4 ms·

> “ The same thing happened for decades where low fat diets were supposed to help for heart disease but that has only recently been reversed” Oh did not know t

> “ The same thing happened for decades where low fat diets were supposed to help for heart disease but that has only recently been reversed” Oh did not know that. Do you have reference material?

redis_mlc 7y ago
A shill scientist was paid to promote high sugar, low fat diet a few decades ago by the sugar lobby. Just like every other food paper quoted in the press.
catoc 7y ago
Read this: https://thebigfatsurprise.com/ https://thebigfatsurprise.com/ The website initially may look like yet another diet approach, but this is actually a serious publication. And a good read.
- jonplackett 7y ago
  I spoke to someone about this the other day and they claimed it was now the dairy and meat industry campaigning in response to get their fatty foods re-accepted. Is there any truth to this? Or anyone heard anything about this?
  - catoc 7y ago
    I actually did read the book. It is really well researched. It certainly did not come across like that when the book was first published.
    - jonplackett 7y ago
      Which book do you mean?
- anewvillager 7y ago
  It's certainly a controversial book. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nina_Teicholz https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nina_Teicholz > Teicholz' claims were harshly criticized by the DGAC, the US Department of Health and Human Services, the Center for Science in the Public Interest, and others, including a petition signed by 180 scientists, and they called for the BMJ to retract the article or issue corrections.[11][13][16][19][20] The BMJ issued a correction in October 2015 and another in December 2016, the latter with a statement that after an independent review of the paper, it had decided not to retract it.[21][22][23][24] > Meanwhile, the Arnold Foundation had been pressing for Congressional hearings about the DGAC report and attempted to block the release of the 2015 Dietary Guidelines for Americans; its lobbying group arranged meetings for Teicholz with members of Congress and White House staff.[11][13] Teicholz and the Foundation were criticized at the time for being allies of the meat and dairy industries in their lobbying and other public relations efforts to maintain high levels of meat and dairy consumption by US consumers.[25][26]
  - catoc 7y ago
    Yes, the sugar industry was not silenced by this book, so the fight continued. And I am sure you can come up with criticisms about any research publication. But the main point is undisputed: the "low-fat" science at that time was not purely science. It had been influenced - for years - by lobbyists and scientists with a personal agenda. Then it becomes like so many topics these days: when people (I don't mean you anewvillager) throw enough counter arguments - true or not - distinguishing the truths becomes harder and harder, certainly for the population at large, not so well versed in the subject. [BTW: I have no affiliations whatsoever with the author or the books, other than that I read it]
peter_retief 7y ago
There is a lot of evidence that low fat diets have contributed to the metabolic syndrome epidemic over the last few decades. Obesity, diabetes, high blood pressure and heart disease. The latest studies show overwhelming evidence of the dangers of cutting back on fat but many academics refuse to change their views.
ncmncm 7y ago
The original health warnings were not about fat, but about meat. That ran into the meat-packing lobby, and then everything after had to be couched in terms of fat. There has never been evidence that fats were bad, as such, just meat as produced in the US, and sugar. But no one was allowed to say so.
- vixen99 7y ago
  But how do you define 'original'? in 1956 the American Heart Association announced that a 'diet which included large amounts of butter, lard, eggs, and beef would lead to coronary heart disease'. Not just meat! See also the enormously influential study and conclusion by Ancel Keys. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancel_Keys https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancel_Keys. His seven countries study stressed the dangers of cholesterol and fat. It's interesting that Keys, credited with discovering the Mediterranean Diet, died at the age of 101.
  - Gibbon1 7y ago
    Fred Kummerow died at 102. And unlike Keys got to eat eggs and butter every morning. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Kummerow https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Kummerow
    - superpermutat0r 7y ago
      People living over 100 years old obviously have huge genetic factors that allow them to have unhealthy habits (or at least unhealthy for the normal person). I mean, there are people over 100 that smoke every day.
      - Gibbon1 7y ago
        parent tried bolstering his claim by mentioning the Keys lived to 100. I point out that Kummerow who did good research outlived him. Seriously Keys work is garbage. Where the publicly unknown Kummerow's research was spot on. If you don't know who Kummerow is he's the guy that finally forced the FDA to ban transfats decades after they were known to be poison.

> “ The same thing happened for decades where low fat diets were supposed to help for heart disease but that has only recently been reversed” Oh did not know that. Do you have reference material?

redis_mlc 7y ago

A shill scientist was paid to promote high sugar, low fat diet a few decades ago by the sugar lobby. Just like every other food paper quoted in the press.

catoc 7y ago

Read this: https://thebigfatsurprise.com/ https://thebigfatsurprise.com/ The website initially may look like yet another diet approach, but this is actually a serious publication. And a good read.

jonplackett 7y ago
I spoke to someone about this the other day and they claimed it was now the dairy and meat industry campaigning in response to get their fatty foods re-accepted. Is there any truth to this? Or anyone heard anything about this?
- catoc 7y ago
  I actually did read the book. It is really well researched. It certainly did not come across like that when the book was first published.
  - jonplackett 7y ago
    Which book do you mean?
anewvillager 7y ago
It's certainly a controversial book. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nina_Teicholz https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nina_Teicholz > Teicholz' claims were harshly criticized by the DGAC, the US Department of Health and Human Services, the Center for Science in the Public Interest, and others, including a petition signed by 180 scientists, and they called for the BMJ to retract the article or issue corrections.[11][13][16][19][20] The BMJ issued a correction in October 2015 and another in December 2016, the latter with a statement that after an independent review of the paper, it had decided not to retract it.[21][22][23][24] > Meanwhile, the Arnold Foundation had been pressing for Congressional hearings about the DGAC report and attempted to block the release of the 2015 Dietary Guidelines for Americans; its lobbying group arranged meetings for Teicholz with members of Congress and White House staff.[11][13] Teicholz and the Foundation were criticized at the time for being allies of the meat and dairy industries in their lobbying and other public relations efforts to maintain high levels of meat and dairy consumption by US consumers.[25][26]
- catoc 7y ago
  Yes, the sugar industry was not silenced by this book, so the fight continued. And I am sure you can come up with criticisms about any research publication. But the main point is undisputed: the "low-fat" science at that time was not purely science. It had been influenced - for years - by lobbyists and scientists with a personal agenda. Then it becomes like so many topics these days: when people (I don't mean you anewvillager) throw enough counter arguments - true or not - distinguishing the truths becomes harder and harder, certainly for the population at large, not so well versed in the subject. [BTW: I have no affiliations whatsoever with the author or the books, other than that I read it]

peter_retief 7y ago

There is a lot of evidence that low fat diets have contributed to the metabolic syndrome epidemic over the last few decades. Obesity, diabetes, high blood pressure and heart disease. The latest studies show overwhelming evidence of the dangers of cutting back on fat but many academics refuse to change their views.

ncmncm 7y ago

The original health warnings were not about fat, but about meat. That ran into the meat-packing lobby, and then everything after had to be couched in terms of fat. There has never been evidence that fats were bad, as such, just meat as produced in the US, and sugar. But no one was allowed to say so.

vixen99 7y ago
But how do you define 'original'? in 1956 the American Heart Association announced that a 'diet which included large amounts of butter, lard, eggs, and beef would lead to coronary heart disease'. Not just meat! See also the enormously influential study and conclusion by Ancel Keys. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancel_Keys https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancel_Keys. His seven countries study stressed the dangers of cholesterol and fat. It's interesting that Keys, credited with discovering the Mediterranean Diet, died at the age of 101.
- Gibbon1 7y ago
  Fred Kummerow died at 102. And unlike Keys got to eat eggs and butter every morning. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Kummerow https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Kummerow
  - superpermutat0r 7y ago
    People living over 100 years old obviously have huge genetic factors that allow them to have unhealthy habits (or at least unhealthy for the normal person). I mean, there are people over 100 that smoke every day.
    - Gibbon1 7y ago
      parent tried bolstering his claim by mentioning the Keys lived to 100. I point out that Kummerow who did good research outlived him. Seriously Keys work is garbage. Where the publicly unknown Kummerow's research was spot on. If you don't know who Kummerow is he's the guy that finally forced the FDA to ban transfats decades after they were known to be poison.