Walnuts fight fat's harmful effect on arteries
ANGUS HOWARTH
FINISHING a meal with a handful of walnuts can help stop fatty food damaging arteries, the latest research suggests.
A study found that olive oil, traditionally thought to be good for the heart and arteries, did not provide the same protection.
Dr Emilio Ros, director of the Lipid Clinic at the Hospital Clinico in Barcelona, Spain, recruited 24 non-smoking adults with normal body weights and blood pressure. Half had normal cholesterol levels, and half moderately high.
Volunteers were randomly assigned to one of two groups, and each given two high-fat meals, eaten one week apart.
The meals were identical, consisting of a sandwich made with salami and cheese on white bread, and a small serving of full-fat yoghurt. For one meal, Dr Ros's team of researchers added five teaspoons of olive oil. For the other, they added eight shelled walnuts.
Tests showed that both the oil and the walnuts helped to reduce the sudden onset of inflammation and oxidation in arteries that follows a meal high in saturated fat.
These harmful processes can lead to hardening of the arteries and heart disease.
However, unlike olive oil, adding walnuts also helped preserve the elasticity and flexibility of the arteries, regardless of cholesterol level.
Arteries that are elastic can expand when needed to increase blood flow.
"Each time we eat a high-fat meal, the fat molecules trigger an inflammatory reaction that, among other ill effects, reduces the elasticity of the arteries," said Dr Ros, whose research is reported in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology.
i keep hearing of "substances" that help remove the plaque from the walls of arteries, allowing for the healing of same.
anyone?
Tripled
Sun Mar 25, 2007 9:22 pm
Sponsor
madthumbs
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 Posts: 8183 Location: Fingerlakes - NY usa
You might be hearing of chelation therapy which is used for removing heavy metals.
I think concerning heart disease it may be a hoax. Chelation therapy can be dangerous and removes good minerals with the bad. There are natural foods we can eat that can remove heavy metals slowly like chlorella.
I just found something very interesting, and before creating a new topic I searched to see if a topic had already been started for it. I see that the OP touches on this ("Breathing Chlorine from water"), so I'll post this here. This post will broaden the concept to include drinking or absorption through pores, and provide further evidence that chlorine causes cholesterol.
1-line summary: If chlorine is the real cause for cholesterol, what about the "bad" fats that we are being taught about? Can both be true? Is one more likely than the other?
I was doing some research on H2O2's (hydrogen peroxide) reaction with chlorine in water. I was reading this page, which discusses the application of H2O2 in wells, when I came across this line:
Quote:
The chlorine causes fat to form the cholesterol deposits known as plaque that can lead to clogged arteries, heart attacks and strokes.
I had never heard of this before, so I began researching it to see if there are any other pages that say the same thing. (There are.) I will quote from one page:
Evidence and principles of science clearly show that drinking chlorinated water is the main cause of arterial plaques, which is the most serious cause of heart disease.
Chlorine attaches to arteries and looks like a foreign substance. White blood cells attack the chlorine. But since it is stuck to arteries, the white blood cells stick to the arteries. Then they do what they always do, which is remove excess calcium and fat from the blood. It accumulates to form plaques.
Supposedly eating the wrong foods creates heart disease. No way does biology get that contrasurvival by itself. Humans have been eating cholesterol and similar lipids for millions of years. And nature has had quite a bit of practice at creating hearts for half a billion years prior.
The primary cause of heart disease can be understood, but authorities are not describing it. Professional scientists would have their careers ruined for even thinking about it. Since I'm an independent scientist, I can describe the science of the subject.
A key point is that before plaques develop in arteries, white blood cells (leukocytes) stick to artery walls. The leukocytes then fill up with lipids and calcium.
Researchers don't say why leukocytes attach to arteries. A common theory is that the leukocytes attempt to heal damage, but malfunction occurs. Nature doesn't malfunction that way.
The nature of chlorine is extremely informative. Chlorine, iodine, bromine and fluorine are called halides, because they are similar. Organic halides (halides attached to carbon) are never found in nature. The reason appears to be their tendency to react with and alter other biological molecules.
Halides react by substitution. This means they replace something else on a larger molecule, and they stay attached to the molecule afterwards. This is what chlorine does while killing germs in water. It could only be expected to do the same thing inside a person's body after drinking chlorinated water. It should attach to artery walls which it comes into contact with.
Governmental laws require residual effects with chlorine, meaning it still kills bacteria when water comes out the faucet. When it is drank, it is going to react with molecules in the body. Among the first to be contacted are walls of the arteries. This means the artery walls should theoretically become chlorinated as a result of drinking chlorinated water. Much evidence shows that the results follow the theory.
Chlorine attached to artery walls would create the appearance of a foreign substance. Halides (like chlorine) are extremely antigenic. So they would cause the leukocytes to attack the arteries. Then the leukocytes would do what they normally do, which is absorb free lipids and calcium from the blood.
Calcium and lipids in the blood are supposed to be combined with carrier molecules; and if not, they are removed from the blood by white blood cells. Probably, a low percent of all calcium and lipids which enter the blood are not properly attached to carriers.
So the leukocytes which are attached to arteries fill up with those calcium and lipid molecules which are not properly attached to carriers. The result is plaque formation.
Reduced consumption of lipids and calcium diminishes the problem, because there is then less in the blood to be absorbed into the plaques. But it is a losing battle as long as leukocytes are attached to artery walls.
Evidence for this mechanism is in the fact that Europeans have less of a problem with heart disease than Americans. They ozonize their water instead of chlorinate it. Ozone does not create those problems.
The list of pages that talk about this go on and on, and I won't bore you by quoting them all here. I recommend that you research this yourselves to come up with your own conclusion.
Knowing this, is the story of "good" and "bad" fats in food really true? Is the good/bad fats story just a method to remove liability from those who are responsible for all the damage that chlorine has caused? Imagine the lawsuits that would suddenly be possible, if it became widely known that chlorinating our water is causing all the heart disease. We can't sue nature, but we can sue people. There are specific people that are responsible for ordering the water supplies chlorinated...these are the people that would have an interest in making sure we don't find out about their liability.
Sun Jun 15, 2008 10:31 am
madthumbs
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 Posts: 8183 Location: Fingerlakes - NY usa
Wrote about this a while back and failed to update this thread.
