For decades, "experts" have been recommending increased fiber in the diet to prevent colorectal polyps and/or cancer, to treat/prevent constipation, diverticulous, hang nail (OK, maybe I'm exaggerating about the hang nail issue) — the point is, whenever someone has a digestive problem, what do the "experts" recommend? That's right — they recommend more fiber in the diet. I've been skeptical about this for years, and I even mentioned it in my book, and cited a reference that reached the same conclusion that I've reached — namely that fiber doesn't actually seem to do any of these things that have been attributed to it by "experts" with vivid imaginations.
Research shows that fiber does not prevent the development of colorectal polyps or cancer, nor does it improve or prevent diverticulitis — in fact, it appears to make diverticulitis worse (as can be seen by the worldwide increase in diverticulitis problems as people have added more fiber to their diet).
And now a recent research project has shown that the long-standing claim that fiber helps to treat or prevent constipation, is also bogus. Dr. Briffa discusses this in a recent blog:
Study finds dietary fibre is more likely to be cause of, rather than a cure for, constipation and other bowel symptomsThe study focused on 63 adult (average age 47) individuals who had persistent constipation for which no medical cause could be identified [1]. Stool (bowel motion) frequency was less than once every three days for at least three months. All participants were on a high-fibre diet and/or were taking fibre supplements.
Study participants were instructed to adopt a low-fibre diet, and specifically to eliminate fruit, vegetables, breakfast cereals, wholemeal bread and brown rice for two weeks. After this, participants were asked to continue eating as little fibre as possible if this helped their symptoms.
6 months after the start of the study, 41 patients had persisted with the ‘no-fibre’ diet, 16 were eating a reduced fibre diet, and 6 were on a high-fibre diet for a variety of reasons (including being vegetarian or religious reasons).
In the 41 patients on the no-fibre diet, average bowel frequency had increased from an average of once every 3.75 days to once every day.
In the 16 patients on the reduced-fibre diet, average bowel frequency had increased from an average of once every 4.19 days to once every 1.9 days.
In the 6 patients who remained on a high-fibre diet, bowel frequency was once a week initially, and it remained the same on the high-fibre diet (as expected).
Symptoms of bloating occurred in 0 and 31 per cent of the low- and reduced-fibre eaters respectively. Of those on the no-fibre diet, no one had to strain to pass a stool. Abdominal pain also improved in this group and any anal bleeding they had resolved completely.
Stopping or reducing dietary fiber intake reduces constipation and its associated symptoms
That's pretty strong evidence, IMO. I'm beginning to wonder — are any of the dietary recommendations that have been made by the "experts" in the past century actually valid? Or did they just arbitrarily make them up all those claims? One by one, they're falling by the wayside, as researchers actually check them out and find that they're simply not true.
Don't try this at home, as they say, but about 10 years ago, when it finally dawned on me that my severe digestive system problems were probably due to my diet, I removed most of the fiber from my diet, (along with the removal of food sensitivities), and since then, every time that I have experimented with adding fiber back in, my body has demonstrated either disapproval, or no benefits, so my current diet is still virtually devoid of fiber, and always will be.
We are all well aware that fiber is contraindicated for anyone who has active MC (or any other IBD). But is it actually good for anyone? Archaeological records show that the paleo people actually ate much less fiber than has been traditionally attributed to them, and the evidence suggests that they typically ate from a third to half the amounts recommended today. Could it be that they simply ate fiber in order to prevent having an empty stomach, until they could find some "real" food to sustain them?
Beyond that, I'm beginning to wonder if fiber might be implicated in the environment that predisposes us to the development of MC and/or other autoimmune type diseases. After all, research shows that fiber causes "regularity" by physically tearing the cells in the mucosa of the intestines, to cause them to dump their mucin, as the immune system marks them for apoptosis (programmed destruction) and replacement. Why would a lifetime of physical trauma to an organ be beneficial?
The traditional medical view of chronic insults that are in the form of long-term abuse and/or physical or chemical damage to an organ, is that such abuse leads to cancer.
Tex
