RR 3, Box 384
Mifflintown, PA 17059


Volume 17, Number 4

Guy R. Schenker, D.C.
April, 2006

Dear Doctor,


     The capacity for quantitative thinking is essential if we are going to use objective evidence to guide us in clinical practice (or any aspect of living, for that matter). In the February issue of this Letter, we looked at some numbers regarding dietary fat. We took a quantitative look at the NUTRI-SPEC Fundamental Diet, showing how simply and naturally saturated fat should make up the majority of our food intake. That analysis also demonstrated that the NUTRI-SPEC Fundamental Diet is not a high protein diet. We then looked a little closer at dietary fat, breaking it down into its percentages of saturated, monounsaturated, omega 6, and omega 3 fatty acids. We compared the fatty acid make-up of roast beef to human fat; we then compared common roast beef to grass fed beef in terms of fatty acid make-up.

     In last month’s Letter we ran the numbers on the Eskimo diet, a bit of health food industry mythology purported to show the benefits of a high omega 3 fatty acid diet. A quantitative look, plus an ounce of rationality, showed clearly that the Eskimos were free of degenerative diseases in spite of, not because of, their damaging omega 3 intake, and, that that intake was quite a bit lower than the health food charlatans would have us believe.

     During our two months of running numbers, I occasionally took delight from poking my elbow into the ribs of the many readers of this Letter who, as products of socialized schooling systems, have an aversion to quantitative thinking. Those of you crippled by politically correct math curricula could not grasp the comparison of PUFA content between grain fed and grass fed roast beef. How could I say on one page that grain fed beef is 6% PUFA and grass fed is 10% PUFA, yet on the next page say that grass fed beef is 52% lower in PUFAs than grain fed beef? The answer should be obvious, but since it is not, here is your math lesson for today:

     6% of John’s writing instruments are pencils (while 94% are pens). 10% of Mary’s writing instruments are pencils (90% are pens). Who has more pencils, John or Mary? “Obviously,” you exclaim, “Mary has more than John --- 10% vs only 6%!” No! No! No! No! No! Your Addison-Wesley math text has led you astray. You simply do not have the quantitative information necessary to reach a conclusion here. Believing that Mary has more pencils than John, is the same as accepting statistics offered by Socialist politicians designed to mold public opinion. Addison-Wesley has clearly achieved its social purpose --- giving us two generations of illogical sheep. Think!!! Suppose John has 100 writing instruments and Mary has only 10. You see that John has 6 pencils and Mary only has 1, even though Mary’s pencils make up a higher percentage than do John’s. Get it? The point I did not make clearly enough to help you understand my PUFA example was that grass fed beef has a lower total fat content than does grain fed beef --- so --- it has lower PUFA content than grain fed beef, even though its PUFA percentage is higher.


     You see, there is a contradiction in my numbers, and an inaccuracy that renders my analysis totally invalid. Careless, unforgivably careless, sloppy calculations --- I apologize. My mistake? I did my calculations on grain fed beef based on a percentage of calories from each type of fatty acid. My numbers are correct:

  • 3 ounces of grain fed roast beef = 390 calories

  • 324 of these calories come from fat ...

  • 152 calories from saturated fat

  • 158 calories form monounsaturated fat

  • 13 calories from omega 6 fatty acids

  • 1 calorie from omega 3 fatty acids

     But --- I did my calculations on grass fed beef without taking into account that it has less over all fat. It thus requires more than a 3 ounce serving to yield 390 calories. So, for 390 calories of grass fed beef, the corrected numbers are:

  • 263 calories from fat

  • 132 calories from saturated fat

  • 105 calories from monounsaturated fat

  • 18 calories from omega 6 fatty acids

  • 8 calories from omega 3 fatty acids

     My statement that grass fed beef is lower in PUFAs than grain fed beef is wrong. You can see it is higher (18 + 8 = 26 vs 13 + 1 = 14) when we compare equal calorie servings. [Grass fed is lower than grain fed in PUFAs if we compare servings of equal weight, but that was not the purpose of this analysis.]

     Again, I apologize for my inexcusably sloppy math. However, the point of my original analysis is substantiated by these corrected numbers. Grass fed beef is nothing special. The misguided proponents of omega 3 fatty acids can claim that grass fed beef has a statistically significant higher percentage of omega 3’s, but the omega 3 content, at less than 2% of the calories, is clinically insignificant. Actually, these corrected numbers can be interpreted to show that grass fed beef is slightly less healthful than grain fed beef, since it has a higher content of omega 6 fatty acids as well as omega 3 fatty acids. Conclusion? --- grain fed vs grass fed is a non-issue. The only health-significant issue regarding fat intake is the essentiality of eliminating as much as possible from our diets the concentrated sources of omega 6 and omega 3 PUFAs.

     Be aware that on behalf of your patients you are fighting a David vs Goliath battle here. The fish oil establishment has become as politically and financially well-connected as the seed oil establishment before it. The amount of propaganda generated by the PUFA oil establishment is overwhelming in its effect on the uneducated, non-thinking, gullible public. Just as from the 1950’s through the 1990’s people unquestioningly accepted that seed oils were the key to health and long life, now the same people are just as easily victimized by the later day fish oil mythology.

     Just how well-connected is the omega 3 establishment? Ray Peat’s Newsletter reprinted this item from the Houston Business Journal:

“Houston-Based Omega Protein Inc.’s bottom line may get a little fatter. The publicly traded company, which produces an omega-3 fatty acid product called OmegaPure, has signed an agreement to provide its fish oil in school lunches in 38 school districts in South Texas beginning this month.

“The 500-person company which has ties to former President George Bush’s Zapata Corporation will distribute the product through an agreement with Mercedes-based H & H Foods.

“Although the dollar amount of the contract between Omega Protein and H & H Foods hinges on future sales, the company is poised to cash in as school administrators and parents re-focus their attention on the nutritional content of student diets.

“The Omega Protein President and CEO says “The company’s recent investment of 16.5 million dollars for a fish oil refinery in Reedville, Virginia, scheduled for completion in May, and an increased awareness of the benefits of omega 3 in human food, positions Omega to capitalize on predicted demand.”

     Just as Archer-Daniels-Midland and the rest of the seed oil establishment moved in and captured the banner of the health food industry regarding polyunsaturated oils during the 1960’s, some heavy hitters are ready to cash in big on what originally began as a (misguided) grass roots health food movement in support of omega 3 oils. How can we possibly resist the power of the Bush family and their cronies? --- One patient at a time.

     Your last Letter’s reference to The Eskimo Diet highlights both the benefits and the risks of studying isolated populations to analyze the reasons for their health, or their lack of it. The problem is it is so easy to produce non-sequiturs from such an analysis. As pointed out in last month’s Letter, it is very difficult to establish cause and effect relationships in the biological sciences. There is no denying that the Eskimos had a low incidence of chronic degenerative diseases. To conclude that their freedom from disease resulted from the ingestion of small quantities of lipid peroxidative, immuno-suppressive, hepato-toxic, catabolic polyunsaturated fatty acids is, we showed, a non-sequitur.

     Weston Price’s book, “Nutrition and Physical Degeneration”, is by far the most valuable nutrition book ever written. Price observed many populations every bit as free of disease as the Eskimos, who consumed diets that were really quite diverse. However, these diets all shared the following in common:

  • The majority of calories were derived from animal-source foods. (Generally eaten three times daily)

  • The animal foods were not over-cooked

  • There was little or no sugar in the diet

  • There was little or no polyunsaturated fat in the diet

     That’s it --- that’s all there is to maximizing health and longevity. In other words, all the cultures who historically lived long and lived well ate the NUTRI-SPEC Fundamental Diet.

     Another way to learn much about nutrition from studying isolated populations is to look at the work done in the field of animal husbandry. Agri-Business is extremely successful at employing both nutrition and anti-nutrition to serve its purposes. If Agri-Business wants to produce a chicken that becomes disgustingly obese in a very short period of time on very little feed, then that is exactly what it produces. If Agri-Business wants to produce a cat food that protects cats from the heart disease that is pandemic among the species, then that is exactly what it produces.

     It is interesting to look at how farmers have supplemented livestock diets with various fats, and how their experience confirms our stance in favor of saturated fat and against polyunsaturates. Coconut oil is a vegetable source fat that consists predominately of saturated fatty acids. Particularly, coconut oil is unusually rich in short and medium chain fatty acids. Before the seed oil propaganda machine began to roll in the 1950’s, coconut oil was used by the American food industry in crackers, baked goods, and virtually all packaged and canned foods. In the 1940’s, farmers attempted to use cheap coconut oil for fattening their animals. It did not work. Since coconut oil is so high in short and medium chain fatty acids that can be metabolized without use of the carnitine transport system, it promotes very efficient metabolism. The farmers found that instead of fattening their animals, the coconut oil made them lean, active, and hungry.

     Agri-Business abandoned coconut oil in favor of anti-thyroid drugs, which achieved their purpose --- making livestock fat while eating less food --- but the drugs were found to be carcinogenic. So, by the late 1940’s it was found that the same anti-thyroid effect, causing animals to get fat without eating much food, could be achieved by using soy beans and corn as feed. This was the birth of the modern agricultural industry --- and the death of the American people.

     Other experiments in the field of animal husbandry involved feeding diets containing different proportions of saturated coconut oil and unsaturated vegetable oil. Throughout a lifetime of eating these diets, animals’ obesity increased directly in proportion to the ratio of unsaturated oil to saturated oil in their diet, and was not related to the total amount of fat they consumed. At the extremes of coconut oil vs PUFA oil consumed, it was found that animals eating just a little unsaturated oil were fat, while animals eating a lot of coconut oil were lean.

     George Crile, author of “A Bi-Polar Theory of Living Processes”, one of the most important books ever written, found that the metabolic rate of people in Yucatan, where coconut is a staple food, average 25% higher than that of Americans. Normal adaptation to a hot climate such as in Yucatan is to lower metabolic rate, so the saturated fatty acids of coconut oil more than offset the expected effect of the high temperature environment. Not only were the people lean, women had none of the symptoms commonly associated with menopause.

     So, we are back to the formula proposed by Hartroft and Porta in their 1968 edition of “Present Knowledge in Nutrition,” when they proposed that health and longevity are directly proportional to the dietary ratio of saturated fat compared to polyunsaturates. Monounsaturates (meat, poultry, fish, eggs, olive oil) are good; saturated fats (meat, poultry, fish, eggs, cheese, and coconut oil) are excellent; short and medium chain saturated fats (eggs, cheese, and coconut oil) are extraordinary. On the other hand, polyunsaturates (nuts, seeds, fish oil) are pathological --- causing accelerated tissue aging, oxidative free radical damage, and inhibition of mitochondrial respiration --- leading to cardio-vascular disease, auto-immune diseases, cancer, arthritis, migraines, allergies, diabetes, dementia, etc., etc., etc. -- We will complete our case against PUFAs next month by exploring their immuno-suppressive effects. Meanwhile --- here is a bonus anti-PUFA fact...

     You have learned how both omega 3 and omega 6 fatty acids, because they cause oxidative free radical damage while inhibiting normal oxidative metabolism, are devastating to the cardiovascular system. What we did not mention yet is that these PUFAs are damaging to red blood cells themselves. When dietary PUFAs are retained in the cell membrane of RBCs, they lower the rigidity of those cell membranes by destroying their protein structure. The presence of these unsaturated fatty acids, plus the effects of their peroxidation products, so weakens the cellular structure that RBCs are destroyed prematurely.

  • Gorbunov, Effect of Structural Modification of Membrane Proteins on Lipid-Protein Interactions in the Human Erythrocyte Membrane, Bull Exp. Biol & Med 116(11), 1364-67, 1993.

     I trust that by now you are convinced of the evils of fish oil, flax oil, soy oil, canola oil, corn oil, safflower oil, sesame oil, peanut oil... So --- have you incorporated your knowledge into your own life and into your practice? --- Your NUTRI-SPEC Fundamental Diet must be primary; no supplementation will be maximally effective without it.


Guy Schenker, D.C.