I needed to disable self sign-ups because I’ve been getting too many spam-type accounts. Thanks.
Documenting my experience
I think the discussion is good, too.
Because of this talk, I'm realizing my point of view is slightly different. (and not necessarily right, of course)
First, let me start off by saying I definitely overdid VA in a HUGE way for years!!!
I don't really think my liver is suffering, and I would guess it was NOT full, but that my body decided to store VA other places anyways. I might wonder if somehow my nightly drink sends VA out of the liver into the tissues, actually sparing the liver? I get sick if I drink more than one, perhaps sparing me some of the bad effects on the liver that alcohol could cause. (some studies have found that moderate use of alcohol (especially wine) can be related to some helpful effects.)
Although my liver seems ok, my urine plumbing was suffering. I would have probably arrived, as Grant did, at kidney failure. It appears to me that I was low in B12-- because the urine plumbing is responding to that.
Unlike people who seem to be able to make fat in which to store VA, I don't seem to do that. Which probably leads me to inflammation more quickly because more VA is stored in less fat.
I used to have signs of blatant poisoning which have stopped. (chronic vomiting and headaches).
I haven't changed my diet a great deal. I just dropped the VA. I still eat about the same macros, I just avoid colorful veggies and the worst of the VA animal foods. I've never been ultra-low VA. I eat a wider range of foods than most here.
I never had any miraculous cure, although I've been through some weird things such as the bug crawling thing at the beginning. I feel I'm making slow progress.
To me, what I seem to be going through is just a LONG SLOW DETOX from all over the body. Not a setback scenario. When I think about just how sticky carotenes and VA are, it doesn't surprise me. These things are as durable!
When I look at Grant's ideas vs Michelle's, I almost wonder if Michelle's idea is more about just leaving the VA where it is. Not upsetting the bee's nest.
Hi @michele,
Please see my response inline below:
- The "detox setback" refers to a period of time after the adoption of a low VA (and higher protein) diet in which a person experiences negative side effects ("detox" symptoms)
Yes, but we don’t know at this time if higher protein consumption is a key factor or not; I’m just proposing that as a theory.
- Historically low-protein consumers are more likely to store VA in their liver, as the lack of protein leads to a lack of RBP release
Yes, I think so.
- RBP release is the process in which the body safely releases the VA from the liver, into the bloodstream, and ultimately out of the body (via urine and/or bowels)
Well, the general theory in MS medical science is that the RBPs are carriers and thus delivery proteins used to supply cells outside of the liver with vit A. I don’t buy that theory at all. Additionally, it looks like the half-life of the RBPs might be much longer than previously thought. But, yes, ultimately the RBPs will get disposed of via urine and/or bowels.
- When low-protein consumers switch to a high-protein diet, RBPs are released from the liver as the body now has the raw material (protein) to create these RBPs and therefore release VA (detoxify). The body did not have these proteins before and therefore could not release any storage from the liver.
Yes, but I don’t think it is a binary: off / on type thing. Rather, the amount of protein available is going to change the rate of RBP production. Zinc availability is going to be an important factor too.
- This increase in RBPs ultimately winds up causing the "detox setbacks" as there is more VA floating around the body than the body is able to eliminate via urine/bowels and therefore this causes temporary inflammation/agitation of other tissues ("detox" symptoms)
Yes, it appears to be so. It’s not so much that the body can’t eliminate it fast enough, rather the retinol carried within the RBPs is now getting into the cells, especially the so into the endothelial and epithelial cells. So, yes, the delivery / availability rate of retinol has increased thus causing more cell damage aka the “detox setback”.
- Rice (glucose) is exacerbating this issue, as it is pulling even more VA/RBPs out of the liver
Once again, that is just a theory. If increases in insulin do indeed induce more retinol to be released by the liver? It actually kind of makes sense that it could. Because insulin is going to increase the glucose uptake by the liver cells, and that could therefore displace some of the stored retinyl esters and other lipids such as the LDLs.
Let me know if this is more or less correct.
Yes.
I definitely have questions.
I do have one issue with this line of thinking right off the bat, but perhaps I'm missing something. My understanding from your work is that VA toxicity becomes an issue when the liver reaches storage capacity of VA and spills over into tissue throughout the body, causing inflammation, disease, etc.
Yes. But, it’s not always the case where the liver has reached max storage capacity. There are other events that can trigger a significant release of stored vA; such as viral infections, some pharma products, periods of prolonged mental stress, vigorous exercise, etc.
Therefore, anyone with an issue caused by VA has a liver which is totally full, correct?
No, not always, as described above. Also, the liver does not capture 100% of the vA consumed from foods. I think it’s only about ~ 80%, and other tissues capture the remainder.
Therefore, the history of protein consumption would be irrelevant and have no effect on the detox process. Both meat-eaters and vegans alike would be at the same starting point - a liver which cannot store any additional VA.
I don’t think so. There are just too many variables to make a blanket claim about it.
I do agree that a low-protein diet would have had an effect on the rate in which this disease threshold was reached (i.e. low-protein eaters would have hit their liver storage limit more quickly due to lack of protein and therefore slower/nonexistent RBP release), but it should not effect the detox process once more protein is introduced. In addition, your diet included rice, which should have increased the release of VA and increased the likelihood of detox symptoms (unlike carnivore dieters, as you propose).
Yes, maybe my high rice consumption was a mistake. Although I didn’t encounter a major detox cycle, I sure had my share of ups & downs. So, I may have been better off if I consumed less rice. But, I don’t know what I should / could have replaced it with either. Please understand that I’m not advocating for an all carnivore diet. Of course, just completely preventing the liver from releasing any of its stored vA is not ideal either.
I might even argue that those with a historically low-protein diet should see less detox symptoms - they reached the disease threshold without the protein helping them, but meat eaters reached the disease threshold WITH the protein helping them. So clearly the meat-eaters were less efficient in ultimately eliminating the VA.
Yes, I understand what you are saying. There are other variables though. The pro-formed VA (plant sourced) is generally not absorbed as readily as are the pre-formed (animal sourced). Lots of other factors are at play here too. Also, not everyone taking on this diet is doing it to resolve health issues. Some people are just trying to improve their sports performance etc.
Also, I'd just like to say that I appreciate you being open to discussing with someone with a very opposing viewpoint. As I mentioned in a previous post, I am not posting here to be a troublemaker or to piss anyone off.
It’s not taken that way at all. I welcome the discussion, and the possibility that we might get to a better understanding of why only some people encounter the detox setback.
If my experience happens to be helpful, even if negative to me (i.e. I am wrong), I still consider it a win. Not only did I lose my health due to the trust I put in the very miseducated, narcissitic allopathic community, but I also lost my father very tragically due to improper prescribing of medication by a doctor. You could say that I just have a real passion for finding out what is actually true when it comes to health. I am by no means a scientist, but I can share what my experience has been in hopes of putting some more puzzle pieces together.
Agreed, the more people we have honestly discussing this the faster we’ll get to the truth about it. Thanks so much.
@ggenereux2014 Is the role of the RBPs not also to safely shuttle Vitamin A stored in the peripheral tissues back to the liver? I thought we wanted more RBPs in order to get the Vitamin A out of the tissues and back into the liver, and that the liver then eliminates glucuronidated Vitamin A to the intestines (via bile) or kidneys without the need for RBPs at that point?
In other words, I thought the RBPs were essentially transporters between the liver and the tissues but did not play a direct role in eliminating Vitamin A from the body once it was in the liver?
I shared my thoughts on the what I think is the real role of the RBPs in this blog post.
https://ggenereux.blog/2019/08/05/the-retinol-binding-proteins-as-antibodies/
RE: transporters between the liver and the tissues but did not play a direct role in eliminating Vitamin A from the body once it was in the liver
I don't think the the RBPs are transporters at all, and they are probably not really functionally used to eliminated vA either. But, I think they will eventually, like in maybe 5-7 years, breakdown and get expelled.
Thanks Grant. I understand this is just a theory, and you might not have all the pieces figured out yet. I just wanted to make sure I was following your logic.
One last question before I respond... do you believe that VA is a poison to all species?
Just a quick note on your post. I disagree strongly with any healing diet that includes alcohol, let alone one that suggests that it encourages detoxification of any kind or somehow helps our body to do something more efficiently. Alcohol is a cellular poison. Perhaps an extreme example, but it's along the same lines as chemo. Sure, kill the cancer cells...along with the healthy ones!
I mean this in the kindest way possible, but your belief about alcohol (regardless of a "scientific" study to back it up) is simply the epitome of "people like to hear good things about their bad habits".
Ok let me clarify... poison to all mammals? All vertebrates (which would also include birds, fish, amphibians and reptiles)?
I promise I'm going somewhere with this.
Hi Michele,
Sorry, I have no idea about how widely the toxicity applies to other mammals. From the research from Kare Rodahl, and others we know it applies to: rats, mice, dogs, chickens. pigs, guinea pigs, rabbits, and birds. I wonder if it might mostly apply to only animals that have a liver?
No worries, I understand it's not something you'd think too much about. Here's where I'm going with this. I'll get into more with regards to the problems I see with the details of your theory, but again, I like to try to keep things simple and zoom out from time to time to do a sanity check. We can hypothesize and make assumptions all we want for and against RBPs being transport vehicles and cherry pick scientific studies to support both sides, but we'll never know for sure, unfortunately.
I think we can agree that most (if not all?) fruit contains some VA, and often significant amounts of it. Why do trees produce fruit? Well, all species want to survive, which requires procreation. Trees can't mate with one another, so they have another technique. They spend an enormous amount of time and energy creating a package of sugar around a seed (aka fruit) with a taste that is appealing to other species. The seed is the key to their survival. Since trees can't move, they need the seed to be moved for them. Let's assume a time before farming (but the logic is ultimately the same). Humans, birds, monkeys, bats and other animals pick and eat the fruit to eat and stay alive. The animal may or may not eat the fruit directly under the tree (a seed falling directly below an existing tree would be useless as it would be unable to grow without sunlight from the mother tree's shade and would also need to compete with the mother tree's root system). In the instances when the animal gathers the fruit and moves some distance away from the tree to consume it, the seed is then discarded. Or, if ingested, it passes through the animal's digestive system intact and is excreted in a perfect container of what is essentially fertilizer (feces). This is how trees make more trees. The animals essentially plant the seeds for the tree. I have a hard time coming up with an alternate explanation.
So, the trees are dependent upon the animals who eat fruit and the animals are dependent on the tree. It's a beautiful relationship (I'm constantly amazed by nature). I can't come up with a good reason as to why the tree would put poison into that fruit, because it would ultimately mean the end of trees - either when the animals figured out that VA is poison and stopped consuming the fruit or when the animals eventually wound up so sick from the VA that they could no longer procreate and therefore survive. It would essentially be tree suicide. I refuse to believe nature is just that stupid.
Obviously, this doesn't in any way prove that humans should be eating mostly fruit, as there are plenty of other species that can keep trees alive. But it is something to consider with regards to the hypothesis that VA is a poison.