Live data from Hacker News

What Your Microbiome Wants for Dinner

nautil.us

41–50 of 99 posts

Re: What Your Microbiome Wants for Dinner

#41
post #21
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don’t even need to omit the grains. You can just eat Dinkel or Urkorn, two very common (like, in every bakery) types of grain that existed even in the paleolithic times. EDIT: Seriously, how is this not contributing? Please provide a comment if you think it is not contributing.

Those grains aren't good for paleo though since we didn't really eat them while evolving. Our bodies haven't been primarily digesting them for very long.

Of course paleo is absolute BS, so why does it matter?

Re: What Your Microbiome Wants for Dinner

#42
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure. You'll need LibreOffice. there's not many readings thus yet. However, given some of my previous symptoms (thirst, extreme hunger, overheating) along with family history, a basic test was done. a1c=7.1 and initial fasting glucose = 161mg/dL I'm approaching this aggressively, as I'm not sure exactly how many medical symptoms were caused/still caused by this, including mental fog during programming. https://mega.n…

Are you overweight? I am, and recently tested a1c @ 6.1. That's not Type-2, but it's dangerzone. I'm dieting now, I'm going to re-test each time I drop 5kg to see if it helps. see: http://www.gizmag.com/one-gram-pancreas-fat-reverse-type-2-d...

I am. The weights are also in the data. Initially at the doctor's, I was 320. And that was 2 weeks ago.

Now I'm at 314.

And also, watch out about the a1c. They are not reliable readings to use in diagnosis. Studies from last year show a very skewed weighted average from the last 3 months that generate the a1c. Also, if you have any sort of hemoglobin-modifying illness (sickle cell, others), a1c is completely inaccurate.

140mg/dL is scientifically known to kill nerve cells. Every minute above this kills stuff. The ideal healthy human's response is between 85-100mg/dL. A resting rate away from this shows dysfunction.

However, an OGTT shows if you have problems. You take a reading prior to drinking 75g glucose. One big drink. Then you test every 30 minutes until you're back to normal, which is usually 2-2.5 hours. A doc won't say it, but every minute over 140 causes cell death, and most likely lower.

For example, this is what 12 carbs did to me:

     18:20 12/09/2015	test		143
     18:35 12/09/2015	eat	15m	
     19:15 12/09/2015	test		182
     19:30 12/09/2015	test		172
     19:45 12/09/2015	test		168
     20:00 12/09/2015	test		150
     20:15 12/09/2015	test		144
     20:30 12/09/2015	test		123

Re: What Your Microbiome Wants for Dinner

#43
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great to see someone taking charge of their condition and using data to do so. Have you tried squats after eating. Use of the largest muscles in the body may help with extra glucose sensitivity.

Seems like good advice. I think this is recommended in the four hour body too. I'm not sure why it was down voted.

I wholeheartedly agree.

When I asked my doctor about what kind of exercises to do, and whom to ask about that for safe weight loss via exercise, he said "Oh just do exercises".

I also have an existing shoulder injury, and meeting with an orthopedic surgeon. His answer was "Don't do these 2 exercises because of exacerbating the condition, but the rest are safe. And These will help."

I'm still kind of in the research phase on what I can do that will cause a good amount of change. But my research also shows that a safe amount to lose is 1lb/week.

Re: What Your Microbiome Wants for Dinner

#44
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those grains aren't good for paleo though since we didn't really eat them while evolving. Our bodies haven't been primarily digesting them for very long.

Of course paleo is absolute BS, so why does it matter?

rather than just saying an absolute, why not give some facts as to why "you agree with those who say paleo is BS".

I'm not suggesting it isn't but your dismissive comment doesn't enlighten those who are not aware of the controversy.

Re: What Your Microbiome Wants for Dinner

#45
post #11

It's a book extract: "Excerpted from The Hidden Half of Nature: The Microbial Roots of Life and Health by David R. Montgomery and Anne Biklé. Copyright © 2016 by David R. Montgomery and Anne Biklé. With permission of the publisher, W.W. Norton & Company, Inc. All rights reserved." Based on that section, I would look for an extract from The Good Gut (1) instead. It leans more towards science and less towards populariz…

I just read Good Gut, it's a very very very bad book. About 10% enlightening accepted science and about 90% rampant and very wild speculation. Filled with little chapters that take in many cases very tenuous unproven theories (they come out and say that) and then use weasel words to then write a whole speculative chapter about it.

I learned a lot about how digestion works and then a lot about how to make a book out of very thin gruel.

Re: What Your Microbiome Wants for Dinner

#46
post #7

This article opens with, "[New science] is also showing us that advocates of trendy paleo and vegan diets are missing the big picture of how our omnivorous digestive system works." But it concludes with, "Pick a modest-sized plate and make meals using vegetables, legumes, leafy greens, beans, fruits, and unmilled whole grains as the main ingredients. Add some meat if you want and dollops of healthy fats on the side o…

The "add some meat if you want" part.

Re: What Your Microbiome Wants for Dinner

#47

Rolled out this idea in a thread long ago about Apple not including a Period Tracker in their health app and it was taboo then, but here is as best a place to try again... There should be a poop tracking app. It would help a user track their waste over time, identify important red flags, act as an incredibly detailed source of diagnostic data for health care professionals, and promote healthy and happy living. Two to…

Um..."very solid today", "kind of soft today"...what exactly would you track, without more tools to analyze it?

Re: What Your Microbiome Wants for Dinner

#48
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And omit the legumes and grains and you have paleo. Agreed, it's pointlessly contrary.

You don’t even need to omit the grains. You can just eat Dinkel or Urkorn, two very common (like, in every bakery) types of grain that existed even in the paleolithic times. EDIT: Seriously, how is this not contributing? Please provide a comment if you think it is not contributing.

No matter the seed you will find in the vast majority of cases they contain anti-nutrients that are toxic to mammals. Lectins, glutens, phytates, etc.

Re: What Your Microbiome Wants for Dinner

#49

Rolled out this idea in a thread long ago about Apple not including a Period Tracker in their health app and it was taboo then, but here is as best a place to try again... There should be a poop tracking app. It would help a user track their waste over time, identify important red flags, act as an incredibly detailed source of diagnostic data for health care professionals, and promote healthy and happy living. Two to…

Um..."very solid today", "kind of soft today"...what exactly would you track, without more tools to analyze it?

"never eating Taco Bell again."

Actually, you could track cohesion, firmness, gassiness, possibly odor, etc. Unfortunately there's already an online community of people who do this kind of thing.

Re: What Your Microbiome Wants for Dinner

#50
post #27
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those grains aren't good for paleo though since we didn't really eat them while evolving. Our bodies haven't been primarily digesting them for very long.

I think you underestimate how fast evolution happens. Lactose tolerance is a fairly recent, but widespread adaptation.

Yep, rates of evolution (in particular mutation rate and drift) are proportional to population size, and we have a larger population size than we ever have in the past.

~2 billion base pairs * ~1 in a billion error rate = 2 mutations per generation (on average)

Edit: Slight clarification and a brief (and greatly oversimplified) lesson on how this works.

Let Ne = effective population size. And I'll define "fitness effect" as the advantage conferred by a particular mutation in a particular fitness landscape. e.g., If you're an E. coli, the fitness conferred by penicillin resistance is very high if you're sitting in a pool of penicillin, but generally mildly negative otherwise because you're wasting energy.

When the fitness effect size is much larger in magnitude than 1/Ne (or 1/2Ne if you're diploid, like us), the fate of the gene is largely determined by natural selection. (But add the occasional coin toss in there b/c the real world is messy.)

When the fitness effect size is much smaller in magnitude than 1/Ne, the fate of the gene is largely determined by genetic drift. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_drift (tl;dr Mostly chance mod a few other effects, like if the mutation of interest has a physical location close to another mutation with strong selection pressure)

However, there are slightly deleterious or slightly advantageous mutations, whose fitness effect size is close to 1/Ne (or 1/2Ne for diploids), and things get kinda interesting, because it's a combination of genetic drift and natural selection. For instance, if it's a slightly deleterious mutation, it will decrease Ne slightly (increasing the proportion of mutations that are considered neutral of the new value of Ne), and the previously "slightly deleterious" mutation may now be effectively neutral for the new value of Ne.

There is a lot of evidence that the "slightly" deleterious and the "slightly" advantageous mutations contribute substantially to evolutionary dynamics.

This is further complicated by the fact that the fitness (whether a mutation is deleterious or advantageous) is not constant everywhere geographically, or over time.

Post reply on HN