Oops, they got it wrong about cholesterol

[claig]

"We've all spent time worrying about our cholesterol levels, but what if it was all... a conspiracy! What if the truth was that eating lots of fat doesn't clog your arteries and kill you, and that there's been a deliberate effort to ignore that evidence in order to secure the financial fortunes of Big Pharma's major anti-cholesterol drugs?"

www.cbsnews.com/news/dawn-of-the-cholesterol-skeptics-big-pharma-conspiracy-theorists-get-a-turn-in-the-spotlight/

"Flawed science triggers U-turn on cholesterol fears"
...
Its Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee plans to no longer warn people to avoid eggs, shellfish and other cholesterol-laden foods.

The U-turn, based on a report by the committee, will undo almost 40 years of public health warnings about eating food laden with cholesterol. US cardiologist Dr Steven Nissen, of the Cleveland Clinic, said: 'It's the right decision. We got the dietary guidelines wrong. They've been wrong for decades.'

Doctors are now shifting away from warnings about cholesterol and saturated fat and focusing concern on sugar as the biggest dietary threat.

The Daily Mail's GP Martin Scurr predicts that advice will change here in the UK too.
...
He added that the food industry had effectively contributed to heart disease by lowering saturated fat levels in food and replacing it with sugar.

Matt Ridley, a Tory peer and science author, yesterday said there should be an inquiry 'into how the medical and scientific profession made such an epic blunder'.

He described the change of advice in the US as a 'mighty U-turn' and said studies linking high cholesterol and saturated fat in food to heart disease were 'tinged with scandal'."

www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3096634/Why-butter-eggs-won-t-kill-Flawed-science-triggers-U-turn-cholesterol-fears.html

I wonder if a similar thing will happen in about 40 years to the "save the planet" climate change warnings.

Oops!

During the usual overnight fast, the body's metabolism naturally switches into ketosis, and will switch back to glycolysis after a carbohydrate-rich meal

So do you know what your body does overnight?
Do you know where it gets the glucose from?

We have glycogen stores. Glycogen is converted to glucose and used in glycolysis. So normally your overnight glucose levels stay roughly the same.

If you have a problem with that (undiagnosed diabetes for example), then your morning glucose will be high as you've not been able to store glucose as glycogen. So you can't regulate it.

I'd be surprised if the body needs to resort to ketosis overnight in healthy people. Certainly can't see any biochemical reason for it.

But I suppose Wiki is more accurate than science in a journal.

books.google.co.uk/books?id=S5oCjZZZ1ggC&pg=PA732&lpg=PA732&dq=overnight+fasting+ketosis&source=bl&ots=2xKCyXmKrC&sig=2FcKvutWhK5MvoSPYQ4oYPsrALA&hl=en&sa=X&ei=ZVpnVaqkKMv1UJr7gLAL&ved=0CFEQ6AEwCDgK#v=onepage&q=overnight%20fasting%20ketosis&f=false

No diabetes here Orlando. Just that I go into ketosis quickly.

This was over ten years ago.

"They [researchers] claim homo sapiens first appeared 180,000 years ago, but stayed in one location around bodies of water in central Africa for almost 100,000 years.

Senior author Doctor Floyd Chilton, professor of physiology and pharmacology and director of the Centre for Botanical Lipids and Inflammatory Disease Prevention at Wake Forest Baptist, said the location was critical as the ready supply of fish and shellfish provided the fatty acid Docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), which was necessary for brain development.

'This may have kept early humans tethered to the water in central Africa where there was a constant food source of DHA,' he said.

'There has been considerable debate on how early humans were able to obtain sufficient DHA necessary to maintain brain size and complexity.
...
This conversion meant that early humans didn't have to rely on just one food source, fish, for brain growth and development."

www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2206544/Humans-began-eating-plants-180-000-years-ago-aid-brain-development---affecting-diet-today.html

Sounds like humans ate fish right from the beginning.

Attia is always quite good on this topic.

eatingacademy.com/nutrition/ketosis-advantaged-or-misunderstood-state-part-i

None of us has anything to prove. Those that know what makes us feel healthy and well are more than content if others have different views. However there is a huge movement of doctors and many others who believe from things like the Newcastle study for diabetics, to the traditional treatment of children with epilepsy that the way to good health for many is eating less and eating only health foods. that might well be high good fats, medium protein and lower carb. I still think if you don't over eat if you eat only healthy unprocessed carbs in reasonable amounts you will be fine too. The bottom line is that our huge bottoms (60% over weight int he UK) are largely caused by people moving to processed foods, higher carb and ditching good fats like the fat on meat.

Orlando
that book you linked was published in 2005, 10 years ago.

You haven't commented on the link regarding ketosis and ketoacidosis. It says they are not the same thing at all.

A different kind of pathologic ketosis occurs in uncontrolled diabetes.

So some highly educated people say one thing, other highly educated people say the opposite.
How do you know who to believe? Presumably they are all educated enough in their fields to be considered knowledgeable and experts, yet opinion is as different as chalk and cheese.

Some highly educated people are in the pay of big corporations who pay them to find results in their favour and statistics are skewed. Others sell themselves as the honest voice in a scientific world of dishonesty.

So how are we, the uneducated, supposed to know what's best when advice differs so wildly.

Stop listening to Parrots and listen to your body. I guess we eat basic old fashioned unprocessed food.

Go back to full fat milk, butter and so forth.

Exactly. Listen to your body. Do what feels right for you. By all means read - my Attia link above is worth reading or just do what feels right, although some people like to be led like a herd of sheep and just obey the dictats of invented principles like 5 a day and plenty will follow their craving for alcohol or cocaine and say their body is telling them that is what they need (although not perhaps the morning after the night before)....

(Milk etc makes my nose run but that is not the case for lots of people)

Lotus the 5 a day campaign is so way off the mark. It should be more like 15. I totally agree though with you both Joan Lotus. I eat mostly unprocessed food. So fruit, veg, meat, fish, nuts, eggs with a little dairy (processed) occasionally. I do have cakes which I make from scratch as I enjoy them. I don't drink though (listening to my body) as it causes migraines, hives and sinus problems.

I mess around with fodmap as a lot of food upsets my digestive system, IBS.

I do go for banned foods like beans every so often to have a clear out if I am constipated. The swelling and pain is hard to deal with.

ha ha! With you on the beans there Joan. Give me terrible pains and wind.

I rather red kidney beans than moviol.

You haven't commented on the link regarding ketosis and ketoacidosis. It says they are not the same thing at all

Ketosis can cause ketoacidosis.

That book you linked was published in 2005, 10 years ago

Yes, and the basic biochemistry of the human body hasn't changed in 10 years. We could detect ketone bodies then and we can detect ketone bodies now.

If you read it, it says that some people may experience mild ketosis especially women after a long overnight fast. To say that glycolysis shuts down over night and ketosis takes over is scientific bollocks.

Others sell themselves as the honest voice in a scientific world of dishonesty

Others jump on a fad in order to sell diet books and make money. People who are desperate to lose weight or want to be really healthy are led down the garden path on pseudo science by people who either don't truly understand it or who have a pet theory.

Ideally this theory should be discredited by other scientists so that makes them look like a maverick - then they can sell more books to people who are desperate.

Snake oil salesmen.

Claig, why bother? you are just googling frantically and copying and pasting whatever.

as I said, get into a lab and analyse a few bones for yourself.

You have no idea how science works in the real world. Google can't help you there, it really can't.

Humans evolved not to eat fish, go and try some practical analysis. You will learn that human evolved not to eat fish, what ever the daily mail says, and you will come out understanding something of how actually science functions.

What does it matter if Clag is frantically googling. It's a better hobby than drinking/smoking/taking street drugs.

TBF - fish oils are good for you. Omega 3 is particularly good for brain function.

An interesting discussion in a scientific journal about Omega-3 and omega -6.

www.asbmb.org/asbmbtoday/asbmbtoday_article.aspx?id=18365

"No one is disputing that we’re eating more omega-6 than our predecessors did. Over the past 100 years, consumption of linoleic acid has increased dramatically in the U.S., mainly through the use of soybean oil.

Soybean oil intake has gone up from being 1 percent of calories in the American diet to as much as 10 percent, according to Hibbeln. Lands, Salem and others contend that the rise, driven by the processed food and agriculture industries, has happened without anyone knowing its effects. “If I were now to try to get permission to change 10 percent of the calories in the U.S. diet, I would need a very large body of data unequivocally proving that it was safe,” says Hibbeln. “No such body of data exists for soybean oil. But it’s in our diet. We’re the experiment. It’s been a very large, uncontrolled intervention.”

Experts like Harris and Willett say this increase has been to our benefit. “We have seen a massive decline in cardiovascular disease mortality and huge increase in life expectancy,” says Willett. “Not all the benefit is due to the increase in linoleic acid, but almost certainly much of it is. It was not an absolute disaster.”

But the lipid biochemists counter that it’s not just cardiovascular disease at stake. They say diabetes, obesity and even psychiatric disorders are some outcomes of a diet heavy on omega-6s.

Both sides agree that there is much more research to be done on the various pathways in which EFAs participate. Ramsden says nonspecialists may have the impression, based on the well-known body of work on prostaglandins and a few other categories of compounds derived from EFAs, that the biochemistry of omega-6s and omega-3s is firmly established. But that is not the case, because “it’s really more complex than anyone had ever thought.” Ramsden continues: “I look at this field as having a long way to go

Which could be applied to a lot of health and diet areas.

'. “No such body of data exists for soybean oil. But it’s in our diet. We’re the experiment. It’s been a very large, uncontrolled intervention.”'

Oops, not again

Read this one in its entirety. It's gold dust.

"Should we worry about soya in our food?

Whether you know it or not, you'll probably be eating soya today. It's in 60% of all processed food, from cheese to ice cream, baby formula to biscuits. But should it carry a health warning?"

www.theguardian.com/news/2006/jul/25/food.foodanddrink

And after you have read it, ask yourself why the great and the good never mention it, but are fixated on salt and saturated fat.

It's in nearly all our bread. No choice, no one asked us if we wanted it. No advice on it from the great and the good.

What does it matter if Clag is frantically googling. It's a better hobby than drinking/smoking/taking street drugs.

true!
But all this manic incoherent google copy and pasted diatibes make her impossible to have a conversation with!

She needs some real experience of science.