Another Interesting Theory

So I am reading a book that is just blowing my mind. Very interesting. It is by an evolutionary biologist who has spent the last ten years with "hunter gatherers" in Africa. He notes that by and large they have very little cancer, heart disease or other chronic health problems.  They pretty much exercise most of the day while out hunting or with women doing home type work.

His theory: we all believe that excess energy will be turned into fat... but what if some of it isn't? Let's say that we need 1500 calories per day and we eat 2000 calories - constantly. Sure 400 of it may be turned into fat... but 100 will be used by the body before the excess is turned into fat.  It is this chronic excess energy that causes bad things in the body: simply because the body has excess energy and has to do something with it. 

So what does it do? Increases inflammation, increases cell proliferation, causes an overactive immune system, and who knows what else? Essentially we should not be running on an excess energy situation each day.  The excess energy causes the body to have to do something with it - and that something may not be a positive thing.  

This is my commentary but IMHO this makes sense.

• It is well known that Calorie Restriction improves health, longevity, and biomarkers across all species...
• Exercise also has been shown to to improve health, longevity, and biomarkers across all species. But sometimes it doesn't... perhaps due to overeating?
• Part of his theory is what what you really need energy for are "big ticket items" like reproduction. Well, it is well known that people start having health issues in their 40s and 50s... when your body downshifts and no longer needs the energy for reproduction.  I have long stated that if menopause MUST mean something and we should listen to its apparent demand that we eat less... here is some evidence that failure to heed its warnings about less energy will cause problems. 
• Diet interventions that invariably cause less energy to be eaten (or increase the energy needs of the body) are more likely to result in health. E.g., fasting, keto, etc.
• Many diseases of modern calorie excess imho have evidence of an "overactive" body. Sink tags, Acanthosis nigricans, even uterine fibroids - etc. Does your body make these because it has to do something with the excess energy? Are these signs that your body has energy excess? 

What is most interesting about it is that it is kind of like a toggle... when you are younger you have massive energy needs... so you very rarely are in energy excess. But as you age you have less and less energy needs, and, you eat by and large the same (or more) you flip over to a chronic energy surplus which causes complete havoc with the body. 

Another part of his book that is interesting is that he has done extensive studies on it and it turns out that exercise does NOT increase your Total Daily Energy Expenditure.  This is another reason why we have all messed up so badly. He has measured the TDEE with these hunter gatherers and it the same as any person in the modern world. He has also studied it with animals... apes - and a captive ape in a zoo has by and large, a similar TDEE to an ape in the wild.  This number is determined by YEARS of evolution and factors like famine and reproduction. You cannot increase it substantially on a short term basis. 

So you see, people who are exercising may believe they can eat more than they really should be eating.  They may believe they burned off 2000 calories per day because they went to the gym, but they didn't and eating 2000 calories gives them excess energy that they didn't need. 

A NEW THEORY ON CANCER

So as I mentioned I am doing Keto. Everything on my blood tests has gotten better - except my cholesterol.  It is well known in the Keto community that Cholesterol goes way up on Keto and mine did that.  But why? I mean we know that food itself does not relate to the cholesterol level. Your cholesterol level is controlled by the liver.  We also know that people on Keto usually have their cholesterol stabilize once they have been on Keto for a while. 

Finally someone figured it out Cell Walls

Cholesterol in cell walls "Most people think of cholesterol as something that is mainly found in the blood," says Zinöcker. “But only a small part of it is found there. Most cholesterol is distributed throughout our cells.” Cholesterol is an indispensable part of the cell membrane – a kind of flexible wall along the surface of the cells. This membrane protects the cell contents inside, but it’s not completely impermeable. The cell needs substances like nutrients, building blocks and signaling substances from the rest of the body. It also has to get rid of waste. The cell membrane allows substances in and out in a very controlled way. In fact, a well-functioning cell membrane is extremely important for the cell to function.Research has shown that cholesterol is an essential component of this membrane. Between 30 and 50 percent of the cell membrane consists of cholesterol, where it has a very important task.Adjusts membrane stiffness "Cholesterol adjusts how fluid the membrane is," says Zinöcker. The cell membrane can become more or less rigid, depending on how cold it is and what kinds of fats it consists of. The latter depends on what we eat. When we eat more polyunsaturated fat, the cells incorporate more polyunsaturated fat into the cell membrane, making it more fluid. To compensate, the cell also incorporates more cholesterol in the membrane. Cholesterol has a stabilizing effect on the soft membrane. If we eat more saturated fat, the opposite happens. The cell membrane becomes stiffer and no longer needs that much cholesterol.

At the same time... last year I stumbled upon a researcher who was looking at how cells started their journey to cancer. Mina Bissell has been researching the extra cellular Matrix (the area surrounding your cells) for about Thirty years. Her amazing information is, that when the area surrounding your cells starts to break down, your cells start to "break free" / "become deformed" and proliferate. It is the area surrounding the cell that keeps it in shape. That keeps it from proliferating.  To use an example... maybe sausage. It has a thin layer that keeps the stuffing inside. But if that breaks down it will come spilling out. Well, what about this polyunsaturated fat making the cell wall more fluid? And saturated fat making the cell wall more stiff?  Dr. Bissell has shown that once you replace the outer layer of any cell that is proliferating it will return to normal and stop proliferating. 

And then it hit me... are an excess of polyunsaturated fats causing cells to break down more easily?  If we ate more saturated fats would the cell wall get stronger? Less fluid leading to less proliferation?

And let's go further, going back to my last post talking about inflammation in the cell due to excess carbs and water. If the cell interior is stuffed full of water, pushing on the cell wall, at the same time was we are eating fats that make the cell wall more fluid, does this not explain how the cells "break down" and proliferate? There is pressure on the cell wall from the inside due to sugar and the fats that make up the cell wall are less strong and firm. 

SO GOT MY RESULTS

And I am happy to say that I am thrilled.

M-spike: Went down.  From .5 g/dl to .4 g/dl. 

Light Chains: Went down massively. Both Lamda and Kappa were normal and my ratio went from an abnormal 1.9 to a very normal, and the best ever 1.4. That takes me out of the high(er) risk range.

IGM Immunoglobin: Well this one went up a little. From 290 to 296. But it is still normal and, if seems as if it might just be something that could run high in the winter.  Both my IGA and my IGG were higher and are in the normal range as well.  Remember this number can include polyclonal antibodies.

Hemogram and Differental: Absolutely spectacular.  Everything was normal. 

Comprehensive Metabolic Panel: Absolutely spectacular. Everything was normal. 

I have to lay this at the feet of keto / fasting. My thought is that it has to be related to inflammation. Now to be fair, it also might have to do with my getting my tests last time after having blood drawn for research donation. However, I think it is more likely to do with inflammation and its effects on MGUS. For me the only possible reasons I could have gotten MGUS in the first place seems to have been inflammation. Almost everything else was really ruled out. 

You see, last June I also was doing Keto and fasting.  And those tests too, were also spectacular. My M-spike came back lower than now. .3g/dl and all the other tests were normal and great. So it seems obvious to me that perhaps, doing this keto and fasting could actually lead to this going away. The problem so far is that I haven't stayed fasting for long enough.

I have been listening to a doctor on you tube called Dr. Cywes... he is amazing. The explanations he gives for things are pretty spectacular and, when I look them up... he is right.  He talks about how inflammation is really a disorder of water -- caused by glucose molecules.  He says that 1 molecule of glucose goes into the cell with 4 or 5 of water. Eventually the cell uses the glucose but the water remains. This is inflammation. Now your cell(s) are running around with too much water and inflammation.  And doesn't this seem likely? Haven't you noticed the "puffiness" of people today?

Normally, your body uses inflammation to denote to the immune system what cells need to be looked at. Inflammation is normally something triggered when there is a virus or bacteria.  He says that inflammation is not a bad thing. There is a normal homeostasis of autophagy and inflammation that keeps your system working right. But if you are eating carbs a far too great number of cells are "inflamed" and your immune system is disposing off far too many good cells and calling for more cells to be created. Is that not a recipe for a mistake?

I will include the link at the end. For the moment I am going to see what happens the rest of the year as I do keto and fast for a longer period. 

WORRIED ABOUT MY NEXT TESTS

So my next blood tests are due. I called on Monday and they are sitting there waiting for me. My last tests were done on November 17, 2020. So today is exactly three months. 

I was going to go today, it is a beautiful bright day.... but I just couldn't bring myself to do so. 

The reason in my head is that I have been fasting and am probably dehydrated. And also, I am not sure about my CBC and other results because, I have been fasting and I am not sure I have been getting really strong nutrition. 

But, truth is... probably scared. 

Mostly scared because at the moment I am without a primary care doctor and also, without a hematologist. I said that the blood test results would tell if I needed to go to Dana Farber or just find a hematologist / oncologist.... 

I have tentatively decided to perhaps go on Saturday. The lab is open for 4 hours. I will be on a "eat day" on Friday and hopefully can drink a lot of water. 

BONES

I remain quite afraid of what this disease can do to bones. On the one hand if I progress to WM it appears bone complications are rare (as opposed to MM). I hang out on a WM group and rarely hear people asking about bones or fractures.  While a lot of people I know with MM were diagnosed with it via fracture. 

That being said, I need to keep my bones strong.  Being single, healing from a fracture could be devastating. 

So for the moment I am looking into osteoporosis.  The good news, I thought, was that I had a DEXA scan last year and all was well. I didn't have osteoporosis or osteopenia. That test measures Bone Mineral Density. But, looking further, BMD has been scientifically determined to mean nothing as to fracture risk.  The way I have heard it... BMD measures essentially the calcium in your bones. Sounds like a good deal right? But your bones have a structure to them that underlies the calcium. If that structure is not strong, you can have all the calcium in the world and not have strong bones. 

In addition, your DEXA scan is compared to a 28 year old female. But as some doctors have noted, it is not scientifically sound to do that. Our bodies at 28 are primed for childbirth and accordingly have high supply of calcium in case needed for childbirth. Once you are no longer going to have children it lets go of some that supply. They argue that if anything standards should be made with regard to normal for women at age 50, 60, 70 and 80. 

Also, this was pretty interesting to me but your blood type can play a role in your risk for fracture. O blood type is the least likely to have fractures.  This may be due to the fact that O blood type is less likely have have diabetes. And diabetes is a major factor in fractures. 

The shocking but never mentioned biggest thing to destroy bone turns out to be sugar. There are tons of studies showing that sugar destroys bone -- in particular with soft drinks. But also, diabetics have a much higher fracture risk even though many type two have strong bone mineral density. (showing that BMD means nothing to fracture risk).

People say that animal foods destroy your bones. But I think that is faulty thinking. If the bones do need a "structure" for the calcium to sit on... and that structure is made up of things like collagen and protein... it would seem that you need meat. In addition, in the last thirty years we have largely gotten rid of meat, and it hasn't done a body good. Fractures are at a highest point ever and Vegan and Vegetarian diets have shown themselves to increase the risk of fracture. Vegan diet higher risk of fracture It also doesn't make sense from a historical point of view. When we were hunter gatherers we at almost exclusively meat / animal foods. If it could cause the bones to fracture, well, that would have ended us as a species.  It also doesn't make sense looking at other animals. Who often do not eat dairy of any kind and do not seem to have their bones melt. 

The theory seems to be that acid from animal products will melt the calcium in your bones... but, all of that imho is speculative. There is great debate about our ability to make our body acid or alkaline for very long. Further calcium is just one of the factors that go into bone health. Not 100%... that is outdated thinking.

I saw a theory on Pub med last year that really capture my imagination. It was proposed by scientists and to me makes a lot of sense. It is fact that the countries with more calcium consumption have worse rates of fracture. The theory is that the more calcium that goes into your blood, the more the body must get rid of. Calcium in the blood is tightly controlled. The body can dispose of it via urine but, if there is too much, it must find another place to hide it until it can be removed by urine - so the body stuffs calcium into your bones until it can later be removed. Sound good right? But no. We have bone remodeling cells. Osetoblasts and Osteoclasts. Osteoblasts put the calcium in - Osteoclasts take the calcium out. One problem the process of putting calcium in destroys the osteoblasts -- forever.  They are not reproduced like osteoclasts. So if you have been overdosing on calcium for your entire life, you will have drastically reduced the cells that put calcium in your bones. 

Finally, I have long had a theory that insulin resistance is, in part, caused by calcium blocking/ gumming up.. insulin receptors in cells. This is my theory but, is seems there is a lot of circumstantial evidence. First, every single thing that reduces calcium in the body also helps insulin resistance -- Vitamin D, Vitamin K2, Magnesium, Apple Cider Vinegar, fasting/ autophagy.   In addition, insulin resistance tends to ultimately cause worse glucose control in the blood stream. And what does that end up causing.. bone damage from sugar in the blood stream. It just seems obvious that when you constantly have high levels of calcium in your body, no cofactors, some calcium is going to gum up the works and over years could gum up the insulin receptors on cells - there is absolutely is science showing that excess calcium is associated with insulin resistance. Association of Serum Calcium and Insulin Resistance -- this is just what I could find easily. 

LIGHT CHAIN QUESTIONS

But I continue to have so many questions about my abnormal light chain result.

1. Can the blood test itself be off? As the doctors have stated many times, blood tests are not always perfection. The numbers can vary from blood draw to blood draw.  They look for an over all pattern not a particular one time result.  My change in the ratio is a small one. Could it simply be a blood test fluctuation that will go back to normal? I wish I could find some hard data on this. 

2. Could it be due to donating blood? In October I donated a blood for research. I was told I could not give blood again for 8 weeks. Yet, my free light chains were tested after about 6 weeks from the blood donation. Without my knowledge. My ratio is off due to a drop in my lambda free light chains. My Kappa light chains hardly moved.  Does that suggest that perhaps the blood draw threw off the light chains and it had not properly recovered yet? 

3. Assuming it is not from blood donation... why would the lambada light chains be so substantially lower? From everything I read, you normally have more of the involved light chain. So people who have a lambada involved cell.. will see their ratio go down. While those with a kappa involved cell will see their ratio go up.  I have kappa, why did my lambada go down? 

4. Can the change in ratio be caused by something other than the mugs? As noted in the last post, it seems that light chains are related to immunoglobulin. Well, those can changed based on non clonal cell issues. Cold, virus. etc. Though of course the ratio typically can be normal... can it change on for reasons unrelated to MGUS. After all free light chains are not typically tested for unless you have a clonal cell issue.   By taking a blood test snapshot can it be misleading? From Wikipedia: Increased levels of free Ig light chains have also been detected in various inflammatory diseases. It is important to note that, in contrast to increased levels in lymphoma patients, these Ig light chains are polyclonal.  So if I had inflammation and Ig light chains made my light chains change, how would I know what the reason was?  The free light chain measurement just measures all light chains. So how do know if it is an issue of IGM?  In January my doctor mistakenly ran an IGM immunoglobulin test and unlike November, it had decreased. From 290 to 260. Does that give me a hint that my free chains will be down? Also, I had been taking turmeric and fasting, both shown to reduce inflammation,  will that reduce my light chains?

5. How much exactly is dangerous to have in terms of just kappa or lambda? Right now both my kappa and lambda results are normal. But assuming they go out of wack, when should I be concerned about their volume?

If anyone has any answers feel free to comment. 

FRUSTRATED ABOUT LIGHT CHAINS

I just find it so hard to get good information about MGUS. When I was first diagnosed with MGUS my light chain ratio was normal.  This made me happy as it seemed to place me in a low risk category. In fact, at that time..., almost everything was good. Everything was normal but for the M-spike. Which actually went down at the first subsequent blood test.  From .5 to .3. 

But then, only 4 months after that test. 

- my M-spike went up (though just back to where it was when I got diagnosed).

- my IGM immunoglobulin went up... normal but still at the top of the range.

- my light free chain ratio went up to abnormal. From 1.5 to 1.9. (end of normal is 1.65).

This really upset me. I now have moved into a much more risk prone situation. I have both IGM (more risk for progression) and abnormal light free chains. All of this happening just one year after I was diagnosed. To me suggesting I have an aggressive problem. But my doctors seem completely unconcerned. 

What I have managed to learn. 

The ratio itself isn't that bad. Ultimately a lot of people with an abnormal ratio have a much grater ratio than I have. Some people have 17 to 20 or greater and are still MGUS. In fact, typically they won't treat you until you reach 100.  If you calculate the increase in light chains that I had in about 1 year you will see that it is about....25%. 

Light chains themselves are sort of a waste product of the immunoglobulins.  So the over producing clonal cell secretes (in my case) IGM immunoglobulins. And if you are having an excess of clonal cells and IGM immunoglobulins then you are necessarily likely to have an increase in the light chains (in my case likely Kappa) since I am IGM kappa - throwing your ratio off. 

In addition, the light chains in your blood are a function of the kidney. Your kidneys clear the light chains.  So the only thing that my specialist at Dana Farber told me to do was to drink water. Now I think very much the case could have been that drinking water helps clear the light chains and keep kidney's functioning well.  So does your hydration status play a role in your result?  I think so. From Wikipedia in normal individuals, free light chains are rapidly cleared from the blood and catabolised by the kidneys. Monomeric free light chains (kappa) are cleared in 2–4 hours, and dimeric (lambda) light chains in 3–6 hours. Removal may be prolonged to 2–3 days in people with complete renal failure. So can your hydration and also your status make a slight change? Possibly.  In my case I was not expecting at all to get my blood tests for this so I have no idea if I was dehydrated etc. 

So it seems clear that light chains, antibodies and the M spike are all closely related. With the M spike being one of the last things to move.