so there was a Dr. Gil Caral who did a fact-checking video on me, so today we're going to do a fact-checking video on the fact checker. So we got a ton of requests from a lot of you guys to comment on this video. Okay, so the first thing he

says is there's a ton of you that requested to do a video on one of my videos. Huh? What what is my channel have to do with your channel? I'm just curious. Like Gil, can you just maybe show us uh how many people actually requested this video? We're going to focus only on

the substance. No ad hominem. I didn't Google him, I don't know anything about him, I didn't go watch a bunch of his other videos for context, nothing, because it doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is whether the claims match the evidence. So don't you hate that when you

know that there's some bad news coming, so some negative things about you coming, but they kind of prep it with, you know, 'Oh, we won't look at [you] as a character, we won't we'll be really nice to [you] as someone maybe pushes you underneath the bus.' Okay.

Let's continue. Let's go. This was in 2018. The new guidelines by the American Heart Association, okay, this is brand new. They said total cholesterol is not significantly associated with heart disease. Okay, that's the new finding. They just found out looking at your total

cholesterol doesn't really give you a lot of information with in relationship to predicting heart disease. I don't know what he's talking about. Total cholesterol is not the best marker, it's a dirty marker, but it definitely associates with cardiovascular disease, with heart

disease I don't remember any American Heart Association guidelines saying that it just doesn't associate period Here's the 2018 American Heart Association guidelines like he said population studies suggest optimal total cholesterol levels are about 150. Populations with cholesterol in this

range manifest low rates of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Nobody's saying it's the best marker but this is the opposite of what he's saying. I've read these guidelines, there's nothing in there about total cholesterol not associating period. Maybe he saw

something else and misunderstood it. Uh, is there anything in the description that he links as a reference? Okay, two links to journals, that's good. American Heart Association Journal, that's probably it. Let's click here. All right, sweet. Um, wait, this is scientific advisory for dietary

cholesterol. No way, no way. Don't tell me this guy is confusing. Wow, wow. Yep, here's the passage he's referring to. My God, generally no significant association with cardiovascular disease risk, but this document is the scientific, this is the science advisory on dietary

cholesterol. I think most people understand the difference, but just in case. All right, so that sounds a little bit staged, but nevertheless, he's absolutely correct. I did make a mistake. The American Heart Association did not say that, but they did say that the

dietary cholesterol is not associated with cardiovascular risk. However, if you take a look at this paper in 2018 entitled "LDL Cholesterol Does Not Cause Cardiovascular Disease: A Comprehensive Review of the Current Literature", under section two, "Does High Cholesterol Cause Atherosclerosis?" and in summary: no.

association between total cholesterol and degree of atherosclerosis that's stuff that clogs up your arteries so Gil point is correct American Heart Association did not say that but another uh paper did say that so both dietary cholesterol and blood level cholesterol is not associated with cardiovascular

risk more specifically risk for getting atherosclerosis all right let's move on particle size no longer predicts risk it's just like the astri analogy and they add two more lines of evidence okay wait a second let's go back to this for a second saturated fats and

cardiovascular health current evidence and controversies this is an editorial piece it's not an actual study it's someone talking about the data and they add two more lines of evidence statins which have a well-established effect of lowering risk preferentially

reduce large LDL and number two patients with familial hypercholesterolemia which is a disease where people have very high cholesterol and very high risk of heart disease they have mainly large LDLs and they are at high risk indicating that large LDLs are not

benign okay the next point he brings up which is rather a long explanation I'm going to summarize it because it gets into a lot of additional things which are a bit complex but basically the point I was making was that um you have two different size particles with LDL

you have small dense and you have large buoyant okay and I was making a point that the small dense were more pathological they create more problems than the large buoyant particles and so then he shows several references that it's not true they're both damaging

especially if you look at the total concentration of LDL, if that's high you know that's going to be a bigger problem, but uh there were two additional studies that I want to show you right now that um came a little bit later than the one

he posted. This one was originally published in 15 February 2021. Small dense low-density lipoprotein, that would be the small dense LDL cholesterol, is the most atherogenic lipoprotein parameter in the prospective Framingham Offspring study in the

conclusion, it says our data indicate that small dense LDL is the most atherogenic lipoprotein parameter. And then there's one more study I want to show you, 2017, small dense low-density lipoprotein, that's LDL, as a biomarker for atherosclerotic diseases. So this is the

conclusion, the results of the recent study demonstrate that LDL fractions, talking about the low-dense versus the um large buoyant, okay, the two different uh particle sizes have different atherogenicity. That means ability to affect the arteries with the small dense LDL being more atherogenic than the

large LDL subfractions. Small dense LDL is characterized by the enhanced ability to penetrate the arterial wall. That makes it a potent source of cholesterol for the development of atherosclerotic plaque. Importantly, longer circulation times of small dense LDL result in

multiple atherogenic modifications of small dense LDL particles in plasma, that's your blood, further increasing its atherogenicity. Now they just mentioned why the small dense LDL is more pathogenic because it has the ability to penetrate the deeper walls as well as

having a longer circulation time, the longer that a small, dense LDL is exposed to the arteries, okay, it's going to create more problems. And there was some additional data that there's more oxidation going on with the small, dense LDL than the large, buoyant. Okay, let's

move to a different topic. Um, one little thing that um Dr. Gil kept bringing up was uh this this word, we he keeps saying, well, we did this or we're doing that. Um, my first thought was I thought you were an independent guy who just basically is

putting out the message and and um doing videos on various topics. It's not on his YouTube channel. I had to do a little searching, and I suspect it's a a group that he's a member of, and of course, I'm just guessing, but that's the only group

that I could find. So Dr. Gil is a member or council member of an organization called True Health Initiative. So let's take a look at what this organization is. Plant-based diet for reversing disease and saving the planet. Okay, so this is a plant-based organization. All right, let's go down to

the bottom and and take a look at the purpose of this organization and what they do. Okay, changing policy, changing minds, improving lives. We are a global coalition of world-renowned experts fighting fake facts and combating false doubts about creating a world free of

preventable diseases using the time-honored evidence-based fundamentals of lifestyle as medicine. Okay, so the whole uh mission is to fight fake facts and uh combat false doubts. Okay, all right. So that must be the organization that he's talking about when we're talking about

we uh if we scroll down we see no beef week challenge okay so this is uh this is definitely a vegan or vegetarian type um group supporting the benefits of plant-based uh let's take a look at their Partners the True Health Initiative Partners okay we have no beef so I can

see very clearly they're against beef now if you look at how many videos that I have on meat and beef there's a lot I actually am pro beef right I tell people to consume beef now I see why this fact-checking video was created Dr. Go

also did one on Dr. Eberg who also has the same philosophy because we're into the a healthy version of the ketogenic diet okay so now it's all making a lot more sense so Dr. Gil if you're watching um I just want to let you know I did

participate in a study involving grass-fed beef and uh from farmers all over the United States and they submitted their beef into this study uh and it was a metabolomic study looking at all these metabolites and comparing grass-fed to grain-fed beef okay and

about six months after the study uh the researcher called me up and said what are you doing uh I said what do you mean he says take a look at this report look at this first graph total phytochemicals phal stands for plants interesting so you can clearly see the

difference between the beef that I submitted for this research project as far as the amount of phytochemicals plant-based chemicals in the beef and this was compared to other farmers who had grass-fed and compared to grain-fed so this was the total phytochemicals

okay if we scroll down we'll take a look at a very specific polyphenol called hirate which is the major polyphenol these typically are antioxidant anti-inflammatory and higher levels are associated with improved gut microbial diversity and a lowered risk for

metabolic syndrome in humans here's another one that was significantly higher which is an anti-inflammatory metabolite here's another one antioxidant anti-inflammatory and take a look at the fatty acid profile we're looking at the Omega 6 to omega 3 ratios

so a lower Omega 6 to 3 ratio is typically considered beneficial lower levels means a higher abundance of omega-3 fatty acids here's another interesting finding vitamin B3 quite a bit more than the other groups here's one that's a bit lower than the others

Advanced glycation end products which is a major negative marker for health here's another one homocysteine uh much lower than the other groups which is a beneficial thing but and the reason I wanted to mention this is because so many times people lump in processed meat

with grass-fed grass-finished beef like they're the same thing they're not and of course there's not a tremendous amount of research in the area of grass-fed grass-finished beef but that's coming using what's called metabolomic testing so you could really see what's going on

with these health markers because there is a difference in differentiating going to McDonald's versus getting a really healthy source of beef which is filled with phytonutrients and a lot of other great things including a lot of great bio-valuable protein so Dr Gil if you're

watching just want to let you know um there's a lot of positive things in beef that personally I feel very healthy when I consume it but I can see that I'm a target for this organization for sure all right let's scroll down a little bit

further on the True Health Initiative we have Beyond Meat all right the truth about plant-based meats okay I see so this is definitely supporting plant-based meats and alternative meats okay and if we do a search on Dr. Gill's site you have quite

a few videos uh about imitation meats or Beyond Impossible Burger lab-grown meat I I have no idea what your thoughts are I didn't watch these videos but you definitely talk about these these products now the president of this organization uh Dr. David Katz is definitely not a fan of Keto or any

other diet that restricts entire food groups calling them unhealthy or unsustainable he said that keto is just a false label for some kind of diet that presumably restricts added sugar and refined carbohydrates which frankly any good diet does Katz's low opinion on keto

is echoed by many nutritional specialists across the country Katz joined 24 other top names in the field to rank 35 popular weight loss programs for 2020 recently put up by the US News and World Report which is a very credible uh news organization on being very

sarcastic here's another article toasting 2017 goodbye with the ketogenic Kool-Aid this is by Dr. Katz as well he said the historical case for ketogenesis denying the body its customary fuel source that glucose is in short supply and instead

it metabolizes fat preferentially and generates ketone bodies as fuel uh resides in starvation rather predictably starvation has profound effects on all aspects of metabolism the body effectively turns to autodigestion to sustain itself during the protracted

fast now first of all I can tell that what you're talking about is is starvation it's not even fasting your body might create autophagy but it's not going to go after the muscles until you're actually starving until you burn up your fat I mean this is the way our

bodies were designed to store fat to live during times of famine and we didn't have food so we would burn fat so there's a way to do ketosis without even doing fasting and just cutting down your carbs he goes on to say that the one

known benefit of ketogenic diets is for the short-term control of otherwise intractable seizures mostly in certain children so why would that be a short-term thing if it helped them and that's the only benefit that you know okay you should go to my website I have

over 7,000 success stories which you probably won't consider valid but there's 7,000 people um that are real testimonials of going on the ketogenic diet and looking at many other benefits here's another quote there are as noted short-term studies of ketogenic diets

showing the usual metabolic benefits attached to almost any diet so basically just lump everything together all right whatever but this next sentence is quite entertaining but lest you think short-term improvements in these markers a good idea makes consider these other interventions that do the same out of

choleric a crack cocaine binge the spread of cancer through one's body or the advance of tuberculosis my goodness many life-threatening diseases evoke autodigestion and cause weight cholesterol glucose insulin and blood pressure to fall they are all emphatically ill advised just the same

so he's comparing the ketogenic diet creating damage like you would if you smoke crack or had cancer or had TB and the last thing I want to bring up just one last quote as I write this the proposed guiding principles for healthy eating in Canada have just been released

they are eminently sensible current and evidence-based so naturally they are under immediate attack as was the comparably sensible 2015 report of the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee here in the US before its ink was dry all right so definitely he's talking

about how you know there was some attack on this Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee well if you take a look at this website called the US Right to Know.org nearly half of the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee have conflicts of interest this is why it's attacked so I'm not sure about Dr Gil

but I definitely know Dr Katz doesn't like keto and probably doesn't like my 9980 keto videos which very unfortunately well he'll probably like this it's you can't even find them anymore when you do a search on keto all you see is the negative keto videos that

come up but of course if you search for the plant-based ones they're all really nice and positive so my question for Gil and others who do like an uh anti-Dr. Berg videos is what diet do you recommend you know what should we be eating and let's compare that versus

just the keto ketogenic diet because there's a lot of different ketogenic diet versions uh the one I recommend is the healthy version in fact I don't know if Gil knows this but I recommend 7 to 10 cups of vegetables every single day which is a considerable amount of

vegetables I don't know if you knew that or not but as I dug more into this true Health Initiative site I found a link to this other site called eat forum.org it's called the EAT Lancet Commission planetary Health diet so as far as I

know this might be the diet that this group recommends I don't know this for a fact but it's definitely mostly plant-based and they want to put this out to the entire planet so this is what it looks like okay here's the interesting thing about this diet

they're recommending 811 calories behold grains okay what about gluten what about the phytates which block zinc and what about the fact that very very few people have just whole grains they have a combination of whole grains and refined grains I mean just take a look at the

grocery store they do recommend potatoes and cassava uh fruits 126 calories but this is interesting beef we can have 30 calories per day that comes out to a half of an ounce per day that's like a little little tiny bite but we can have

284 calories from legumes okay and 291 calories of nuts and 354 calories of unsaturated oils would that be like soy oil canola oil cottonseed oil corn oil I couldn't find the specific unsaturated fats and that you're allowed added

sugars, 120 calories, that's 7.5 teaspoons per day. Now, why is that on the list of a planetary health diet? Why do you even have to add sugars? What is healthy about those added sugars? I would love to know. Now, another thing about this planetary

health diet is the strategic partners. Okay, strategic partners. Let's take a look who that would be. Well, we have Nestle. That's interesting. Nestle produces a lot of um, refined foods at the grocery store, don't they? Why are they involved in this planetary health

diet? That's that's strange. Well, I did a little deeper dive on vegannews.com and apparently Nestle is the first major food company to get behind lab-grown meat. Incredible. Dr. Gil, if you're watching, please tell us what we should be eating and please educate us

on what is damaging about what I'm recommending and also what is so beneficial health-wise of what you're recommending. Now, because of the censoring and the suppressing of the algorithms on YouTube, it's becoming more difficult to find my content and there's

a lot of content that I cannot put on YouTube unfortunately. So to make sure you have full access of all my information, go to drberg.com and subscribe to my newsletter by clicking the link down below in the description. I will see you on the other side.

Dr. Berg Fact-checks the Fact-Checker

Dr. Eric Berg DC, age 59, discusses the truth about getting healthy and losing weight. Dr. Berg specializes in Healthy Ketosis and Intermittent Fasting. He is the director of Dr. Berg's Nutritionals, and a best-selling amazon.com author. 

His book, The Healthy Keto Plan describes specific strategies on doing the healthy version of the ketogenic diet as well as intermittent
fasting. He has conducted over 4800 seminars on health-related topics and trained over 2500 doctors world-wide in his methods. Dr. Berg breaks down confusing complex health topics into easy to understand, usable knowledge. 

For more information, go to our website at www.drberg.com or call customer service at 703-354-7336. Much of the details of Dr. Berg's program is in his exclusive membership site at: https://www.drberg.com/exclusive-membership

By:
Dr. Eric Berg
4501 Ford Avenue
Alexandria, VA, 22302
703-354-7336

Dr. Eric Berg DC

길 카랄 박사의 팩트체크 동영상에 대한 답변

연사가 길 카랄 박사의 사실 확인 동영상을 소개합니다.

동영상 요청 횟수에 대해 질문하고 클레임의 내용에 집중합니다.

분석은 오로지 주장이 증거와 일치하는지 여부에만 초점을 맞출 것임을 강조합니다.

부정적인 정보를 제시하는 데 있어 조작적인 접근 방식으로 인식되는 것에 대한 의견입니다.

콜레스테롤 및 심장 질환 관련 클레임 분석

총 콜레스테롤과 심장병에 대한 미국심장협회의 2018년 가이드라인에 대한 논쟁.

발표자는 총 콜레스테롤이 심혈관 질환과 관련이 없다는 주장을 반박합니다.

최적의 총 콜레스테롤 수치를 제시하는 2018년 미국심장학회(AHA) 가이드라인의 증거를 제공합니다.

참조된 연구가 총 콜레스테롤이 아닌 식이 콜레스테롤에 관한 것임을 명확히 합니다.

식이 콜레스테롤에 대한 AHA 성명서에 대한 실수를 인정합니다.

식이 및 혈중 콜레스테롤이 심혈관 질환 위험과 관련이 없다는 주장을 뒷받침하는 추가 연구를 제시합니다.

LDL 콜레스테롤 입자 크기와 위험성에 대한 논의

LDL 입자 크기가 심혈관 질환 위험을 예측하는지에 대한 논쟁.

발표자의 원래 요점은 작고 밀도가 높은 LDL 입자가 크고 부력이 있는 입자보다 더 병적이라는 것이었습니다.

작고 밀도가 높은 LDL이 죽종을 더 많이 생성한다는 연구 결과를 제시합니다.

작고 밀도가 높은 LDL이 침투력과 순환 시간이 길어 병원성이 더 높은 이유를 설명합니다.

길 카랄 박사의 소속에 대한 조사

연사가 길 카랄 박사의 트루 헬스 이니셔티브와의 관계를 조사합니다.

트루 헬스 이니셔티브를 가짜 사실과 싸우는 데 중점을 둔 식물 기반 조직으로 설명합니다.

쇠고기에 대한 조직의 반대를 언급하며 팩트체크 동영상의 제작 동기를 설명합니다.

발표자가 자신의 소고기 찬성 입장과 목초 사육 소고기에 대한 연구 참여에 대해 언급합니다.

풀을 먹인 소고기와 곡물을 먹인 소고기를 비교한 대사체 연구 결과를 발표하여 풀을 먹인 소고기의 식물성 화학물질 함량이 더 높다는 점을 강조합니다.

풀을 먹인 소고기에서 더 높은 농도로 발견되는 특정 유익한 화합물에 대해 자세히 설명합니다.

가공육과 건강한 목초 사육 소고기의 차이점을 강조합니다.

화자는 풀을 먹인 소고기 섭취의 건강상의 이점에 대한 믿음을 표현합니다.

트루헬스 이니셔티브의 입장 및 파트너 분석

트루 헬스 이니셔티브의 식물성 육류에 대한 지원을 강조하고 케토제닉 식단에 대한 데이비드 카츠 박사의 부정적인 견해를 언급합니다.

케토 다이어트에 대한 카츠 박사의 비판을 인용하여 해로운 행동과 비교합니다.

연사는 개인적인 성공 사례로 카츠 박사의 주장에 반박하고 이해 상충으로 인한 식이 지침 위원회에 대한 공격을 언급합니다.

연사가 시청자에게 권장 식단과 건강한 케토제닉 식단을 비교하도록 도전합니다.

EAT-랜싯 위원회의 지구 건강 식단에 대한 비판

EAT-Lancet 위원회의 지구 건강 식단을 소개하고 그 권장 사항에 대해 질문합니다.

통곡물 권장량은 높고 소고기 허용량은 낮은 식단을 비판합니다.

첨가당 포함 여부와 전략적 파트너인 Nestle의 참여에 의문을 제기합니다.

실험실에서 키운 육류에 대한 네슬레의 개입을 지적합니다.

발표자가 권장 식단을 비교하고 건강에 미치는 영향에 대해 토론합니다.