karppaus.infon arkistoitu foorumi

One more example of data misrepresentation to justify healthy eating dogma.

http://vernerwheelock.com/265-more-doub ... al-advice/ …

Unfortunately this is just one more example of bad science, which has dogged so much of human nutrition in the past 50 years. The values placed on the risk factors are just “guessology”. There can be no excuse for ignoring the fact that the reductions in death rates in Kuopio were at least as good as in North Karelia, even though the risk factors remained the same.

Suomessa kiinnitettiin elintapojen ja kansanterveyden välisiin suhteisiin erityistä huomiota laajassa Pohjois-Karjala-projektissa
.
1970-luvulta 90-luvun loppupuolelle kestäneessä kansanterveyskampanjassa tavoitteena oli vähentää sydänkuolemia juuri elintapojen muuttamisella eli suolan, tupakan ja kovien rasvojen välttämisellä.

A special present for you today Pauli - loads of studies show this, but they sadly ignored...

Yllättäen professori Juhani Knuuti yrittää kampittaa HERTTA-testin käytön yleistymistä. Hän onkin siirtynyt tutkimaan painokkaasti huuhaata. Nyt hän pitää huuhaana professorikollegansa kehitystyötä. Olisiko Lääkäriliiton hallituksen annettava julkinen varoitus epäkollegiaalisesta käytöksestä ?

RESULTS: Eight RCTs enrolling 663 participants were included in the review, with intervention durations between 4 and 28 weeks. Although nonsignificant (p = 0.06), meta-analysis found UFA replacement to reduce total cholesterol concentrations by 10.68 mg/dL (95%CI -21.90 to 0.53). Reductions in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and triglycerides were statistically nonsignificant.
CONCLUSIONS: Due to null results and a small number of studies included, there is no strong evidence that replacement of SFA with UFA may benefit lipid profiles in this population.

Our fervent wish is that, through this supplementary issue, people can see that the cholesterol hypothesis relies on very weak data—and sometimes considerably distorted data. Indeed, many studies in Japan actually show that cholesterol plays a very positive role in health. We hope that JAS, and the government authorities that defer to JAS’s recommendations, will move toward recognizing cholesterol as a friend not an enemy. In the meantime, we will continue pushing for acceptance of the anti-cholesterol hypothesis, to reverse what we see as the biggest mistake made by medical science in the previous century.

The low-fat diet for heart disease, weight loss and much else besides is a zombie myth. Those who keep it alive remain devoted to the diet-heart hypothesis that saturated fat causes heart disease.
No one has yet proved the hypothesis. Thus, it is currently unscientific. 
You wouldn’t know it from the reaction of many doctors and dietitians to the PURE study. Although associational, PURE is yet another nail in the low-fat coffin. Yet many ‘experts’ have a vested interest in keeping the low-fat myth alive. Here, Australian GP Dr Joe Kosterich speculates on why. And shows why it’s time to give it a decent burial. – Marika Sboros

Conclusions
Overall, the evidence presented in this study suggests that the replacement of SFA with MUFA or refined carbohydrates may not improve inflammatory and thrombogenic markers in abdominally overweight individuals. Indeed increased refined carbohydrates consumption adversely impacts fasting HDL subfractions.