Hyperinsulinemia and Its Pivotal Role in Aging, Obesity, Type 2 Diabetes, Cardiovascular Disease and Cancer
-
Hyperinsulinemia, driven largely by a junk food diet (and being sedentary), greatly increases the risk of all modern chronic diseases.
It also accelerates aging.
“All things are poison and nothing is without poison; only the dose makes a thing not a poison.” - Paracelsus (c. 1493–1541)
☂︎ -
This post is deleted! -
This is a sounder model, but that's all it is as it is only less sound.
How the medical system has put insulin at the apex of its medical malfeasance dogma is appalling, along with its many falsehoods. To name a few more equivalents of Nobel laureate level hoaxing such as the banshee worship of non-existent viruses, the bedevelling of CO2 within and without the body (downplaying its salutary role as an all important pH buffer within, and its regulatory role in providing earth with a green blanket of forests), the vilification of protective hormones such as progesterone with the false worship of estrogen in its altar of repose with western christian churches in an evil collaboration of promoting superstition and fear.
Even the bioenergetic community blathers on the term insulin resistance as it echoes in unison with the false reliance on insulin as it's savior, refusing to see insulin as just another stress hormone from the true Peatarian view of it. Instead of less insulin being seen as beneficial, insulin is viewed as needed and vital to blood sugar regulation.
To such extent that when the body refuses to lower blood sugar as the charlatans would have us believe, it is never called an acute phase biomarker but instead the body is considered stupid and unwise and in dysregulation.
Insulin does more than just lower blood sugar, and it only does so when the body's ability to absorb and metabolize sugar efficiently via the mitochondria. Only when the body fails in lowering blood sugar does insulin step in. And in corrective fashion, when it tells the liver to convert excess blood sugar to fat.
But when the body is doing well in absorbing and metabolizing sugar, with little or no help from insulin, there is just a minimum level of insulin around that is keeping insulin from inhibiting other metabolic pathways such as lipolysis (as well as other processes which space and the interest of brevity does not permit).
Lipolysis being uninhibited is wrongly viewed as evil from the false notion that there is forum consensus of fat or beta-metabolism as being unequivocally unsound. This is a mental block which keeps most Peatarians from really achieving metabolic health.
Why would inhibiting lipolysis be a bad idea, I ask? For one, how would you lose weight when you don't convert fat cells into fatty acids for these fatty acids to be used as a substrate for producing energy in the mitochondria?
Couple this with the inane idea that more insulin is needed as the solution to lowering your blood sugar, according to mainstream medical thought and experts, not on the strength of evidence but on the usual Nobel Prize-level of propaganda and hoaxing and insulting of our intelligence with Pied Pipers of long noses where we only see long noses as normal only because our de facto religion sanctifies long noses.
Without realizing that an overabundance of insulin not only keeps fat stores in stasis, as we keep our overweightness and obeseness fully intact; while at the same time our liver is told by insulin to tack on more weight by converting blood sugar to fat, and the obvious outcome would be weight gain and poor health.
And then we are mad at United Healthcare for being the proverbial hitman for the lying pharma complex for denying us treatment from being so sick from stupidly taking hook line and sinker pharma's obvious lies as we descend into metabolic hell.
Temporal thinking is the faculty that’s
engaged by an enriched environment, but it’s
wrong to call it “thinking,” because it’s simply
the way organisms exist... - Ray Peat Nov 2017 Newsletter -
That general view of some peaters about lipolysis that you quoted in your reply probably stems from a misinterpretation of what Ray said about it. The emphasis he places on inhibiting lipolysis is in the context of too much PUFA stored in the tissues, which becomes less and less necessary as you become “PUFA depleted”. After that, inhibiting lipolysis becomes more of a therapeutic tool to be used in appropriate contexts, such as in some pathologies.
He even mentions that in healthy people (especially children) stress hormones are only produced in the amount needed because free saturated fatty acids serve as negative feedback, not allowing them to rise beyond what is necessary.
In good health, especially in children, the stress hormones are produced only in the amount needed, because of negative feedback from the free saturated fatty acids, which inhibit the production of adrenalin and adrenal steroids, and eating protein and carbohydrate will quickly end the stress. But when the fat stores contain mainly PUFA, the free fatty acids in the serum will be mostly linoleic acid and arachidonic acid, and smaller amounts of other unsaturated fatty acids. These PUFA stimulate the stress hormones, ACTH, cortisol, adrenaline, glucagon, and prolactin, which increase lipolysis, producing more fatty acids in a vicious circle. In the relative absence of PUFA, the stress reaction is self limiting, but under the influence of PUFA, the stress response becomes self-amplifying.
This misinterpretation is probably one of the bases for the idea that moderately high insulin several times a day is beneficial (because it inhibits lipolysis and increases glucose oxidation). I don't particularly consider insulin to be a “stress hormone”, but high insulin several times a day and for long periods is obviously a bad sign; insulin plays an “enhancing” role and not the main role.
Keto diets, a very low fat and/or very low protein diet, exercise, ACV before meals, walking after meals, and other similar tools aimed at reducing insulin are only necessary if metabolic dysfunction is already present. Is it good to have these options available with the constant attacks on our health? Yes, but the more miraculous a therapeutic tool is, the more likely it is that your health isn't as good as you think.
