4 ms·

Insulin is not required for fat storage. Insulin spikes do not create energy out of nowhere and don't suddenly make the same number of input calories multiply.

• balnaphone 6y ago
  The linked-to discussion of insulin has a major error logical error. The title is "Insulin: An Undeserved Bad Reputation", but then the body of the article says for example "Carbs are not alone in being responsible for insulin secretion. Protein can cause just as much, if not more, insulin secretion as carbs". This is a straw man, because the point that is trying to be refused is that "insulin is bad", not "carbs are bad". Insulin, being necessary for healthy human life, is certainly not "bad". However, a shortage (e.g. Type 1 diabetes) or excess (e.g. Type 2 diabetes) is certainly a problem. Given the current epidemic of Type 2 diabetes, metabolic syndrome, and NAFLD, triggering excess insulin production is certainly something to be wary of. Also of concern is impinging on the glucagon cycle, and in the linked-to post there is no mention of the important function of glucagon, which is typically considered as having effects opposite to insulin. Maintaining the insulin/glucagon cycle is important in maintenance of a healthy metabolism. The article makes a point about how "Insulin is not needed for fat storage", but omits the fact that in reality, practically all fat storage is mediated by insulin and its effects on glucose. Insulin mediates glucose transport and promotes absorption of blood glucose into the liver, fat and muscle cells. Once the liver has filled its compliment of glycogen, it will indeed produce fat locally. Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease (NAFLD) currently afflicts about 25% of the entire human population, and the linked-to author would have the reader believe that excess insulin production isn't an issue? Very strange. All in all, this article paints a false picture of human metabolism. People eating a typical Western diet should be concerned or at least aware of the facts of that process, and be wary of having an excess or deficit of insulin; and should know that the excess case is the more common condition. A reasonable scientifically-accurate depiction of the process can be found, for example, in Jason Fung's books, "The Diabetes Code" and "The Obesity Code".
  • ryeguy 6y ago
    > This is a straw man, because the point that is trying to be refused is that "insulin is bad", not "carbs are bad". I don't see how this is a strawman. Click through to the source article, that bullet point in particular is refuting the common belief that carbs alone are what spike insulin. Most insulin-centric discussion on fitness forums (which is where this was posted) tends to mention insulin spikes in the context of high-GI carbs. > Also of concern is impinging on the glucagon cycle, and in the linked-to post there is no mention of the important function of glucagon, which is typically considered as having effects opposite to insulin. Read the linked "part 1". It specifically mentions that newer research shows that glucagon does not counteract insulin as previously thought, and links some studies. > The article makes a point about how "Insulin is not needed for fat storage", but omits the fact that in reality, practically all fat storage is mediated by insulin and its effects on glucose. That isn't really relevant to the core point, which is debunking the idea that insulin is what makes us fat. I just want to restate the fact that the above reddit post is a summary of articles, which themselves are a summary of studies. It is targeted at fitness people who are discussing insulin only in the context of weight loss. There is of course an oversimplification here due to omitting details the target audience might not need as well as being 2 steps removed from the source material.
    • balnaphone 6y ago
      The linked-to "Part 1" includes the "myth" that his discussion is referring to, and so is much less misleading. However, personally, I'm not aware of anyone interested in this kind of thing who holds those myths to be true; it's very common knowledge that if you ingest any calories, or taste something sweet, etc, it will trigger the release of insulin. (However, I'm confident that you and the Part 1 author know your target audience, and these myths perhaps make perfect sense to address to them). Likewise for his comments on glucagon, it does not "cancel" the effects of insulin, it rather has the opposite effect at the same time. Also, in a natural system (i.e. without intervention), secretion of insulin typically suppresses secretion of glucagon, with some rare exceptions. He's stating a supposed myth and then taking it down with another one. The two papers cited for his interpretation of the role of glucagon are quite old, from 2001. There have been dozens of studies since then, confirming the role of glucagon in lipid metabolism, from many different perspectives. Here is one published last year https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31068828/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31068828/ "Collectively, emerging data support an essential role of glucagon for lipid metabolism." There are dozens of others -- you can get a start on this reading by seeing who has cited the two papers he referred to. I didn't understand that the main point was "debunking the idea that insulin is what makes us fat", since I don't know anyone who believes that. Chronic poor nutrition can make you fat, sure, and rising basal insulin levels tend to occur as a result of that, but saying "insulin is what makes us fat" sounds a lot like "yellow fingertips cause lung cancer". Nobody I know believes that is true. I have to keep up on these things for my work, in drug development. Regarding "being 2 steps removed", yes, it seems like some "broken telephone" is going on. Be well!
• gridlockd 6y ago
  You are missing the point. Carbs and fat are not metabolized the same, that is my point. > Insulin is not required for fat storage. Insulin provokes fat storage, regardless of any other pathways that may exist. Spiking your insulin with refined carbs is going to provoke fat storage more than the equivalent caloric amount of fat. > Insulin spikes do not create energy out of nowhere and don't suddenly make the same number of input calories multiply. Unfortunately, this "law of thermodynamics" view of things is too simple. > Also, insulin spikes are nearly unpredictable anyway. Carbs aren't necessarily the trigger, protein and fat can be too. Fat has minimal impact on insulin levels. Refined carbohydrates can raise blood sugar very high, requiring a double dose of insulin to get back to baseline. Meals high in protein or more complex carbs will be somewhere in the middle. > I summarized some articles that dispel insulin voodoo here If there's anything that's being dispelled there, it's not something that I actually said. Seems like this is a pet peeve of yours and you're seeing someone else in me.