Have you ever wondered why the bookstore shelves are filled with completely different types of eating plans ranging from the high protein and fat Atkins diet to the low fat high carb Pritiken diet, to the Zone, which advocates an eating plan somewhere between the two? Is one type of book completely right and the others completely wrong? Don't you think that if there were only one way for us to eat for optimal health we would have figured it out by now? Some who follow the recommendations of government food guides do well, while others gain weight and become less healthy. It depends on the biochemistry and metabolism of the person as to which kind of diet will support and sustain the individual. As Roger Williams explains in his book Biochemical Individuality we are as different on the inside as we are on the outside, and to think that we would all require exactly the same ratio of proteins, carbohydrates and fats seems almost silly.

The Inuit of northern Canada, who traditionally ate a high protein high fat diet and had very little or no access to any vegetation for much of the year due to snow cover, were extremely healthy, did not suffer from constipation as one might assume considering the extreme lack of fibre in their diet, and did not suffer from heart disease or cancer. However in today's modern world, they are consuming much more carbohydrate, and are consequently developing symptoms and disease such as
type 2 diabetes, heart disease and cancer. On the flip side of that, because of the lack of large game, most tribes in South America traditionally did best on an almost vegetarian diet supplementing with the meat of small animals. They become ill when they eat too much meat and/or fat. The idea that one man's food is another man's poison is certainly true.

Two of the most important fundamental homeostatic control systems that determine how food is used in the body are the autonomic nervous system and the oxidative system, and depending on the individual, one system or the other dominates. Then each dominance can be further broken down into fast, slow or mixed oxidizers, and parasympathetic, sympathetic or balanced autonomics. Both fast oxidizers and parasympathetic dominants are considered protein types, but food effects each of these types in opposite ways. For example, a fast oxidizer tends to have an acid blood pH, and protein/fatty food balances her chemistry by pushing her alkaline, whereas a parasympathetic dominant tends to have a blood pH that is alkaline, and protein/fatty food pushes his system acid thereby balancing his chemistry. Slow oxidizers and sympathetic dominants do better on a lower fat, higher carbohydrate diet, but their blood acid/alkaline status are opposites as well. Vegetables and fruit balance a sympathetic type by pushing her more alkaline, and balance a slow oxidizer by pushing her more acid.

It becomes very easy to understand why nutrition/drug studies usually don't give overwhelmingly conclusive results in one direction or the other. Although a study may show that some improve on a particular diet/drug, there are usually those that worsen on that same diet/drug, and others for which there is little or no change. The problem arises because the premise on which most studies are based is fundamentally flawed. Instead of asking how this diet/drug will effect this disease, we need to ask how this diet/drug will effect the biochemistry of the individual that has the disease. If the populations chosen for the various studies were picked from one metabolic type the results would probably be clear. In other words, too much fat in the diet of a person who is either a slow oxidizer or a sympathetic dominant may play a role in that person developing heart disease, whereas in a fast oxidizer or a parasympathetic dominant, too much carbohydrate will. Both individuals need to alter their diets in opposite directions in order to balance their systems. Once the metabolic imbalance in the individual is corrected, no matter what the disease, the likelihood of a successful outcome is much greater. For a more thorough understanding of this fascinating and, in my humble opinion, critically important topic, go to www.healthexcel.com, and look at the Information Library on the left sidebar.

So, how do you learn what kinds of foods are best for YOU and in
what ratio your cells require those foods? Doing the metabolic typing
test is the easiest way to determine how YOUR body metabolizes your
food, and therefore the type of diet that will regulate your weight,
give you sustained energy, reduce your cravings, and reduce your mood
swings. Look for a metabolic typing advisor in your area by clicking here. Or read either The Metabolic Typing Diet by William Wolcott and Trish Fahey, or The Nutrition Solution; A Guide To Your Metabolic Type by Harold Kristal and James Haig.

Chek, Paul; You Are What You Eat CD Series Chek Institute, San Diego, CA, 2002.

Kristal, Harold; Haig, James. The Nutrition Solution; A Guide To Your Metabolic Type North Atlantic Books, Berkley CA, 2002

Williams, Roger J. Biochemical Individuality Keats Publishing Inc., New Canaan, Connecticut, 1998.

Wolcott, William; Fahey, Trish. The Metabolic Typing Diet Broadway Books, New York New York, 2000.

Online www.healthexcel.com