The Extraordinary Science of Addictive Junk Food

[Whiskeyjack]

The New York Times just published a fascinating article on the science and marketing behind processed foods. It's really long, but well worth your time.

Sounds like Big Tobacco all over again.

 

[Rack Em]

We watched a documentary on obesity in my Health Care Payment and Policy class last semester and this point was made during the movie.

The premise was that farm subsidies for corn make it profitable for farmers to grow. Companies that make processed food buy the corn cheaply and use it in things like high fructose corn syrup. Processed foods with high fructose corn syrup are actually addictive in our bodies and they crave more. Consequently, when it comes time to choose what to eat, we pick the Oatmeal Creme Pie instead of the banana because that's what our bodies want.

Vicious cycle.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

The premise was that farm subsidies for corn make it profitable for farmers to grow.

Strong contender for single worst Federal policy.

 

[Rack Em]

Strong contender for single worst Federal policy.

Absolutely. Right up there with affordable housing.

Thanks a lot Clinton, Bush, and Obama!

 

[DSully1995]

Strong contender for single worst Federal policy.

Its got my vote. HFCS + Sugar+White Flour= Obesity Epidemic


However, I still do not understand the witch hunt against fat, low cal low fat have always been trumped by high fat

 

[woolybug25]

You guys wonder why i'm a vegan???



Whiskey, I could go on for days about how farm subsidies are not only killing our economy, but completely against the ideals of a free market economy. Totally with ya, homie.

 

[Rack Em]

Back on topic:

I recently signed up for an 8K in Chicago (Shamrock Shuffle) and decided that if I were really serious about it that I would have to make some lifestyle changes. Lent was a good excuse that is helping. I'm 6' 180 and I retained some weight from undergrad when I was lifting 5 days a week. So these were minor changes that would make my exercise more effective and make me healthier overall.

I quit drinking as much (not that difficult). But I also cut soda and chips out of my diet completely during Lent. This has been a b!tch. I love potato chips. I love every brand and all flavors except Salt and Vinegar. But I still get random cravings when I'm studying or late at night when I used to eat junk food. It's weird and they're hard to control.

The closest thing to 'junk food' that I have in my pantry are Wheat Thins and some M&M's. I literally had to make that stuff unavailable to me. I don't walk down the aisle with chips and soda at the grocery store anymore. The money that I used to spend on frozen pizza, chips, soda, ice cream, etc. now goes toward fruit (which I also love), yogurt, whole wheat products, romaine lettuce, spinach, vegetables for salads, and frozen vegetables. It's hard to eat this way. But over the last few weeks of gradually changing my diet, I actually MISS having vegetables at a meal. Instead of hammering into Lays at night, I'll pour myself a bowl of low-fat granola cereal or get out low-fat yogurt. It doesn't satisfy me yet, but I'm getting there.

As a result of all of this (and exercising for about 45-60 minutes a day) I've trimmed down. I don't own a scale so I don't have an exact weight, but my stomach is much tighter.

But the biggest change I've noticed is that I DON'T FEEL LIKE **** AFTER EVERY MEAL. Even if I didn't overeat I was still putting junk into my body.

Moral of the story? It's tough to eat well when junk food is so satisfying.

 

[Rack Em]

You guys wonder why i'm a vegan???



Whiskey, I could go on for days about how farm subsidies are not only killing our economy, but completely against the ideals of a free market economy. Totally with ya, homie.

YES! I'm from rural Missouri and my opinions are not popular there in terms of farm subsidies.

 

[DSully1995]

You guys wonder why i'm a vegan???



Whiskey, I could go on for days about how farm subsidies are not only killing our economy, but completely against the ideals of a free market economy. Totally with ya, homie.

If you can afford it grass fed beef is absolutely healthy, not to mention your supporting local farmers who need help right now

 

[woolybug25]

If you can afford it grass fed beef is absolutely healthy, not to mention your supporting local farmers who need help right now

Grass fed beef is not necessarily healthy. You can make a double cheeseburger with grass fed beef, do you think eating double cheeseburgers regularly is healthy?

Furthermore, grass fed beef that you get at the grocery store, is probably not supporting your local farmer. They are probably paying the shareholders of a large cattle conglomerate that raises their cattle under the lax "grass fed" limitations (which by the way, are completely seperate from homorne free). You pay more in farm subsidies to have your local farms NOT GROW FOOD than you can possibly return to them in profit in sales.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

The closest thing to 'junk food' that I have in my pantry are Wheat Thins and some M&M's. I literally had to make that stuff unavailable to me. I don't walk down the aisle with chips and soda at the grocery store anymore. The money that I used to spend on frozen pizza, chips, soda, ice cream, etc. now goes toward fruit (which I also love), yogurt, whole wheat products, romaine lettuce, spinach, vegetables for salads, and frozen vegetables. It's hard to eat this way. But over the last few weeks of gradually changing my diet, I actually MISS having vegetables at a meal. Instead of hammering into Lays at night, I'll pour myself a bowl of low-fat granola cereal or get out low-fat yogurt. It doesn't satisfy me yet, but I'm getting there.

My wife and I have been making a concerted effort to eat better, but it's hard. Fresh produce is expensive, and it spoils quickly if you can't use it all. Setting out a balanced healthful meal requires serious planning and preparation; and since my wife and I both work long hours, we struggle with the time commitment. When you go to the grocery store, it's staggering how much of the food on offer is processed; feels like it's 90%+.

We've had some success with replacing processed snacks with fresh fruit: bananas and clementines both travel and keep well; my kids are happy to devour a package of berries instead of ice cream for dessert, etc.

But meals are still a challenge. Without a stay-at-home parent to plan and prepare them, we just can't find the bandwidth to do it consistently. Had to order pizza tonight

 

[woolybug25]

My wife and I have been making a concerted effort to eat better, but it's hard. Fresh produce is expensive, and it spoils quickly if you can't use it all. Setting out a balanced healthful meal requires serious planning and preparation; and since my wife and I both work long hours, we struggle with the time commitment. When you go to the grocery store, it's staggering how much of the food on offer is processed; feels like it's 90%+.

We've had some success with replacing processed snacks with fresh fruit: bananas and clementines both travel and keep well; my kids are happy to devour a package of berries instead of ice cream for dessert, etc.

But meals are still a challenge. Without a stay-at-home parent to plan and prepare them, we just can't find the bandwidth to do it consistently. Had to order pizza tonight

Spring will be here soon, my friend. You must do a garden, it not only saves you money, but its a radical hobby. Please visit us in a few weeks at:

http://www.irishenvy.com/forums/leprechaun-lounge/68806-any-green-thumbs-here-2.html

 

[DSully1995]

Grass fed beef is not necessarily healthy. You can make a double cheeseburger with grass fed beef, do you think eating double cheeseburgers regularly is healthy?

Furthermore, grass fed beef that you get at the grocery store, is probably not supporting your local farmer. They are probably paying the shareholders of a large cattle conglomerate that raises their cattle under the lax "grass fed" limitations (which by the way, are completely seperate from homorne free). You pay more in farm subsidies to have your local farms NOT GROW FOOD than you can possibly return to them in profit in sales.

Based on the evidence ive seen the worst part of it would be the bread man.

And yeah im talking more go to a farmers market and buy a 1/4 cow direct from a farmer.

 

[woolybug25]

Based on the evidence ive seen the worst part of it would be the bread man.

And yeah im talking more go to a farmers market and buy a 1/4 cow direct from a farmer.

I take it that cholesteral and saturated fat are cool with you?


Totally agree with your second point though.

 

[DSully1995]

I take it that cholesteral and saturated fat are cool with you?


Totally agree with your second point though.

Yes, the evidence for making a link between dietary fat and cholesterol and human fat isnt strong. Ancel Keys ruined burgers for us all. ( By the wqay this based off what ive seen if anyone has compeling evidence to the contrary ill be glad to look at it)

Top 11 Biggest Lies of Mainstream Nutrition

Number 2 makes a case for it, and since an epidemilogical study started the saturated fat myth (a bad study at one) Why cant one denounce it.

 

[greyhammer90]

Yes, the evidence for making a link between dietary fat and cholesterol and human fat isnt strong. Ancel Keys ruined burgers for us all. ( By the wqay this based off what ive seen if anyone has compeling evidence to the contrary ill be glad to look at it)

Top 11 Biggest Lies of Mainstream Nutrition

Number 2 makes a case for it, and since an epidemilogical study started the saturated fat myth (a bad study at one) Why cant one denounce it.

Have you ever seen the movie Fat Head? Really interesting documentary about the myth of "the evil high fat diet." Also rips the lie-filled "Super Size Me" a new *******, which I enjoyed.

 

[AdmiralBackhand]

My wife and I have been making a concerted effort to eat better, but it's hard. Fresh produce is expensive, and it spoils quickly if you can't use it all. Setting out a balanced healthful meal requires serious planning and preparation; and since my wife and I both work long hours, we struggle with the time commitment. When you go to the grocery store, it's staggering how much of the food on offer is processed; feels like it's 90%+.

We've had some success with replacing processed snacks with fresh fruit: bananas and clementines both travel and keep well; my kids are happy to devour a package of berries instead of ice cream for dessert, etc.

But meals are still a challenge. Without a stay-at-home parent to plan and prepare them, we just can't find the bandwidth to do it consistently. Had to order pizza tonight

Buy a foodsaver, homey.

 

[DSully1995]

Have you ever seen the movie Fat Head? Really interesting documentary about the myth of "the evil high fat diet." Also rips the lie-filled "Super Size Me" a new *******, which I enjoyed.

Ill check it out, thanks! Its really a travesty, to much pride to take a step back and say maybe we werent right in the 60s, because right nnow it looks like everything is bad, Fat and Carbs, what are people to do right.


Wooly you see the link I posted? Dont expect you to accept it as truth but id feel bad if someone went through life not know an alternate hypothesis.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

Idk how I'm twelve years too late to this thread. The above is one of those topics that get myself and my brother-in-law extremely riled up. I'm definitely upset that I missed the party. Anyways, I randomly found this when searching for a spot to ask a question about cholesterol and statins...It ties in well with America's Health Crisis so here goes...

I'm 41 years old, BMI 27. I clearly need to lose some pounds, no question, but I'm not severely obese. I try to eat relatively healthy. My issue is lack of time w/ a busy family so we eat out more than we should. Also, I don't workout as hard or as much as I used to (history of multiple back surgeries and severe nerve damage in my legs). During a routine physical, doc pointed out that my Total Cholesterol, LDL, and triglycerides are all high. Accounting for family history, he said my physical health has room for improvement, but not so much that statins won't be in my future. (Note: He is not recommending them now, but said if diet and exercise don't drive these numbers down significantly, genetics may convince him to get me started on them in the next 5 years or sooner.) My gut reaction to this methodology is two-fold and I'm wondering if any doctors or health nuts on this board can tell me if I'm wrong in this thinking.

First and foremost, this is likely a nothing burger and diet and exercise will in fact drive these numbers down. We also can agree that lowering my numbers is a good thing, in general. Don't take the following cynicism as a scapegoat for not getting those numbers in check the natural way.

With that said, as mentioned, I can't help but be slightly cynical of Big Pharma. Whenever a lifelong dependency of a drug is prescribed, alarm bells go off in my head. Back in the 1960s, the New England Journal of Medicine stated overall cholesterol goals as <280. However around 1988, that range decreased to <200. Again, it should be noted that research shows lower risk of CVD when these numbers are lower, so I'm not saying this is bad. But, that decrease in "normal range" just so happened to coincide with the invention and prescription of statins. Lowering the normal range opens up a broader market of people who could get prescribed this medication. Obviously, statins have helped save a ton of lives. I'm not against them. What I'm questioning, however, is their usage in my situation. Don't get me wrong, I plan to utilize a better diet and more exercise to achieve the current recommendations based on the modern scientific data. I'm just wondering if I should be hesitant about statins and push back against the notion that I need to be on them given the shift in normal ranges that happened right around the time statins became a thing. I'm usually around 200 total cholesterol with elevated LDL and triglycerides that are borderline "acceptable." I'm just not sure I share the same concern as my doc. Am I wrong here?

 

[NDRock]

Idk how I'm twelve years too late to this thread. The above is one of those topics that get myself and my brother-in-law extremely riled up. I'm definitely upset that I missed the party. Anyways, I randomly found this when searching for a spot to ask a question about cholesterol and statins...It ties in well with America's Health Crisis so here goes...

I'm 41 years old, BMI 27. I clearly need to lose some pounds, no question, but I'm not severely obese. I try to eat relatively healthy. My issue is lack of time w/ a busy family so we eat out more than we should. Also, I don't workout as hard or as much as I used to (history of multiple back surgeries and severe nerve damage in my legs). During a routine physical, doc pointed out that my Total Cholesterol, LDL, and triglycerides are all high. Accounting for family history, he said my physical health has room for improvement, but not so much that statins won't be in my future. (Note: He is not recommending them now, but said if diet and exercise don't drive these numbers down significantly, genetics may convince him to get me started on them in the next 5 years or sooner.) My gut reaction to this methodology is two-fold and I'm wondering if any doctors or health nuts on this board can tell me if I'm wrong in this thinking.

First and foremost, this is likely a nothing burger and diet and exercise will in fact drive these numbers down. We also can agree that lowering my numbers is a good thing, in general. Don't take the following cynicism as a scapegoat for not getting those numbers in check the natural way.

With that said, as mentioned, I can't help but be slightly cynical of Big Pharma. Whenever a lifelong dependency of a drug is prescribed, alarm bells go off in my head. Back in the 1960s, the New England Journal of Medicine stated overall cholesterol goals as <280. However around 1988, that range decreased to <200. Again, it should be noted that research shows lower risk of CVD when these numbers are lower, so I'm not saying this is bad. But, that decrease in "normal range" just so happened to coincide with the invention and prescription of statins. Lowering the normal range opens up a broader market of people who could get prescribed this medication. Obviously, statins have helped save a ton of lives. I'm not against them. What I'm questioning, however, is their usage in my situation. Don't get me wrong, I plan to utilize a better diet and more exercise to achieve the current recommendations based on the modern scientific data. I'm just wondering if I should be hesitant about statins and push back against the notion that I need to be on them given the shift in normal ranges that happened right around the time statins became a thing. I'm usually around 200 total cholesterol with elevated LDL and triglycerides that are borderline "acceptable." I'm just not sure I share the same concern as my doc. Am I wrong here?

I'm in a similar situation. 48, good shape. Run 3-4 days a week, lift a couple days a week, 15% body fat. Always had high blood pressure and high cholesterol (father, the same). Get a physical every year (actually 2) and my total cholesterol was always around 240. Everything else on blood work is good. 2 years ago, it got up to 300. Tried eating super clean (only fish) and it still stayed high. My primary doctor said it's fine, my doctor through work said to get on something to lower it (but not statins), went to a cardiologist and he said statins. I got on the statin and it definitely lowered my cholesterol (down to 150).

Was that the right decision? I have no idea. There are so many conflicting opinions out there that I don't know what to believe. My dad always had hight cholesterol and finally had a heart attack and needed 5 bypasses (early 60's). A couple young guys at work have had heart attacks and both said they had high cholesterol for years but that's obviously anecdotal. My advice would be to try all natural ways first and see if that makes a difference. I bet eating a little better and more exercise would get you to where you want to be. It didn't for me, which is why I went the statin way.

 

[Veritate Duce Progredi]

TIFWIW:

People shouldn't rely on this idealized future self who will finally be motivated to workout or eat well. If you lack the discipline now, then you either change it now or you're showing yourself who you are. Given that, I know Peter Attia (surgeon, longevity researcher) says statins are an incredible drug for those who need them and begin using them when needed/indicated.

He's adamant that many people aren't taking proper care of themselves early enough. Many think they'll eventually take the drug, workout, eat correctly. I'd suggest making some hard decisions in terms of lifestyle if you want to be healthy as your years increase. If you know your car needs oil/tires/fluids of some kind, but instead keep driving while thinking "I'll eventually get to it", bad things will happen. Your engine could seize, your traction could be so greatly compromised that you get in an accident or it could begin running incredibly rough. With your body, you can't just swap it out like a car or junk it, etc.

I'm not for/against pharmaceuticals. My father is on a statin, I'll probably be on one at some point but I've changed my activity/eating habits to try and be as healthy as possible. I have blood work done yearl/biyearly to monitor and make changes as needed. I'm 42 and I understand the thoughts that become more frequent as we age.

 

[NDdomer2]

Something else to consider - the knowledge from studies and technology gained between 1960s and 1988 to 2024 on what a healthy range of XYZ is for a human probably shouldn't be overlooked.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

I'm in a similar situation. 48, good shape. Run 3-4 days a week, lift a couple days a week, 15% body fat. Always had high blood pressure and high cholesterol (father, the same). Get a physical every year (actually 2) and my total cholesterol was always around 240. Everything else on blood work is good. 2 years ago, it got up to 300. Tried eating super clean (only fish) and it still stayed high. My primary doctor said it's fine, my doctor through work said to get on something to lower it (but not statins), went to a cardiologist and he said statins. I got on the statin and it definitely lowered my cholesterol (down to 150).

Was that the right decision? I have no idea. There are so many conflicting opinions out there that I don't know what to believe. My dad always had hight cholesterol and finally had a heart attack and needed 5 bypasses (early 60's). A couple young guys at work have had heart attacks and both said they had high cholesterol for years but that's obviously anecdotal. My advice would be to try all natural ways first and see if that makes a difference. I bet eating a little better and more exercise would get you to where you want to be. It didn't for me, which is why I went the statin way.

My dad has been on them since he was 40. He's 72 now and last year had 5 stints placed. He and I are not of the same when it comes to other health factors. He was a smoker and drinker most of his life and also ate a very poor diet without exercise. So yeah, genetics obviously play a role, but whenever my dad starts pushing me in that direction, I remind him of the different life choices that also effect our health.

Thanks for advice. Like I said, I've been borderline for the last few years. The only real variable change is my increasing age. I have a 3 month and 6 month followup for testing this year on the books. So we'll see where the numbers read after I clean up some of these meal choices.

TIFWIW:

People shouldn't rely on this idealized future self who will finally be motivated to workout or eat well. If you lack the discipline now, then you either change it now or you're showing yourself who you are. Given that, I know Peter Attia (surgeon, longevity researcher) says statins are an incredible drug for those who need them and begin using them when needed/indicated.

He's adamant that many people aren't taking proper care of themselves early enough. Many think they'll eventually take the drug, workout, eat correctly. I'd suggest making some hard decisions in terms of lifestyle if you want to be healthy as your years increase. If you know your car needs oil/tires/fluids of some kind, but instead keep driving while thinking "I'll eventually get to it", bad things will happen. Your engine could seize, your traction could be so greatly compromised that you get in an accident or it could begin running incredibly rough. With your body, you can't just swap it out like a car or junk it, etc.

I'm not for/against pharmaceuticals. My father is on a statin, I'll probably be on one at some point but I've changed my activity/eating habits to try and be as healthy as possible. I have blood work done yearl/biyearly to monitor and make changes as needed. I'm 42 and I understand the thoughts that become more frequent as we age.

I completely agree with the premise that most people aren't taking good care of themselves and have this "I'll get to it later" mindset. And I don't mean to come across as untrusting of medicine or conspiratorial. It's just something that triggers alarm bells and causes me to want to research it some more. I feel like when you turn 40 suddenly your body changes physically, even though mentally I still feel 25-30 most days. It takes some mental adjustments to hear a doc say "you're getting to the age of..." and begin to explain all of these risk factors and then immediately transition into prescription drugs that I'll need to take daily for the rest of my life. It's a tough pill to swallow, pun intended.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

Something else to consider - the knowledge from studies and technology gained between 1960s and 1988 to 2024 on what a healthy range of XYZ is for a human probably shouldn't be overlooked.

100%

 

[FightingIrishLover7]

Not really about junk food - but figured while we're talking about health, I'd share my recent news.
34 years hold, BMI 26, not sure of body fat percent, but athletic build good shape.
I get my physical every year with extra blood monitoring beyond normal comprehensive labwork (love tracking data)

Long story short - blood work is fantastic as usual. Doctor always tells me how great it is, but I've notice signs of sudden lingering pains in right fingers and right toes. No signs of arthritis in my bloodwork. However, I told my doctor that I've had psoriasis on my elbows and lower back for at least 10 years but never got worse and very small / didn't care.

Immediately the doctor said, you need to meet with dermatologists and rheumatologists. Turns out, me ignoring my psorisas caused me/dad/grandfather all to get diagnoses with an autoimmune disease. We all seem to have the same autoimmune issues. My grandpa's exhibits in ulcerative colitis, my dad in arthritis, me arthritis and skin plaques. My dad and gpa never got skin issues.

Summary, my doctors want me to start on biologics immediately to treat and possibly even reverse the skin AND the autoimmune disorder and can reverse my "pre" arthritis they're calling it before it progresses into osteoarthritis like my dad or organ issues like my gpa.

So, I may be on medication for the first time in my life. I'm excited for the possibility of getting my "normal" life back in terms of activity but dreading being a medication reliant person.

(PSA - if you have psoriasis like me, be more vain than I was and take it serious and don't blow it off and educate yourself because I was ignorant)

 

[IRISHDODGER]

It may have been Attia but I heard a heart specialist state that statins are advisable if you’ve already had an event. Purely anecdotal from second hand message board guy…LOL. I wouldn’t get overly cynical on the “big Pharma conspiracy”. Not saying they don’t want folks on their meds but statins are all generic now (w/ the exception of Crestor…maybe?) so big Pharma can no longer cash in on statins. Now it’s the generic companies from India making $ off the generic version (which is just a few bucks per script for you & me). The days of the “billion dollar mega-brands“ are long gone. Still some huge money makers (GLP-1) but most stuff is targeted now to specific patient groups.

Another anecdote, family MDs/Internists are under the thumb of managed care & their corporate bosses to see patients in an efficient manner. Doesn’t mean we don’t get great care but something to consider. They’re also (understandably so) cynical to their patients not doing the proper diet/exercise to reverse their health so they simply wait until their blood tests reveal it’s time for a beta blocker or a statin or insulin for their type 2 diabetes.

 

[IRISHDODGER]

Not really about junk food - but figured while we're talking about health, I'd share my recent news.
34 years hold, BMI 26, not sure of body fat percent, but athletic build good shape.
I get my physical every year with extra blood monitoring beyond normal comprehensive labwork (love tracking data)

Long story short - blood work is fantastic as usual. Doctor always tells me how great it is, but I've notice signs of sudden lingering pains in right fingers and right toes. No signs of arthritis in my bloodwork. However, I told my doctor that I've had psoriasis on my elbows and lower back for at least 10 years but never got worse and very small / didn't care.

Immediately the doctor said, you need to meet with dermatologists and rheumatologists. Turns out, me ignoring my psorisas caused me/dad/grandfather all to get diagnoses with an autoimmune disease. We all seem to have the same autoimmune issues. My grandpa's exhibits in ulcerative colitis, my dad in arthritis, me arthritis and skin plaques. My dad and gpa never got skin issues.

Summary, my doctors want me to start on biologics immediately to treat and possibly even reverse the skin AND the autoimmune disorder and can reverse my "pre" arthritis they're calling it before it progresses into osteoarthritis like my dad or organ issues like my gpa.

So, I may be on medication for the first time in my life. I'm excited for the possibility of getting my "normal" life back in terms of activity but dreading being a medication reliant person.

(PSA - if you have psoriasis like me, be more vain than I was and take it serious and don't blow it off and educate yourself because I was ignorant)

Good advice. Auto-immune stuff wreaks havoc on all regardless of co-morbidities. Auto-immune is almost always triggered by inflammation. The quickest thing to calm that down is steroids but that has long-term side effects. Now there’s the biologics that hopefully can target the specific auto-immune issue. Keep up the blood monitoring. Look into paying out-of-pocket for even more detailed blood testing that can predict multiple life shortening issues. May be worth the $500-$1000 investment. Insurance won’t cover it.

 

[FightingIrishLover7]

Now there’s the biologics that hopefully can target the specific auto-immune issue.

Yep. I used to work in pharma research and left. I'm pretty knowledgeable on certain things but have not kept up / don't know about certain things.
Biologics I was very out of the loop on. I've heard of Humira treating auto-immune disorders, but I'll be (if insurances approves) taking Skyrizi. Doctors agreed that since likely a hereditary disease and since my gpa has ulcerative colitis that this biologic attacking Interleukin 23 is the way to go. That has show results in treating psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, and ulcerative colitis. I'm hoping that since I caught this early not as much long term damage like my dad and gpa.

 

[Rizzophil]

Good advice. Auto-immune stuff wreaks havoc on all regardless of co-morbidities. Auto-immune is almost always triggered by inflammation. The quickest thing to calm that down is steroids but that has long-term side effects. Now there’s the biologics that hopefully can target the specific auto-immune issue. Keep up the blood monitoring. Look into paying out-of-pocket for even more detailed blood testing that can predict multiple life shortening issues. May be worth the $500-$1000 investment. Insurance won’t cover it.

Sugar is always the biggest reason for inflammations

 

[FightingIrishLover7]

Sugar is always the biggest reason for inflammations

And genetics, in my case. I have a really clean diet. Not perfect, but very good overall. Still not great. With that said, you are correct that if I had a bad diet, I'm sure my symptoms would be even worse.