 In the preface of How Not To Die, after bemoaning the fact that I never got taken out to dinner by Big Broccoli, I wrote that you'll never probably see an ad on TV for whole natural foods, because there's just not much of a markup. They're not shelf stable. You can't brand them, patent them, trademark them. Real food just isn't as profitable as junk. But I may have to eat those words. There was evidently a TV ad for avocados, and during the Super Bowl, no less. Not like avocado flavored Doritos or something, but an ad for the actual fruit, thanks to billions of avocados sold every year, giving the avocado board $50 million, not only for ads, but for research. I previously touched on their burger study, in which adding avocado blunted the spike in inflammation one gets within hours of eating meat. So they added more fat, more calories, but got less inflammation, perhaps because they were adding that fat and calories in the form of a whole-plant food, which tend to be packed with antioxidants, which can inhibit the formation of oxidized fats that are formed when meat is cooked and when it hits your stomach acid. Do other high-fat, high-calorie whole-plant foods have the same protective effect? What about peanuts, for example? We didn't know until now, not to be outdone by Big Guac. The Peanut Institute funded this study with the understanding that most of us spend most of our waking hours in a post-prandial state, in other words, an after-meal state, and the fact coursing through our systems from those meals is a well-recognized risk factor for atherosclerosis, the number one killer of men and women, and manifests as impaired endothelial function, meaning crippled artery function, within hours of a crappy meal, like a milkshake. 1200 calories are mostly sugar and heavy cream. Okay, but what if you drank that same milkshake with 3 ounces of peanuts added? Now, to match up the added fat and protein, they had to add some oil and egg whites, and even threw in a fiber supplement to try to match the nutritional profile of the added peanuts as closely as possible. So here you have two milkshakes, pretty much the same calories, same amount of sugar, same amount of protein, same amount of fat, same amount of saturated fat, same fiber. So on paper, they should cause the same reaction in the body. But peanuts are whole plant foods, and so what you don't see listed here are the thousands of fiber nutrients in the peanut milkshake missing from the non-peanut milkshake. Would it make any difference? That's what this study aimed to find out. This is showing artery function before either milkshake is ingested, the ability for arteries to relax and dilate normally. Within hours of consuming the non-peanut milkshake, all that saturated fat and sugar clamps artery function down about 20%. One milkshake. Okay, but what if you ate the same amount of sugar and saturated fat, but with a little real food floating in there? No significant drop. So the peanuts help preserve artery function in response to the endothelial insult, a cardio protective effect, presumably due to the active phytonutrients in peanuts. Now, walnuts may work even better, eat a salami and cheese sandwich with some olive oil, and artery function plummets like a third, but replace that olive oil with the same amount of plant fat in the form of whole walnuts. You don't just blunt the effect of the salami and cheese, but reverse it, ending up actually better than you started out. What about avocados? Research indicates that calorie-dense foods increase inflammation oxidation, thereby contributing to the development of artery disease. However, it's not clear whether the high calorie load alone, irrespective of the nutritional content of the ingested food, produces that postprandial after the meal oxidation and inflammatory activity. And so what this study did was compare the impact of high calorie junk, high fat, high sugar ice cream, a phytonutrient reduced food, that's an understatement, compared to the effects of the exact same number of calories from a calorie-dense, phytonutrient-rich whole-plant food avocado. If it's just the concentration of calories, the concentration of fat, they should have the same effect. They tested reactions to four different meals, ice cream versus avocado, versus just the fat and protein from the ice cream to separate out the sugar, and then just the amount of sugar in the ice cream to separate out the effects of the saturated butterfat. So two pints of ice cream versus just the cream, versus just the sugar, no fat, versus about four avocados, which ends up having about three times the fat, as ice cream in the same amount of saturated fat, and the same whopping load of calories. Okay, so what happened? Eat the ice cream, or just the sugar-free components, or just the sugar, and the level of oxidative stress in people's bloodstream goes up. But this is not observed after ingestion of a calorie equivalent whole-plant food. Unlike the ice cream, ingestion of the whole food avocado, even though it's packed with calories and fat, did not produce a rise in oxidative or inflammatory activity, suggesting that the after-meal oxidative stress observed after eating foods such as ice cream may be due to their isolation from nutrients like antioxidants. Sugar is okay in fruit form because it comes naturally prepackaged with phytonutrients. Similarly, the fat in whole-plant foods like nuts and avocados comes prepackaged with a rich matrix of phytochemicals and therefore doesn't demonstrate the same potential for oxidative damage.