karppaus.infon arkistoitu foorumi :: Philip Ovadia ravitsemussuositusten puolueellisuudesta ja poliittisuudesta

karppaus.infon arkistoitu foorumi https://karppi.ninja/forum/

Philip Ovadia ravitsemussuositusten puolueellisuudesta ja poliittisuudesta https://karppi.ninja/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=113829	Sivu 1/1

Julkaisija:	Wi-uusi [ 2022-09-19 09:40:22 ]
Viestin otsikko:	Philip Ovadia ravitsemussuositusten puolueellisuudesta ja poliittisuudesta
Philip Ovadian uutiskirjeessä oli painavaa asiaa ravitsemustieteen puolueellisuudesta ja politisoitumisesta. En ehdi nyt referoimaan, mutta liitän koko kirjeen sisällön tähän. Ovadia ei ole suora karppauksen puolestapuhuja, mutta kyllä hänen ydinviestinsä likeltä liippaavat. They say seeing is believing — but that isn't always true. And when it comes to the food we eat and the diets we follow, blind trust can be a dangerous thing. The food pyramid is a great example of this. Not only are 88% of Americans metabolically unhealthy, but their recommended diet is failing their bodies and their hearts. This isn't my only reservation about modern dietary guidelines. New research finds that 2021 Dietary Guidelines of Americans advisory committee (DGA) is almost completely inundated with conflicts of interest, to the tune of 95% of the entire board. And if that doesn't give you pause, their non-disclosure will. The DGA has not once disclosed its conflicts of interest in a public setting. Let's take a look at the evidence. COI in the DGA Conflicts of interest (COI) are rampant in the food industry. It's no question that vested interests have a measurable impact on our dietary guidelines, and quite possibly the quality of our dietary guidance. And to see COI in such a high concentration within DGA is disheartening, to say the least. In March 2022, researchers performed background research on the 20 members of DGA to determine the extent of their COIs and evaluate their impact on research funding. The results were staggering: 95% of the board was compromised with vested interests. Many board members were associated with industry giants such as Kellogg’s, General Mills, Dannon, and more. It gets worse. Roughly 60% of the documented COI was related to research funding or membership on a board. Most if not all of the 20 participants had a direct financial tie to the food industry. We’re starting to see the dirt under the rug. Not only are these COI practices completely unethical from a scientific perspective, but they completely negate the DGA's purpose: to provide Americans with unbiased, science-based nutritional advice. I believe I speak for everyone when I say dietary guidelines should and must be comprised of objective science. But with such a significant lack of transparency, objectivity, and unbiased reasoning, it's extremely difficult to trust the validity of DGA's advice. You can’t believe everything you read — even from so-called experts. And when it comes to the food you eat and the diet you uphold, you must think critically and do your own research. So what guidelines do we follow? Conflicts of interest have an enormous impact on the guidelines surrounding the Standard American Diet (SAD). And with so much uncertainty, our circumstances beg the question: what do we do now? I firmly believe the guidelines of our diets should be grounded in legitimized, ethical research. The rules we follow must be as whole and as real as the foods we eat, and come from an unbiased place of academic study. From my time in the medical field, I've followed several rules of thumb backed by credible research. These include: Eating whole, real foods. This means anything that comes from the ground or is raised on the ground — and no hyper-processed 'near food' objects. Evidence suggests that eating whole, real foods over a 16-week period may result in weight loss, increased energy values, and confidence surrounding health and wellness. Avoiding refined grains. Although conventional guidance may tell you otherwise, consuming high volumes of white rice and flour can significantly increase weight, blood sugar, and your albumin and triglycerides levels. Additionally, diets that are high in processed foods have a 30% higher all-cause mortality rate. Make grains a nonexistent part of your diet, and seek alternatives that provide more protein and higher fiber. Consuming animal protein. Plant-based alternatives have their benefits, but studies show meat is considerably more effective than legumes and nuts for reducing all-cause mortality. Chicken, fish, beef, and pork all have a place in the modern diet, and unless you have special dietary restrictions, you should be consuming these on a regular basis. Keep in mind that this is just a starting place for research-driven, heart healthy diets. As you embark on your own metabolic health journey, I encourage you to take a closer look at the DGA and the food industry as a whole. Where we go from here? The conflict of the Standard American Diet is old hat. But as increasing evidence sheds light on its continual failure, it's time we stopped following the advice of those with vested interests. If we want to take our diets back into our own hands, we need to be more critical of the foods we eat, the diets we follow, and the advice we choose to believe. This includes being wary of guidelines created by those with something to gain, evaluating our sources from a critical perspective, and looking to science rather than hearsay to make decisions about our diets. Only then can we hope to create a food system that is healthy, sustainable, and free from the stranglehold of Big Food.

Sivu 1/1	Kaikki ajat ovat UTC+02:00
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited https://www.phpbb.com/