Ep. 64: The True Cause of Fatty Liver (NAFLD Part 2)

Listen to the podcast on Apple Podcasts | Google Podcasts | Stitcher| Spotify

In this episode we discuss:

  • Why fructose doesn’t cause leptin resistance
  • How our livers produce fat from fructose or dietary fat 
  • How a failure of energy production (mitochondrial respiration) causes NAFLD 
  • Why increases in uncoupling, autophagy, mitophagy, and other stress pathways is often a sign of dysfunction and stress 

4:54 – why fructose doesn’t cause leptin resistance  

11:56 – the physiology of triglyceride (fat) synthesis in the liver 

28:03 – the role of inhibited, inefficient mitochondrial respiration in triglyceride synthesis in the liver 

46:06 – the role of inhibited, inefficient mitochondrial respiration and stress pathways in NAFLD 

Links from this episode

  • Chris
    Posted at 03:02h, 02 November Reply

    In this episode, you referenced your article “The mythical calorie equation”. https://www.jayfeldmanwellness.com/the-mythical-calorie-equation/
    In your article, you referenced two studies. One of them was a 6 day study. https://sci-hub.se/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmet.2015.07.021. My research shows that it takes two weeks to reverse insulin resistance. Also, the reduced carb diet included 29% carbohydrates, but the typical low carb diet includes around 10% carbs. Would you please provide links to studies with a much longer duration, and include studies with lower carbs? This is the core of your message, so it should be easy for you to provide those studies.

    The other study you referenced was a 9 day study from 1971. It is true that the authors stated, “No adequate explanation can be given for weight loss differences.”

    *However*, You lied about the study results. You wrote “In fact, those on the diet that was highest in carbohydrates lost 14 pounds more of body fat than those on the lowest carbohydrate diet during the 9-week intervention!”

    Your statement above is FALSE. The study results were:
    “Group A with 104g carb daily lost an average of 11.85kg (or 26.12 lb)”
    “Group B with 60g carb daily lost an average of 12.78kg (or 28.17 lb)”
    “Group C with 30g carb daily lost an average of 16.18kg (or 35.67 lb)”
    “Thus, there seems to have been a slight increase in weight loss as carbohydrate in the diet decreased.”

    Group C with the lowest carb intake lost an average of 9.55 pounds more than Group A, yet you claimed that the group with the highest carb intake lost 14 pounds more?

    Here is a link to the study to prove my claim.

    If you are telling the truth about the true cause of fatty liver and lowering carbs will not lead to healthy weight loss, then why would you need to lie about anything?

    • Jay Feldman
      Posted at 10:35h, 02 November Reply

      I already responded to your other accusatory comment on that article explaining that you are, in fact, incorrect, and I did not make a mistake (or lie, which is an especially ridiculous accusation considering that a 9.55 pound difference would still support my point) about that study.

      Here was my response:

      I said body fat, not weight. The values you cited were total weight loss. The group on the diet lowest in carbohydrates lost a considerably higher percentage of lean mass, so the difference in body fat lost was greater.

      If you look at Table 6 you’ll see that those on the diet that was highest in carbohydrates lost an average of 14.85kg of body fat, whereas those on the diet lowest in carbohydrates lost an average of 8.38kg of body fat. That’s a difference of 6.47kg, or 14.26 lbs.

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.