Diabetes, cancer and weight: a Metabolic Typing survey

Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients, Feb-March, 2003 by Harold J. Kristal, James M. Haig

Our work with Metabolic Typing puts us in a unique position to observe relationships between particular disease conditions and the different Metabolic Types. A Metabolic Type can be understood as the characteristic way in which an individual produces and processes energy. By addressing the individual at this fundamental level, we are able to match up their metabolism with an appropriate diet that will help to protect the body from the development of the common degenerative diseases. This approach is in line with, and a contemporary restatement of, the traditional naturopathic orientation to healthcare, where the individual as a whole is addressed, rather than just their specific disease condition. The survey that is presented below shows a direct correlation between diabetes and cancer and specific Metabolic Types in our own patient population. It reinforces the concept that different dietary approaches are needed for individuals to regain or maintain optimal health, and provides important pointers as to how to use dietary intervention to prevent such diseases from occurring in the first place. Before we look at the details and implications of our patient survey, we'll begin with a general overview of the principles underlying Metabolic Typing.

Metabolic Typing: An Overview

In 1987, I was introduced to a little known nutritional protocol that addresses the individual at the foundational metabolic level, rather than directly addressing any particular disease condition. The basic thesis of this Oxidative system approach to metabolic balancing is that imbalances which sooner or later manifest as outright diseases originate when our blood pH deviates too far from the ideal of 7.46. It was George Watson, PhD, a full professor at the University of Southern California and author of the classic book Nutrition and Your Mind: The Psychochemical Response, who first introduced this theory to the world. Watson's typing methodology, later refined by Rudolf Wiley, PhD, was based on the functioning of the Oxidative system, the complex of processes that generate energy at an intracellular level. Within this system, individuals are typed according to the speed at which they convert nutrients into energy, in the form of ATP (adenosine triphosphate).

In 1996, nutritionist William Wolcott introduced me to another metabolic balancing protocol, based on the autonomic nervous system (ANS). This Autonomic system, rooted in the early research of Francis M. Pottenger, MD, and further developed by William Donald Kelley, DDS, relies on a different metabolic pathway than the Oxidative system. It looks to the relative dominance of the two divisions of the ANS (sympathetic and parasympathetic) as the primary barometers of metabolic balance. The main contribution of Wolcott himself, who had worked for many years directly with Dr. Kelley, was the realization that either one or the other of these two dominance systems -- as Wolcott termed the Oxidative and Autonomic systems -- is the primary factor controlling each individual's metabolism. This approach, incorporating both dominance systems, is what we now refer to as Metabolic Typing (see Figure I).

The singular importance of determining oxidative or autonomic dominance is that most foods and supplements are processed differently in each system, producing a different pH effect at the level of the blood, For example, fruits and vegetables are generally considered to be alkaline-forming, and so indeed most of them are within the Autonomic system; but within the Oxidative system they have precisely the opposite effect, and are actually acid-forming. Conversely, protein foods are generally considered to be acid forming, and while most of them are indeed acid forming within the Autonomic system, they are actually alkaline-forming within the Oxidative system. Because one of the two members of both dominance systems (the Fast Oxidizer and the Sympathetic) already runs on the acid side at the level of the blood pH, feeding them foods that further acidify their blood would be counterproductive. Conversely, feeding alkaline-forming foods to the two types that already run on the alkaline side (the Slow Oxidizer and the Parasympathetic) would also be counterproductive. But, given that what is acid-forming in one dominance system is alkaline-forming in the other system, we end up with two types with opposite blood pHs -- one from each dominance system -- sharing the nutritional requirements.

Thus, what we refer to as the Group I diet -- lower in protein and fat, and higher in complex carbohydrates -- is shared by the overly alkaline Slow Oxidizer and the overly acidic Sympathetic. Because the same foods have opposite pH effects in members of the two dominance systems, the Group I foods acidify the overly alkaline Slow Oxidizer while alkalinizing the overly acid Sympathetic, thereby helping to move both types towards a balance point, albeit from opposite directions. Similarly, the Group II diet -- higher in protein and fat, and lower in complex carbohydrates -- helps to alkalinize the overly acidic Fast Oxidizer and acidify the overly alkaline Parasympathetic. Thus, from a Metabolic Typing perspective, the pH effect of any given food is not fixed, as is usually assumed, but is determined to a large extent by the particular metabolism (or, more accurately, by which dominance system controls the metabolism) of the individual consuming it (see Figure II).