• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

Have You Watched Ted Naiman's New Presentation, "too Much Protein Is Better Than Too Little" Yet?

zand, one way to begin evaluating what happened to you is to look at all your lab work in the five to ten years prior to your loss of kidney function. That may or may not provide insight, but it might be worth looking at. A friend of mine is going through this right now so I've spent a lot of time learning about kidney disease. In her case, the damage was not due to protein intake, it was due to loosely controlled type 2 diabetes with medication and insulin and intake of carbohydrate in the form of processed foods over a very long period of time. Nothing makes me sadder than seeing loss of function due to diabetes. Kidney disease, unfortunately, is not reversible.

Another thing to look at in your medical records is a history of hypertension.
 
Last edited:
I hadn't had much lab work done at that point. My kidney function approx. 5 years before that was fine. I now know I had a fatty liver back then, but wasn't told of this until much later on. That's all I have to go on.

I wasn't diagnosed T2 until about 5 years after that. I was trying to low carb simply to lose weight. I had a lot of processed foods until about 3 years prior to the high BP incident, but had been eating fairly healthily for the 3 years before it. My BP was rising steadily with my weight, that was why I was trying to lose weight. I lost about 7 pounds in the 6 weeks prior to the high BP incident due to reduced carbs, so wasn't expecting my BP to have risen at all. I went to my GP with severe pains in my neck (which I thought were due to an old whiplash injury flaring up yet again.) The GP said my neck hurt because both veins were due to burst/cause a stroke due to extremely high BP.

My kidney function since reducing protein has always been >90% which is why I think the protein caused the kidney problem and the high BP.

I am not sure that what you say about kidney disease being irreversible is always entirely true. My friend (not diabetic) had a kidney function of 32% and was seeing a consultant every 3 months, who said they couldn't do anything about it, but would monitor it in case she got a point where she needed dialysis. I suggested that my friend go to see my naturopath for dietary advice. Now 2 years later her kidney function has improved to 50% and the consultant only wants to see her annually.
 
Only just noticed this post. I was thinking of starting my own thread asking for help because I feel I need to lower carb intake , but am that not keen on meat, although I am not a vegetarian. You may have just saved me the bother.
 
zand, thank you for your reply. I'm at work now, will try to briefly respond on my lunch break. This is a very important topic. And there's so much misinformation out there about kidney disease. My friend is working with a naturopath and a kidney specialist. It's a good discussion to have. Another thing to look at is medication history. Ibuprofen is bad for kidneys. Will try to find a link tonight.
 
Last edited:
Okay, still looking for links on risk to kidneys when taking ibuprofen (and other NSAIDS). This quote should get everyone's attention:

"According to the National Kidney Foundation, as many as 3 percent to 5 percent of new cases of chronic kidney failure each year may be caused by the overuse of these painkillers. Once kidney disease occurs, continued use of the problem drug makes it worse."

Here's two links...

https://www.kidney.org/news/kidneyCare/winter10/MedicinesForPain

https://www.peoplespharmacy.com/2017/05/22/can-you-wreck-your-kidneys-with-nsaid-pain-relievers/

And after reading this, I have lost further respect for Harvard. This article reads like an advertisement for the pharmaceutical industry, and it angers me because I know two people now who have been harmed by OTC medications: one had to have a liver transplant after taking too much Tylenol while alone and battling a fever with the flu in her 30's; the other worsened her chronic kidney disease after her doctor would no longer prescribe pain medications and had her take ibuprofen instead in her 60's...

https://www.health.harvard.edu/pain/12-things-you-should-know-about-pain-relievers
 
Last edited:
Without knowing how much protein he's talking about this is meaningless. You could make the same argument with 10g a protain a day compared to 70g.
 
I don't know why everything has to be so complicated. Eat protein to satiety, then add whatever veg you like, plus fat if the protein isn't fatty enough for your taste. Why analyse everything to the nth degree?
 
Indy51 said:
I don't know why everything has to be so complicated. Eat protein to satiety, then add whatever veg you like, plus fat if the protein isn't fatty enough for your taste. Why analyse everything to the nth degree?
Click to expand...
no one is making anything complicated, I've no idea why you've posted this
 
ghost_whistler said:
Without knowing how much protein he's talking about this is meaningless. You could make the same argument with 10g a protein a day compared to 70g.
Click to expand...

@ghost_whistler, I thought your question had been answered in a previous post. He's saying 120 g protein a day, 30 g more or 30 g less given body size and level of physical activity. More specifically, he's stating 30% - 35% of caloric intake.

@Indy51 your point is well taken. I think I got into trouble with protein by not eating what my body wanted. I intentionally reduced my protein intake after listening to Ron Rosedale, M.D.'s m-Tor presentations, which I now think was a mistake. I feel better eating 92 g protein today which is 30% of my caloric intake. And because I don't drink bone broth, I'm now trying to eat meat cooked with it's bones. I think that's helping too.

One of the things I found interesting about the research that Dr. Naiman reviewed was that when rats were allowed to choose how much carbs, fat, and protein to eat, they ate the ratio they needed. It appears that all living things do this, except perhaps us because we're constantly subjected to conflicting research results.

@ghost_whistler I hope you get an opportunity to listen to Dr. Naiman's 2018 lecture on the Diet Doctor website. It's a lot to take in the first time, but by listening to his other interviews too, then going back to listen to the new lecture on Diet Doctor, I think he makes a strong argument for eating 30% - 35% protein. That said, we each need to do what works best for us. We're all highly individual.
 
Thanks.

I would like to listen to it, is it on youtube or just that site?

I find Rosedale's limits just completely impractical personally.

120g a protein isn't huge, IMO. Many people who eat zero carb, for instance, seem to eat that and more.
 
Does he state a reason for eating a lot of fibre?
 
He's promoting an nutrient dense diet that includes eating low carb, above ground vegetables, green plant foods too, which I believe he stated are higher in protein. He also talks about how our ancestral diet was much higher in fiber than what we eat today, so perhaps that's another reason.

For me personally, I'm trying to get as much fiber and nutrition possible from the lower carb, above ground plant foods in addition to the healthy protein and fat I eat. Fiber is also needed to feed and nourish the healthy microbes in our microbiome, which is another reason I include these foods in my diet.

All that said, for some people, fiber is a problem. I know because I've had two active flares of inflammatory bowel disease. I'm lucky though. I was able to get back into remission each time using the specific carbohydrate diet (SCD), so I'm not limited in the foods that I can eat. Well I can't eat gluten, but that's not a problem at all.

I eat fat, protein, above ground vegetables, and a limited amount of tubers, fruit, and berries at every meal.

If you do a google search and a YouTube search on "Ted Naiman", you should find other lectures by him.
 
This is SO interesting and important - thank-you for posting. I listen to Dr Bernstein's Teleseminars each month and he constantly expresses his concern that due to the fashion (my word) for High Fat people are eating too little protein, especially those who are active and even athletic, and even more importantly, parents are feeding their diabetic children too little p;rotein and stunting their growth.
 
I wish! If this is true then my suspicion that I am actually pre-LADA rather than pre-T2 is confirmed, because I quite often eat very low carb high protein meals and my bg does go up afterwards. I would be fascinated to read about other people's experience.
 
I don't know how you could claim our ancestral diet was higher in fibre, we;d have to have eaten huge amounts of spinach or broccoli. Maybe some nuts, depending where you lived. Most fibre rich food today is fortified
 
Winnie53 said:
I think I got into trouble with protein by not eating what my body wanted. I intentionally reduced my protein intake
Click to expand...
I think you may have your answer right there. Of all the macros, protein seems to be self-limiting (unless deliberately distorted by swallowing liquid protein shakes) and almost impossible to over-eat. I remember listening to an interview with protein researcher, Dr Donald Layman very early on in my diagnosis - his advice is to eat a minimum of 30g protein at each meal. Seems to have worked pretty well for me, so I've tried to follow the advice by making protein the main focus of my meals. I even tend to eat the protein first - I think it stops me over-eating other things.
 
@Alexandra100 you weigh what I weighed in high school and I'm 5" shorter. What guidance has our more seasoned forum members offered you?

By the way, what is AF? Atrial fibrillation or something else?

I'm a fan of Bernstein too.
 
ghost_whistler said:
no one is making anything complicated, I've no idea why you've posted this
Click to expand...
Sorry, I let my grumpiness get the better of me. I sometimes find it frustrating the way humans have a tendency to analyse and nitpick things to death. I've been noticing even more of it on the forum of late - or maybe that's just my grumpiness talking. I fear when people get bogged down in the minutiae of how many grams of this, how much exercise, etc. that it takes away from the fairly simple message of "reduce carbs as much as possible". Beyond that, it can get very esoteric and maybe even confusing - and even lead to the dire state of "analysis paralysis" - people don't know who to believe anymore so they end up doing nothing
 
ghost_whistler said:
I don't know how you could claim our ancestral diet was higher in fibre, we;d have to have eaten huge amounts of spinach or broccoli. Maybe some nuts, depending where you lived. Most fibre rich food today is fortified
Click to expand...

@ghost_whistler, this presentation from 2009 may answer your questions about the ancestral diet...
I haven't watched it yet. May do so tonight. In general, I find it difficult to get more than 20 - 30 grams of fiber a day eating vegetables because I don't eat grains, and greatly limit legumes, tubers, and fruit. I've heard, not sure where, that our ancestors ate closer to 100 - 150 grams of fiber a day. Keep in mind that the plants we ate then as compared to now were very different. Perhaps someone else will come along and answer your question.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn More.…