where the vegan "tribe" should be making their arguments in my opinion (which probably means nothing in a TH-cam comment section)
@@darthsmokester4759 Numerous scientific studies have provided evidence supporting the idea that a plant-based diet can contribute to a lower risk of heart disease.
The Adventist Health Study-2, which included a large population of Seventh-day Adventists, found that individuals following a vegetarian diet (including both lacto-ovo vegetarians and vegans) had a lower risk of developing coronary heart disease compared to non-vegetarians. The study highlighted the protective effects of plant-based diets.
EPIC-Oxford Study:
The EPIC-Oxford study, part of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition, examined the diets and health outcomes of over 65,000 participants. It found that vegetarians had a significantly lower risk of coronary heart disease compared to meat-eaters.
Nurses' Health Study and Health Professionals Follow-Up Study:
These long-term cohort studies in the United States involved over 200,000 participants. They found that a higher intake of plant-based foods, such as fruits, vegetables, and whole grains, was associated with a lower risk of coronary heart disease. The emphasis on plant-based sources of protein was particularly noteworthy.
Interheart Study:
The Interheart Study, a global case-control study, investigated risk factors for acute myocardial infarction (heart attack) in various populations. It found that a high intake of fruits and vegetables was associated with a lower risk of heart attack, emphasizing the cardiovascular benefits of plant-based foods.
Hypertension (DASH) Trial:
While not exclusively plant-based it can be done vegan, the DASH diet emphasizes fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and low-fat dairy. The DASH trial demonstrated that this dietary pattern can significantly lower blood pressure, a key risk factor for heart disease.
Meta-analyses and Reviews:
Several meta-analyses and systematic reviews have summarized the existing evidence on plant-based diets and cardiovascular health. These analyses consistently suggest that plant-based diets are associated with a lower risk of heart disease, including a reduction in blood pressure, cholesterol levels, and inflammation.
@@darthsmokester4759 While we see research supporting a plant-based diet as protective against chronic disease and all cause mortality we see the opposite for eating animals.
Here are a few studies you might find relevant:
1. "Red and processed meat consumption and risk of prostate cancer: A dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies"** - This meta-analysis, published in the International Journal of Cancer in 2016, found a positive association between red and processed meat consumption and the risk of prostate cancer. It suggested that higher consumption of these meats may be associated with an increased risk of developing prostate cancer.
2. "Dairy products, calcium, and prostate cancer risk: A systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies"** - This systematic review and meta-analysis, published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition in 2015, examined the association between dairy product consumption, calcium intake, and prostate cancer risk. It concluded that high intake of dairy products and calcium may be associated with an increased risk of prostate cancer.
3. "Egg consumption and risk of prostate cancer: A dose-response meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies"** - Published in the British Journal of Nutrition in 2016, this meta-analysis investigated the association between egg consumption and prostate cancer risk. It suggested that higher egg consumption may be associated with an increased risk of prostate cancer.
These studies provide valuable insights into the potential relationship between the consumption of meat, dairy, eggs, and the risk of prostate cancer.
Here are a few more studies that demonstrate the correlation between higher meat consumption and increased health risks:
4. The European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC): This large-scale study followed over half a million participants from ten European countries for an average of 12.7 years. It found that higher intake of red and processed meats was associated with an elevated risk of mortality from all causes, particularly cardiovascular diseases and cancer. The study emphasized the importance of reducing meat consumption and replacing it with plant-based foods for overall health benefits.
5. The Health Professionals Follow-up Study and Nurses' Health Study II: These long-term cohort studies followed over 120,000 men and women in the United States for up to 28 years. They consistently showed that higher consumption of red meat, especially processed red meat, was associated with an increased risk of mortality from cardiovascular disease, cancer, and other causes. The findings underscored the importance of dietary choices in preventing chronic diseases and promoting longevity.
6. The Multiethnic Cohort Study: This prospective study included over 215,000 participants from Hawaii and California, representing various ethnic groups. It found that higher intake of red and processed meats was associated with an elevated risk of colorectal cancer, particularly among men. The study highlighted the need for population-wide strategies to reduce meat consumption and promote healthier dietary patterns to mitigate cancer risk.
These studies provide further evidence of the dose-response relationship between meat consumption and health outcomes, demonstrating that as meat intake increases, so does the risk of various chronic diseases and mortality.
7. The Nurses' Health Study and Health Professionals Follow-up Study: These long-term studies followed over 100,000 participants for several decades. They found that higher consumption of red meat, particularly processed red meat, was associated with an increased risk of heart disease, cancer (especially colorectal cancer), and type 2 diabetes. The findings emphasized the importance of substituting healthier protein sources, like nuts, legumes.
8. The EPIC-Oxford Study: This large prospective study examined the diets and health outcomes of over 65,000 people in the United Kingdom. It found that vegetarians had a lower risk of developing coronary heart disease, certain cancers (such as colorectal and breast cancer), and type 2 diabetes compared to meat-eaters. The study also highlighted that the risk increased with higher consumption of red and processed meats.
9. The World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research (WCRF/AICR) Continuous Update Project
This ongoing project analyzes and synthesizes global research on diet, nutrition, physical activity, and cancer prevention. It has consistently found strong evidence linking high consumption of red and processed meats to an increased risk of colorectal cancer. The project recommends limiting the intake of red meat and avoiding processed meats to reduce cancer risk.
@@darthsmokester4759 These studies provide robust evidence supporting the association between high meat consumption, especially red and processed meats, and various health risks.
10. Cardiometabolic Risk Factors:
Reference: Micha R, Peñalvo JL, Cudhea F, et al. Association Between Dietary Factors and Mortality From Heart Disease, Stroke, and Type 2 Diabetes. JAMA. 2017;317(9):912-924.
Findings: This study linked high consumption of processed meats to an increased risk of mortality from heart disease, stroke, and type 2 diabetes.
11. Type 2 Diabetes:
Reference: Pan A, Sun Q, Bernstein AM, et al. Red meat consumption and risk of type 2 diabetes: 3 cohorts of US adults and an updated meta-analysis. Am J Clin Nutr. 2011;94(4):1088-1096.
Findings: This study found an association between higher red meat consumption and an increased risk of type 2 diabetes.
12. Colorectal Cancer:
Reference: World Health Organization. IARC Monographs evaluate consumption of red meat and processed meat. Press Release. 2015.
Findings: The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), part of the World Health Organization, classified processed meat as Group 1, meaning there is sufficient evidence to conclude that it causes colorectal cancer. Red meat was classified as Group 2A, meaning it is probably carcinogenic to humans.
13. Cardiovascular Disease:
Reference: Micha R, Wallace SK, Mozaffarian D. Red and processed meat consumption and risk of incident coronary heart disease, stroke, and diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Circulation. 2010;121(21):2271-2283.
Findings: This meta-analysis suggested that higher intake of red and processed meat is associated with an increased risk of coronary heart disease.
Furthermore eating animals results in the most violent jobs, the most atrocious living circumstances for animals including violently slaughtering them, the most invasive and destructive industry that causes deforestation, desertification, concentration feeding operations (200,000 of which are in the US alone) that are toxic to surrounding communities, result in aquatic dead zones, deadly pathogens and zoonotic diseases that kill millions, antibiotic resistant bacteria, tainting water, air, and soil with anaerobic lagoons spewing ammonia, hydrogen sulfide, pathogens, all while being gravely inefficient as it only results in 20% global food intake yet uses 80% of agricultural land. Meanwhile China owns Smithfield so the US is essentially becoming a cesspool of pig and chicken feces, all so people can continue business as usual with their infantile habituated, vile and sadistic, outdated, behaviors that insidiously increase risk for chronic disease and all cause mortality with yet another death-based, elimination fad diet that's essentially a last ditch effort after the failed weight watchers, Atkins, Paleo, and failing keto that ranks lower than a whole list of plant-based diets like Mediterranean, Ornish, Dash, etc. Eating animals is just dumb, deadly and destructive at this point.
This is all why all of the leading health organizations and largest scientific bodies of evidence like the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, National Academy of Science, Kaiser Permanente, American College of Cardiology, American Heart Association, American Cancer Association, World Health Organization, etc. all support a well planned plant-based diet as reducing risk for cardiometabolic diseases while being healthy and appropriate for every stage of life.
And this is why the vegans are far more successful at showcasing the evidence. There is no carnivore equivalent to American College of Lifestyle Medicine, Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, nutritionfacts, Ornish program that's supported by Medicare for non-invasive treatment of cardiometabolic diseases, Hippocrates Wellness, True North, we even have more relevant doctors like you can see on my channel such as many long time vegan cardiologist, long time general practitioners, scientist, nephrologist, pediatricians, gastroenterologist, oncologist, nutritionist, dietitians, If someone's really looking it's clear to see that the plant-based and vegan way of eating is like a century ahead of this so-called carnivore fad diet that's really emulating a necrovore, scavenger based diet.
Even TH-camrs on the vegan side have been around longer, actually show science instead of saying there is and then not showing any and then later saying it's accumulating but not showing any evidence of this. Meanwhile ours keeps accumulating decade after decade ahead of death-based diets.
Even my channel is better than any of the carnivore channels. I showcase interviews with hundreds of long time vegans, lifelong vegans, athletic vegans beating non-vegans, long time world renowned doctors, scientists, Farmers, and the most compassionate people seeking to simply make this a healthier, sustainable, non-violent world.
Thank you for this podcast as I really enjoyed the content.
Amazing episode/Pod. THANK YOU
You’re welcome
Algorithm support 🔥
Thank you for this essential episode- Wonderful expert guests!
Awesome.. really appreciate this..
Thank you.
You're very welcome!
"Come on, it's just a ring" - Thanks to Dr San Millan for a dose of reality.
What??? Please explain as I’ve missed that
Metabolic master class but no dr. Lustig is little bit bummer but still big thank you for this clip!! Amazing👍👏🏼
The notorious Lustig 😂
Dr lustig is smug AF but I love him. 😂he helped me loose 2 stone in 2 months and get my BP back into almost normal range. ❤
Great podcast welcome from Nepal
Wow... Amazing, Many thanks .... So much to think about .... Very much appreciated xx
You are so welcome
What are the dietary recommendations that these doctors are suggesting? As a lay person that’s what I’m interested in. The interviewer keeps asking about exercise and resistance training. Is that how you achieve metabolic health? But the doctors keep saying no.
Sounds like they want to beat up on saturated fat. Energy overload is toxic no matter the source. Oh, I'm mostly carnivore.
As a fellow lay person, my understanding is that reducing fat %, resistance training (build muscle), and some form of high intensity for brief periods along with a diet that induces a caloric deficit (if fat loss is needed) and stays away from saturated fat and refined sugars (the latter is a little more complex, pun intended)
@@christinesullivan6417 yes it's one way you achieve metabolic health, and this is because when you exercise you're helping stop or control insulin resistance and when you stop eating you're also helping your metabolic health by reducing the glucose spike. Hope this helps Thanks! 😊
Excellent questions and answers. Two points, research in Japan shows interval exercise in walking is better than walking the same speed, how about doing 3 minutes of higher part of the zone 2 and 3 minutes of the lower part zone 2 ?
20 minutes HIIT in the beginning,of exercise makes my heart beat more sensitive to exertion.
Such a great collection of experts yet I’m left here thinking I learned basically nothing new and have the same lifestyle takeaways.
That’s a good outcome
@@TheProofWithSimonHill The most interesting thing to me is that some lucky people can end up obese and never get T2 diabetes. Genetics does seem to play a decent factor. Just wish there were more actionable findings. I do think I'll double down on reducing saturated fat though.
Incredible thanks 🙏 🙏 🙏
Thanks for listening
In one of Simon's podcast's I heard a doctor (can't remember the name) say that muscles are like glucose sponges therefore more muscle leads to better glucose absorption. Dr. Donald Layman in this video however does not support this point. He says that more muscle leads to lesser mitochondria per unit of muscle therefore it does not really complement more glucose absorption. Dr Layman however emphasizes on healthy muscles over muscle volume but does not quantify what healthy muscles is. Please correct me if I have misunderstood. Thanks.
Im trying to figure out how this can help me
Excellent questions and answers. Two points, it seems interval exercise even in walking is better than same speed, how about doing 3 minutes of higher part of the zone 3 and 3 minutes of the lower part zone 3 ?
20 minutes HIIT in the beginning, my heart is more sensitive to my exertion.
Do you know the exact name of the shake? Thank you for these detailed podcasts!
Recently I read a research paper where it states lactate is used as a primary fuel instead of Pyruvate and is good for body
Lactate is converted to pyruvate which is then converted to acetyl coenzyme a, beginning the Krebs cycle.
You are correct in saying that lactate can be used for energy metabolism and does so at a rate higher than previously thought (being shared between muscles or going into the blood stream to be used by the brain), but it is not doing so in contrast to pryuvate; rather, it is converted to pyruvate and then used
@@isaacmasquelier1664 Here, we show that lactate activates the ETC to increase mitochondrial ATP production independent of its metabolism. The ability of lactate to stimulate the ETC is independent of LDH and also does not depend on pyruvate entry into the mitochondria or the TCA cycle but requires oxygen availability. This is what I was referring to..the article stated that extra lactate need not convert to pyruvate to produce energy. Thank you for your reply.
@@SunilKumar-tj8rp oh wow, you just educated me, that’s fascinating. Could you link the paper?
@isaacmasquelier1664 Although I first heard it from Prof. George A Brooks from UC on a podcast. You can look up on his work.
I heard that zone two training increases the ability to use lactate as a fuel
Does the higher blood pressure in zone 5 exercise increase the probability of driving more apoB lipids into the artery cell wall? It seems reasonable that it should be a function of apoB density, blood pressure and the health of the cell wall.
Yoyo dieting in my experience raises your fat set point in a stepwise fashion.. The amount of fat your body thinks it needs to survive the next apocalyse (diet). Each time I plateaued/asymptoted at a higher level.
Worked for 11/12%. A further upto 88% either could not hack the 400 Cal pd diet, the diet did not work, regained all the weight, went on to Type II diabetes and were too embarrassed to say, had a heart attack, died...... There are are still a lot of invisible individual patients with unique biochemistry to consider in there.
I haven't finished the video, but, if I don't workout in zone 2, then I am not loosing fat? supposing most of the time I am at zone 3-4
No that’s not accurate! Keep listening - zones refer to energy substrate (carbs vs fat) being used. Not to what exercise intensity results in body fat loss (that comes down to energy balance)
@@TheProofWithSimonHill oh my!! So exciting, thanks a lot for replying 🥰 !!
Regards from Mexico! ❤️
Can we get a neurologist?
Yes coming up soon. Also had multiple episodes with the Sherzai’s
A good amount of muscle = the ability to get down and up from the ground.
One needs only look at how the best actors can, with the help of the best trainers, achieve major body transformation in 6 months. My dream is for apps powered by AI, to bring this knowledge to the masses.
Just use your brain, no need for AI
They usually have the best genetics and their jobs literally depend on the transformation but then they go back to baseline when the role is over. Also there’s a bit of pharmacology involved.. 🫠
Seed oils are ultra processed too. You can get Omega 6 in whole natural food.
What happens if your on insulin like me what’s the best way to eat I’m type 3c I don’t have a full pancreas lost it due to medical
Would highly recommend seeking out a qualified nutritionist. Possibly at your local university (that's where I found mine, and was able to be confident she was evidence based... She also had a PhD and cost was reasonable). Internet advice could potentially be harmful given your unique situation.
That said, my father had type 1 diabetes. He was advised to eat complex carbs, lots of fibre and protein.
@@darthsmokester4759thank you for you kind reply I definitely will have a lot here in the U.K. thanks again
I think you would benefit from listening to Dr Ben Bikman’s lectures 🩵
@@ironmaidenfitness654 thank you 😊
I'm very confused. Fiber is a carbohydrate (a complex carbohydrate). So to me a low carbohydrate diet means a low fiber diet. The only way a low carbohydrate makes sense to me as a means to improve health is if by definition it means a low simple carbohydrate diet. People seem to use the term carbohydrate to mean simple ie sugar carbohydrates. Can someone help me out.
How to reverse fatty liver
Cycling is bro science. Mitochondria health Requires consistency. Why would anyone do cycling in the diet... you are dipping in and Out of metabolic health. You can STAY in metabolic health and experience consistent good comfort.
This was actually uninformative! He didn’t explain how food works with the metabolism or against it. I listen to a LOT of doctors and have done so for as long as they’ve been doing podcasts. He doesn’t explain metabolic syndrome well at all? The reason the metabolism is damaged is because of processes crappy food, especially high fructose corn syrup…which turns directly into fat in the liver and interstitial fat. Carbs cause this, not saturated fat.
@TheProofWithSimonHill I checked the shownotes to look for references, but didn't see any. Not sure if it's feasible for a compilation like this, but would be helpful to be able to provide the references for the claims so that if there is any confusion, someone can compare what they heard elsewhere with the evidence you and your guests are providing
This was a bit uninformative for me also. the Direct Trail is weak at best with no idea what they ate.
Talk, can't sing = Zone 2 ❤
No, not “genders,” but sexes. Get it right.
Professional athletes are over working machines can't be termed as perfect machines, i think there metabolism may be using both efficient and inefficient process for their bodies to be working at such high levels
Paul Mason says saturated fat is no big deal. So who is right ?
Paul Mason is right about fat, the big problem is when you add a big dose of sugar (carbs) with it. a big no no.
You need to invite Ben Bickman to explain this matter clearly!
This man … is not good as Ben Bickman
Dr. Ben Bikman is pro-animal-based protein, not afraid of Saturated fat. And the host is more plant-based. So there are some conflicts. Either side can show you tons of research to support their views.
I enjoy the conversation around the zone 2 training, however, the more I watch the more I notice the activist vegan bias with climate change connotation which were confirmed when I visit your website. If the bias is coming from your beliefs, it’s fine but if it is financed by a certain industry or product you sell then you just lose all your credibility. Still going through your videos for now.
Too many adds. Not subscribing.
Upgrade to TH-cam premium and there’s no YT ads
Excellent questions and answers. Two points, it seems interval exercise even in walking is better than same speed, how about doing 3 minutes of higher part of the zone 3 and 3 minutes of the lower part zone 3 ?
20 minutes HIIT in the beginning, my heart is more sensitive to my exertion.
Excellent questions and answers. Two points, it seems interval exercise even in walking is better than same speed, how about doing 3 minutes of higher part of the zone 3 and 3 minutes of the lower part zone 3 ?
20 minutes HIIT in the beginning, my heart is more sensitive to my exertion.