The Arrow #233

Hello everyone.

As most of you have probably discerned, I wasn’t a big fan of Joe Biden and his administration. But he—or whoever was pretending to be him—did do one thing that affected me personally. I’m still trying to figure out what I think about it. He made my birthday a national holiday. Yep, Juneteenth. The banks are closed; the stock market is closed; and, sadly, there is no Wall Street Journal today (it doesn’t print on the days the markets are closed).

Pretty much every other national holiday has been shifted around each year to be celebrated on a Monday, giving everyone a three day weekend. Of course, Thanksgiving and Easter have their own traditional days, but every other observed holiday has now been pushed to the long weekend format. The only exceptions are Christmas, New Years, and Juneteenth. All of these are celebrated on the days upon which they fall. So, I guess that’s something. Hereinafter my birthday will be right up there with Christmas as a sacrosanct day always celebrated on the calendar day on which it falls, which, to be fair, it always has been (at least at our house.)

Comments, Poll Responses, and Emails

Just a couple today.

Ideal Height and Weight Charts

In last week’s Arrow, I talked about the ideal height and weight charts published back in the 1950s and before. Here is an example.

I completely missed the boat when I was talking about my own weight loss on the ketogenic diet moving me from the large category on the chart to the medium one. I was corrected by a number of readers. Back in the day, small, medium, and large referred to frame sizes. People were identified as having differing frame sizes. If, for instance, you had a large frame size, i.e., big-boned as they said back then, and you were 5’10” and weighed 170 pounds, you would have been categorized as being of ideal weight. But, if you were deemed small-boned (small frame), and you weighed 170 pounds, you would fall in the overweight column.

I remember all that very well. Why it didn’t bubble up into my brain as I was writing, I don’t know. Especially since it’s says “Weight according to frame” right at the top of the chart.

Back in those days, overweight people were ofter heard to say I’m not really overweight; I’m just big boned.

Anyway, I apologize for not being more clear on this issue last week.

The Longevity Nutrient

A number of people have asked me if I was aware of a new book titled The Longevity Nutrient: The Unexpected Fat That Holds the Key to Healthy Aging by Stephanie Venn-Watson, DMV, MPH.

As I’ve mention a number of times over the years, I know how much effort it takes to write a book, so I don’t make a habit of reviewing books I don’t particularly like. Many reviewers love to trash books they hate, because their reviews can be quite caustic, funny, and memorable. I don’t fall into that category.

But since I’ve been asked by so many, here are my thoughts on the above book.

It’s not a bad book. It references a lot of studies and has a terrific bibliography, which is catnip for me. The book is written in a little too chatty and frivolous fashion for what I think befits a scientific book. I’ll be the first one to admit that I, too, can fall into the same trap in book writing, but usually I’m slapped down by the editor. In this case, the editor must have encouraged or at the least indulged the author.

All of which has nothing to do with the content of the book. It’s a stylistic issue, but it did bug me.

The author is a veterinarian who has worked for years with dolphins at the Naval station in San Diego

The US Navy has cared for a sustained population of about a hundred bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) for more than sixty years. They live in San Diego Bay, go out into the open ocean every day, and choose to come back to their bay-based homes every day. For a long time, the main job of Navy dolphins has been to do what they naturally do well—namely, use their echolocation superpowers to help recover underwater objects and find enemy swimmers. But that’s not all they do. Navy dolphins have also safely helped with humanitarian de-mining efforts off the shores of Croatia and have aided conservationists looking for endangered Vaquita porpoises in the Gulf of California off Mexico. While some of the dolphins’ formal military duties have been sunsetting over the past decade owing to advancing man-made sonar technologies, the Navy continues to diligently care for this precious population and support their open-ocean livelihood.

She noticed that over time dolphins tend to have the same problems humans do as they age. They develop increased insulin, cholesterol, and triglycerides with some developing the full metabolic syndrome. These dolphins always come back for feeding, which involves tossing them capelin, herring, mackerel, and squid — sea creatures common to the area.

Since fish contain a lot of omega-3 fat, the first thought of the author and her research group was that those fats were involved in the health issues.

To test the hypothesis that higher levels of omega-3 fatty acids protected dolphins against developing chronic conditions, we relied on two dolphin populations. First, we compared Navy dolphins living in San Diego Bay with wild dolphins living in Sarasota Bay, Florida. Although the lifespans of wild dolphins are, in general, shorter than those of Navy dolphins, the health of Sarasota Bay dolphins has been incredibly well documented for decades.

When matched for age, the health of the Sarasota Bay dolphins was significantly better than that of those in the San Diego Bay. But, as it turned out on analysis, the difference between the lab findings of the two dolphin groups was primarily in an odd-chained fatty acid called C-15.

The fish the Sarasota Bay dolphins ate contained a lot more C-15 than did the capelin and squid—staples of the Navy dolphin diet—which had no detectable odd-chain saturated fatty acids, including C17:0 and C15:0.

The author and team then began feeding the San Diego dolphins fish containing more C-15, and their health improved.

This finding launched a quest by the author to figure out exactly what C-15 fats do and why they are so important to health.

The middle part of the book—the part I enjoyed the most—was a long recitation of all the studies done on C-15, some by the author, but most by others, all of which showed great health benefits with increased intake of C-15.

Until I read this section, I had never seen a study on C-15, so I was pretty fired up. It truly is amazing the number of positive reactions this particular fat is involved in throughout the body.

Then I read the next couple of sections of the book, which kind of cooled me down.

The author finally gets around to the main sources of C-15 in the diets of humans. C-15 is found in large amounts in dairy products.

Based on all the research described in the middle part of the book, she tells us we need at least 20 µM of C-15 to do all the things it can do. But it’s difficult to get to that level given the standard American diet.

…for every 100 mg of pure C15:0 we eat, we raise our blood levels by about 10 µM. Since the minimum amount of C15:0 detected in people is around 10 µM (which is likely due to levels that our body can reliably produce), most people need to add about 100 mg of dietary C15:0 to get them to that 20 µM level.

She discusses how the dietary guidelines have warned people away from whole fat milk, cream, cheese, and other high-fat diary products. Even kids now are getting low-fat milk in schools and milk drinking overall has dropped precipitously.

While the average person in the United States drank one cup of cow’s milk a day during 1970, that daily intake had decreased by 12 percent by 1980 and by 22 percent by 1990. This included any cow’s milk, not just whole-fat milk.

The author published a table in the book showing the amount of C-15 in various diary products. It would be a copyright violation for me to reproduce it without permission, which I did not request. But I can tell you what dairy products provide the largest amounts of C-15.

First comes butter at 75 mg per tablespoon. That is followed by heavy cream at 53 gm per tablespoon. At the bottom of a fairly long list comes whole milk, low-fat milk, and then non-fat milk, which contains no C-15.

The part of the book that I found off putting was the next one. After spending many pages describing the wonderful benefits of C-15, she writes that C-15 is found in dairy along with C-17, which has it’s own virtues, but not as many by far as C-15. They are both odd-chain fatty acids. But theses two odd-chain fatty acids are accompanied by C-16 and C-18 fatty acids. You might know C-16, palmitic acid, the most common saturated fat in the body, and C-18, stearic acid, another common saturated fat.

She makes the case that if you drink enough milk or consume enough dairy products, you will end up also consuming a lot of C-16 and C-18 fats, which are saturated and cause all the problems allegedly (she doesn’t use that modifying word) driven by too much saturated fat intake.

Since I think the notion of dietary saturated fats’ being harmful is all bullshit, the author lost me right there.

She and her husband—a physician—have created their own product, which is C-15 in encapsulated form, so that people can increase their C-15 without having to take in any of those nasty saturated fats along with it. (Just give me the butter and heavy cream, please.)

There are many studies out there showing the health benefits of dairy products. After reading this book, I suspect many of them are a consequence of increased C-15. If you want to read about all the benefits C-15 provides, you should take a look at this book—the study section in particular. But don’t get put off dairy products out of fear of saturated fat.

If you want to hear more about this book, go to YouTube and search for the author. You’ll find a number of interviews. Here is a short one to give you a taste.

The Arrow is a reader-supported guide to nutrition, medicine, books, critical thinking & culture. Both free and paid subscriptions are available. If you would like to support my work, the best way is by taking out a paid subscription.

Wood That Is Stronger Than Steel

I came across an article about a wood product that is stronger than steel that reminded me of my first day in engineering school.

My first course was Strength of Materials. On the first day of class, the professor asked us all the following question: If you were designing a structure to hold a large, closed container of a volatile liquid—say, gasoline—would you build the structure out of wood or steel? We were asked to write our answers on a slip of paper and pass them forward without our names.

I thought about it for a bit. Steel seemed the obvious answer, because steel is vastly stronger than wood. I didn’t even have to go to engineering school to know that. But why would the prof even ask such a question if the answer were that obvious? Which led me to write “wood” on my slip and send it forward.

I can’t recall the exact number, but there were only a few “wood” responses, the rest went with steel.

The prof then told us wood was the correct answer and asked why. I was a clueless as anyone else, so my hand didn’t go up. In fact, no one knew.

The prof told us that wood was a better product because steel melts at temperature much lower than it takes to burn completely through wood. He said that the wood would hold up the structure—even burned wood—longer than steel would. Before the wood would burn through, the tank would fall to the ground if built with steel and the contents would then add to the fire.

Now comes a wood product even stronger than steel. Reading the article made me harken back to that first day in engineering school and recall how I was dazzled by the explanation of that first question. I must have asked it of people I knew 500 times since.

I have no financial interest in the wood product. It just took me back a few years, and I figured that many of you might find interesting the same question I got on my first day.

Is It the End of Drug Ads On TV?

It could be if Bernie Sanders and Angus King get their bill passed.

According to the Wall Street Journal, both senators

introduced a bill Thursday that would ban pharmaceutical manufacturers from using direct-to-consumer advertising, including social media, to promote their products.

The bill would prohibit any promotional communications targeting consumers, including through television, radio, print, digital platforms and social media. It will apply to all prescription drug advertisements.

“The American people don’t want to see misleading and deceptive prescription drug ads on television,” Sanders said in a statement. “They want us to take on the greed of the pharmaceutical industry and ban these bogus ads.”

It’s interesting that both Sanders and King voted against RFK for head of HHS, but now they’re floating a bill that is one of his highest priorities. Politics indeed makes strange bedfellows.

The pharmaceutical industry spends a fortune on advertising. For example (from the WSJ)

Prescription drug advertising makes up a major portion of the hundreds of billions of dollars spent on advertising in the U.S. each year. Among the largest spenders, Abbvie spent about $377 million to promote the anti-inflammatory drug Skyrizi with traditional TV ads last year in the U.S. and Novo Nordisk spent about $263 million promoting its weight-loss treatment Wegovy, according to TV ad-tracking firm iSpot.

Prescription drug brands accounted for 24.4% of ad minutes across evening news programs on ABC, CBS, CNN, Fox News, MSNBC and NBC this year through May, according to data from iSpot.

It boggles the mind that drug companies purchase a quarter of the ad time available across all network TV and major cable shows.

In my view, it is protection money. None of these stations can afford to lose 24 percent of their advertising revenue overnight, which is what would happen should one of these stations do an investigative piece on a drug company or even a drug. According to Tucker Carlson, when he was at FOX News, instructions came down from on high to never bad mouth the Covid mRNA vaccines. I’m sure the same rules were enacted at all the media outlets.

Just to show you why I think it’s a payoff, I want you to watch the ad below. I was watching a bit of the US Open golf tournament this weekend, and I happened to see a short 15 second ad about a drug I had never heard of. I tried to find the exact ad on YouTube, but was unsuccessful. But I did find another ad for the same drug that was much like the one I saw last weekend. But this ad is only 7 seconds long.

Over a background of surf or running water, the ad says in white lettering: “Explore a treatment option.” Then just the name of the drug Tremfya pops up. Finally, the words “Ask your doctor” appear under the word Tremfya.

The ad doesn’t even say what the drug does. (It’s an injectable drug for psoriasis.)

How many people do you think will see that ad and even have time to write the name of the drug down? Not many, I suspect. How many will remember the name of a drug they don’t even know what is for that they’ve seen for maybe four seconds and ask their doc on their next visit, Hey what’s Tremfya?

In my view, it’s simply a payoff. The ad has no possibility of generating revenue.

Since Sanders and King, though listed as independents, are pretty far left. I hope they can drag a lot of the left with them on this bill. And if Kennedy can get the Republicans to go along with it, they might actually get it through. All of my appendages are crossed.

Big Food Starts to Comply

In another great headline from the Wall Street Journal, one of the largest food companies has committed to removing all synthetic dyes from its products by 2027.

According to the WSJ, the food behemoth says it doesn’t use dyes in 90 percent of its products, but still does use them in “Crystal Light, Heinz relish, Kool-Aid, Jell-O and Jet-Puffed products.” The company said they “would remove, replace or reinvent colors.”

I know what “remove” means, but I’m not sure what “replace or reinvent colors” implies exactly. More dyes that aren’t on the forbidden list? Or creating new dyes that may be as bad as or worse than the others?

Time will tell, but for now, I’m happy that one giant company is all in on dye removal. I hope it starts a trend, for others to remove them and for all of them to remove all the B.S. in our foods, so that we in the know have more N.B.S. options!

Odds and Ends

Newsletter Recommendations

Video of the Week

MD's mother played classical guitar, and she grew up listening to recordings of such luminaries as Andrés Segovia and Laurindo Almeida...and Chet Atkins. Being a card carrying Beatles' fan since grade school, she loves this performance of selections from Chet Atkins' 28th album, Chet Atkins Picks on the Beatles. It's the Fab Four's music as you've maybe never heard it. Enjoy!

Time for the poll, so you can grade my performance this week.

How did I do on this week's Arrow?

Login or Subscribe to participate in polls.

That’s about it for this week. Keep in good cheer, and I’ll be back next Thursday.

Please help me out by clicking the Like button, assuming, of course, that you like it.

This newsletter is for informational and educational purposes only. It is not, nor is it intended to be, a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment and should never be relied upon for specific medical advice.

Thanks for reading all the way to the end. Really, thanks. If you got something out of it, please consider becoming a paid subscriber if you aren’t yet. I would really appreciate it.

Finally, don’t forget to take a look at what our kind sponsors have to offer. Dry Farm WinesHLTH CodePrecision Health Reports, and Jaquish Biomedical.

And don’t forget my newest affiliate sponsor Lumen. Highly recommended to determine whether you’re burning fat or burning carbs.

Reply

or to participate.