Quick Notes on Acid Base Balance

Posted Wed, 02/10/2010 - 18:25 by Melissa

 I think the post at Whole Health Source is a good summary and has a good discussion in the comments. Really, the whole theory that some foods are alkalizing and others acidifying doesn't seem like anything more than a hypothesis based on a some epidemiological studies and anecdotes. Its a particularly popular theory in raw vegan circles, which is kind of ironic. The main point of not eating "acidifying" foods is so that your skeleton isn't robbed of calcium, but the biggest problems with raw veganism is tooth decay and bone loss! Guess eating massive and massive amounts of so called alkalizing foods doesn't protect the teeth or bones ! Contrast that with the healthy cultures Weston A. Price studied: some ate net acid and others ate net base and it didn't seem to matter. They had healthy bones and teeth regardless as long as they didn't eat trash like sugar and ate plenty of things like offal, bone stock, etc. 

The idea that the Inuit suffered from early onset bone loss seems to come from studies after their diet included grains and sugar, because the studies on older skeletons show no problems. That's even though their calcium intake is LOW and they get waaay more protein than the probably optimal! Same for the Masai and other populations that eat foods that should leave their bones completely withered. 

Even the author of several epidemiological studies trying to prove the acid base bone theory admits "The role of protein appears to be complex and is probably dependent on the presence of other nutrients available in a mixed diet." That's jargon for "this doesn't really prove much, but I really really want it to be published."

The real truth is that Americans probably suffer from bone loss more because they eat so many antinutrients and that 73% of us don't get the basic RDA for calcium. Maybe there is some evidence I'm overlooking, but overall I'd worry about eating real foods and not about calculating net acid load. 

PS Don at Primal Wisdom recently posted a takedown of the Eskimo osteroporosis myth.

Comments

Everybody writes about how

by Don Wiss (not verified) - 02/11/2010 - 09:51

Everybody writes about how one needs to get more calcium into their diet. Or maybe also more magnesium and Vitamin D. No one seems to wonder just where it all goes.

Here's a page that a friend and I put up many years ago. It points out all the non-paleo things people do that are more important than the amount of calcium consumed.

http://paleodiet.com/losspts.txt

Well. As I understand it, the

by Anonymous (not verified) - 02/11/2010 - 09:47

Well.

As I understand it, the acid-base balance theory shouldn't be/isn't about eliminating everything acidifying, it's about keeping a balance.
Which is why the acidifying meat should be balanced with fruit and vegetables instead of grains. So, trying to watch the acidity is not about eliminating meat.
Eating grains with meat is double acidifying I guess. And with the grains containing the inhibitors they do it would stop you from picking up the calcium from the food too. Double, or even triple, bad for you...

Oh, and what do you make of this?

http://www.youngerthanyourage.com/4/ExcessiveCalcium.htm

Still seems fishy to me. The

by Melissa - 02/11/2010 - 13:18

Still seems fishy to me. The only references I can find to people like the unacculturated Inuit and Maasai having bone problems is on vegan websites and books without any references whatsoever. I would think there would be tons of studies on the Maasai since if they had problems it would bolster the popular theory that milk is bad for bones.

I did find this one paper on Fulani herders with low bone density
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2525473/
but the Fulani trade for grain and do not eat enough calories in general. The authors of the paper note that for most of the world bone density problems are associated with malnourishment. We don't think of Americans as being malnourished, but IMHO we definitely are whether it's from low quality food or eating foods that deprive us of nutrition. The Fulani suffer from low quantity of food.

Pastoralists would seem to eat a very acidifying diet, so if the acid base theory is true then we would see them with osteoporosis. " in a study of skeletal remains of early pastoralists from East Africa, reported no change in nutrition and health status of pastoralists relative to preceding hunter-gatherers."http://www.jstor.org/stable/3889202

Thanks! The next post I'm

by Melissa - 02/10/2010 - 20:26

Thanks! The next post I'm going to do is on the female case for paleo! It's too bad that that paleo and offal has gotten a masculine reputation, because women are the ones who can truly benefit from it most.

Hell yea! I hear this one

by Luna (not verified) - 02/10/2010 - 20:05

Hell yea!
I hear this one often, living in a city suffering from VeganZeitgeist-itis, along with a generally squeamish attitude towards meat, especially fatty meat and especially from girls.
It seems like even if you're not "veg" it's the politically correct thing to avoid the nasty, gristly bits and bones, organs, skin and blood, taking the more refined, dare I say, civilized route and buying free-range chicken and $25/lb fish fillets at whole paycheck, oy vey..
At least my Buffalo farmer and Salmon guy get it, even if I hear them giving yuppies the pitch at the farmer's market: "Oh yeah, it's good stuff, lower in cholesterol, leaner meat, etc." they wink and hand me the bones.
Back on topic, I wanted to let you know I think your blog is lovely and very accessible, your writing is very to the point and dense but not overwhelming, thanks a lot!