Dr Oz on TV on May 18th did a piece on carb addition which is really quite good as far as he went....suprisingly so. I am not a Dr Oz fan but my wife is and records on our DVR every show.
He lays out how refined carbs trigger a dopamine/seratonin response in the brain similiar to what happens to a cocoaine addict. Once the seratonin/dopamine is not there anymore, the addict does more of the addicting substance to feel good again. It wears off, and the cycle repeats itself.
He has four very overweight carb addicted women who agree to withdraw from processed carbs and all the classic symptoms of low carb flu appear immediately.
To give Oz credit he does have a four week weaning off the processed carbs program...that seems a little nieve to my thinking.
But nowhere does he ever mention replacing the carbs with meat and fat. No mention of Gary Taubes meat and fat piece nor any mention of Gary's excellent lipid profile that we know Oz received several hundred times over.
Please watch the 5 part piece. Suffer through the Allegra allergy 15 sec commercials. And then come back and report how you viewed the piece in light of what you know about low carb/paleo...the low carb flu...the addition aspect...the lack of willpower of the women...the craving...the headaches, depression, inability to cope...and whatever else you would care to mention.
I am still mad that Oz never mention fat and meat can play in inducing the good feeling of seratonin in the body. And that these overweight women can lose those refined carb pounds by paleo.
What say you PaleoHackers?
http://www.doctoroz.com/videos/are-carbs-new-cocaine-pt-1 There are five parts.
asked byDexter (9948)
Get FREE instant access to our Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!
on May 21, 2011
at 03:44 AM
He has accurately described addiction, but I want to question whether or not it is classical substance addiction or something else. Possibly the result of a carb-contingent metabolism and poor insulin sensitivity.
If it is simply that sugar is just so gosh-darn stimulating and we become addicted to the sensation, how long does this kind of stuff take to set in? I always liked sugary junk but stopped consuming it a while ago when I was still in high school because I heard that it causes diabetes and I didn't want that. Recently I have been consuming quite a bit of sugar, not really refined sugar except in ice cream but maple syrup, honey, fruit juice and whatnot. I don't really see what the big deal is. There aren't any food cravings yet. I can drink 50g of sugar in between meals and not be hungry or crave anything. I can also go without it like it doesn't really matter, but I'm committed to self-experimentation; going from pretty much ideal metabolic health to sugar-junkie consumption and reviewing the difference. Could it possibly be that sugar is only addictive for those who are suffering from the metabolic syndrome? Is it necessarily the case that people become addicted over time or is it a manifestation of poor blood sugar control and leptin resistance? We all eat delicious foods all of the time and I don't see sugar as being uniquely rewarding compared to something like a spiced and salted lamb shank, or bacon for that matter. Bacon fills you up. Non-caloric sweeteners don't exactly sate the sugar tooth so that suggests a physiological component, particularly an influx of energy in an otherwise lethargic body. But that's not necessarily the case, is it? I suspect that part of the problem is the leptin resistance that sugar causes. It stimulates the produce of a great deal of leptin which overloads the receptors and causes the leptin resistant poor satiety signaling and we crave food, especially if blood sugar dips. But is this leptin resistance necessarily the case? Inflammation tends to raise circulating leptin quite a bit and so the leptin from sugar in one meal may not be anywhere near the threshold in those who are already very leptin-sensitive.
Just some stuff to think about. Honestly, having done cocaine and other serotonin/dopamine overloading drugs, calling sugar like cocaine in its propensity to become addictive purely by sensory means is extreme hyperbole.
Heh, Oz gets no love on paleohacks. Not even when he bashes stuff that we all agree is unhealthy.
on May 21, 2011
at 04:12 AM
Oz is a tool that is behind the times, is owned by the mighty O (and we've seen where all HER dieting and fad eating has gotten her) and doesn't have any credibility regarding nutrition as far as i'm concerned. He may say the right thing occasionally but overall won't change his tune. Simply ridiculous, 'nuff said.