A theory has been going around in research circles for a while that cholesterol could be a protective force for the body.
So the increase in trigylceride levels is a protective response to the auto-immune/inflammatory damage.
My take on the theory:
- Where cells have been damaged/destroyed by the immune cells (T-cells say)
Cholesterol builds up to protect the affected area
If low levels of additives are circulating in the blood, we can expect the inside capillary walls to get damaged by mutation and immune response
In this case, cholesterol will line the walls of the damaged capillaries (or arteries)
If damage is widespread cholesterol will build up in the capillaries
This can cause blood clots and at the extremeties, blood cappillaries may be cut off from reacjing their journey
The skin will become dry and less able to heal (because lack of blood flow)
Cholesterol build in the arteries,of course, will lead to the classic case of vascular disease
Looking at the wider picture of food additives:
- One of the biggest these days, monosodium glutamate was manufactured in Japan 1908.
Brought over to the US in the 1940s and slowly became more prevalent in foods
New additives were developed, such as ethoxyquin as a food antioxidant (although originally a fertiliser)
If a fertiliser can kill creatures (pests), it only makes sense it can damage internal cell tissue.
As more new additives grew and their prevalence spread, the wave of autoimmune diseases (type 2, arthritis) seems to be growing roughly proportionally.
It's possible that this could address some oddities such as why some people are obese but don't get inflammatory diseases.
The theory here would be that they eat a lot of calories and get bigger, but the quality of food they eat is better -ie largely free of additives.
It makes sense though that many large people do tend to get type 2 diabetes:
1. the disease itself is a vicious circle of weight gain
2. high calorie foods such as pastries (fats + carbs) also tend to have food additives -bread, doughnuts etc still have artificial trans fats added to this day (here in UK they've renamed them 'mono and di-glycerides of fatty acids' -taking advantage of loophole)
How about diet in general?
- People have often wondered why Inuit people haven't had diabetes as one would expect from their calorie rich diet -they don't have access to artificial additives like we do
It may also explain why the Mediterranean diet is effective -they tend to consume fresh pressed olive oil (not chemically altered/refined oils) and a decent amount of fresh veg
Also, it may explain why people with diabetes who switch to more vegetable based diets start to feel better (and often lose weight) -if they cutting out their additive filled bread for an extra portion or two of vegetables they'll have a less mutagenic diet therefore
It makes sense that a raw food diet can work wonders therefore.
Another consideration is diabetes prevalence by geolocation:
- We know type 2 diabetes is problematic in the US, China, India and W Africa I believe -UK not far behind
These are all areas with very high prevalence of artificial additives
Could this explain why the risk factor for S Asians and W Africans is lower?
Is it simply because these people tend to ingest more artificial additives?