Western diet and disease risks found

[markd]

Archives of Internal Medicine, Nov 2004

The "Western" diet--one especially high in red and
processed meats and refined grain--linked to an increased
risk of type 2 diabetes, stroke, colon cancer, and heart
disease in women. The report's lead author, noted that the
"Western" eating pattern high in red and processed meats,
also has been linked in recent past studies to an increased
risk of stroke, colon cancer, and heart disease.

Nutrition Professor Teresa Fung of the Simmons College
School for Health Studies, noted that with this new
analysis. " we can add diabetes to the list. I think this
is another reason to shift away from that type of diet."

The new study found that the "Western diet" high in red and
processed meats and refined grains, as opposed to a diet
low in those foodstuffs, is associated with an elevated
risk of type 2 diabetes in women.

"Therefore," the study concluded, "it may be prudent to
reduce consumption of these foods items to decrease the
risk of type 2 diabetes."

Fung says that for a long time, it was uncertain whether
diet directly affects the risk of type 2 diabetes. While
it is well known that obesity increases the risk, and diet
is related to obesity, little data was available to see if
diet has any influence beyond its effect on weight. Fung's
study broke away from the traditional way of looking at
foods one at a time to see if they were related to
diabetes risk, and instead looked at an individual's
entire dietary pattern.

Archives of Internal Medicine, Nov 2004

[Wolfbrothe]

markd@toad-net.com wrote in message
news:<419b6b1e$0$63175$4d5ecec7@reader.city-net.com>...
> Archives of Internal Medicine, Nov 2004
>
> The "Western" diet--one especially high in red and
> processed meats and refined grain--linked to an increased
> risk of type 2 diabetes, stroke, colon cancer, and heart
> disease in women. The report's lead author, noted that
> the "Western" eating pattern high in red and processed
> meats, also has been linked in recent past studies to an
> increased risk of stroke, colon cancer, and heart
> disease.
>
> Nutrition Professor Teresa Fung of the Simmons College
> School for Health Studies, noted that with this new
> analysis. " we can add diabetes to the list. I think this
> is another reason to shift away from that type of diet."
>
> The new study found that the "Western diet" high in red
> and processed meats and refined grains, as opposed to a
> diet low in those foodstuffs, is associated with an
> elevated risk of type 2 diabetes in women.
>
> "Therefore," the study concluded, "it may be prudent to
> reduce consumption of these foods items to decrease the
> risk of type 2 diabetes."
>
> Fung says that for a long time, it was uncertain whether
> diet directly affects the risk of type 2 diabetes. While
> it is well known that obesity increases the risk, and
> diet is related to obesity, little data was available to
> see if diet has any influence beyond its effect on
> weight. Fung's study broke away from the traditional way
> of looking at foods one at a time to see if they were
> related to diabetes risk, and instead looked at an
> individual's entire dietary pattern.
>
> Archives of Internal Medicine, Nov 2004

Seriously what is your problem? Do you seriously buy into that
simple minded BS?? I will tell you what is the main
characteristic of the "western" diet moron. It is liquid
polyunsaturated vegetable oils and hydrogenated vegetable
shortenings. THAT smart guy is what distinguishes the
"western" diet from other healthy traditional diets around the
world, MANY of which include red meat but NONE of them!! NONE
include large amounts of liquid/hydrogenated veg oils if any
at all. The fact that those things were not even mentioned is
appalling and a total joke. Even someone so obviously blind as
you should see that simple fact. Can you seriously not get
that through your head? Are you that incompetent?? Are you so
stupid that you can not come to that simple real conclusion
for yourself? Are you really unable to take into account ALL
the facts and ALL the elements of modern western diets as well
as various other diets around the world and honestly and
logically analyses and compare them. If you did you would be
able to single out elements which are most likely to be
responsible for poor health. Red meat is simply not one of
them. While they got it partly right in naming refined carbs
even that is not the main distinguishing factor of poor diets
as there are some healthy peoples who do eat a moderate amount
of such things. However the fact that they left out the true
factor that STICKS OUT LIKE A FUCKING SORE THUMB is absurd. It
is just as absurd for you to go along with it without even
raising a question. You need to start using your fucking brain
and think a little harder instead of regurgitating garbage
like that. You must not just compare diets of today with each
other but take into account diet patterns of the last 100
years. As I know you understand the "modernized" or "western"
diet is always followed by poor health within a short time of
a previously traditional diet being abandoned during the
modernization of a population. The number one factor involved
in the modernization of diet are cheap manufactured
liquid/hydrogenated vegetable fats being introduced into a
previously traditional diet. It happened first in the US 100
years ago which is why we are so far ahead of other countries
in poor health. Other countries who were modernized later in
the century or have yet to be modernized and still eat more
traditional diets or did not fully modernize their diets along
with their society like Japan. Do not take my word for it just
look at this quote from the Agricultural Utilization Research
Institute about the edible oil industry.

"Worldwide vegetable oil consumption (of which soybean oil
represents 28%) is growing at a faster rate than
population—4.1% compared to 1.3% compounded over the past five
years. As the developing world continues to improve its
standard of living, this trend will continue. Per capita
vegetable oil consumption is a good measure of a country's
prosperity."

And there you have it. The true food of prosperity and
modernization. THAT is what the modern "western" diet is all
about. That is why it is so unhealthy. And for some strange
reason it is almost never mentioned in any talk of unhealthy
modern western diets by the mainstream medical establishment.
I wonder why. hmmm. Of course that is understandable
considering the influence of certain interests. What is not
understandable is your dumb compliance and total lack of any
ability to question or think for yourself. You need a big
reality check.

[Jt]

On 17 Nov 2004 19:13:15 -0800, rangerhasten@yahoo.com
(Wolfbrother) wrote:

>Seriously what is your problem? Do you seriously buy into
>that simple minded BS?? I will tell you what is the main
>characteristic of the "western" diet moron. It is liquid
>polyunsaturated vegetable oils and hydrogenated vegetable
>shortenings. THAT smart guy is what distinguishes the
>"western" diet from other healthy traditional diets around
>the world, MANY of which include red meat but NONE of them!!
>NONE include large amounts of liquid/hydrogenated veg oils if
>any at all. The fact that those things were not even
>mentioned is appalling and a total joke. Even someone so
>obviously blind as you should see that simple fact. Can you
>seriously not get that through your head? Are you that
>incompetent?? Are you so stupid that you can not come to that
>simple real conclusion for yourself? Are you really unable to
>take into account ALL the facts and ALL the elements of
>modern western diets as well as various other diets around
>the world and honestly and logically analyses and compare
>them. If you did you would be able to single out elements
>which are most likely to be responsible for poor health. Red
>meat is simply not one of them. While they got it partly
>right in naming refined carbs even that is not the main
>distinguishing factor of poor diets as there are some healthy
>peoples who do eat a moderate amount of such things. However
>the fact that they left out the true factor that STICKS OUT
>LIKE A FUCKING SORE THUMB is absurd. It is just as absurd for
>you to go along with it without even raising a question. You
>need to start using your fucking brain and think a little
>harder instead of regurgitating garbage like that. You must
>not just compare diets of today with each other but take into
>account diet patterns of the last 100 years. As I know you
>understand the "modernized" or "western" diet is always
>followed by poor health within a short time of a previously
>traditional diet being abandoned during the modernization of
>a population. The number one factor involved in the
>modernization of diet are cheap manufactured
>liquid/hydrogenated vegetable fats being introduced into a
>previously traditional diet. It happened first in the US 100
>years ago which is why we are so far ahead of other countries
>in poor health. Other countries who were modernized later in
>the century or have yet to be modernized and still eat more
>traditional diets or did not fully modernize their diets
>along with their society like Japan. Do not take my word for
>it just look at this quote from the Agricultural Utilization
>Research Institute about the edible oil industry.
>
>"Worldwide vegetable oil consumption (of which soybean oil
>represents 28%) is growing at a faster rate than
>population—4.1% compared to 1.3% compounded over the past
>five years. As the developing world continues to improve its
>standard of living, this trend will continue. Per capita
>vegetable oil consumption is a good measure of a country's
>prosperity."
>
>And there you have it. The true food of prosperity and
>modernization. THAT is what the modern "western" diet is all
>about. That is why it is so unhealthy. And for some strange
>reason it is almost never mentioned in any talk of unhealthy
>modern western diets by the mainstream medical establishment.
>I wonder why. hmmm. Of course that is understandable
>considering the influence of certain interests. What is not
>understandable is your dumb compliance and total lack of any
>ability to question or think for yourself. You need a big
>reality check.

It is a tale Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.

[Rob Ruddy]

My great grandmother lived to age 96. She cooked with lard and
used butter and cream. Eggs and bacon were a regular item on
her diet. No margarine in that lady's diet! Oh and she loved
ice cream.

Regards.

Rob

<markd@toad-net.com> wrote in message
news:419b6b1e$0$63175$4d5ecec7@reader.city-net.com...
> Archives of Internal Medicine, Nov 2004
>
> The "Western" diet--one especially high in red and
> processed meats and refined grain--linked to an increased
> risk of type 2 diabetes, stroke, colon cancer, and heart
> disease in women. The report's lead author, noted that the
> "Western" eating pattern high in red and processed meats,
> also has been linked in recent past studies to an
> increased risk of stroke, colon cancer, and heart disease.
>
> Nutrition Professor Teresa Fung of the Simmons College
> School for Health Studies, noted that with this new
> analysis. " we can add diabetes to the list. I think this
> is another reason to shift away from that type of diet."
>
> The new study found that the "Western diet" high in red
> and processed meats and refined grains, as opposed to a
> diet low in those foodstuffs, is associated with an
> elevated risk of type 2 diabetes in women.
>
> "Therefore," the study concluded, "it may be prudent to
> reduce consumption of these foods items to decrease the
> risk of type 2 diabetes."
>
> Fung says that for a long time, it was uncertain whether
> diet directly affects the risk of type 2 diabetes. While
> it is well known that obesity increases the risk, and diet
> is related to obesity, little data was available to see if
> diet has any influence beyond its effect on weight. Fung's
> study broke away from the traditional way of looking at
> foods one at a time to see if they were related to
> diabetes risk, and instead looked at an individual's
> entire dietary pattern.
>
> Archives of Internal Medicine, Nov 2004

[Dunne E .]

On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 18:41:41 -0500, "Rob Ruddy"
<ruddyr@rogers.com> posted:

>My great grandmother lived to age 96. She cooked with lard
>and used butter and cream. Eggs and bacon were a regular item
>on her diet. No margarine in that lady's diet! Oh and she
>loved ice cream.
>
>Regards.
>
>Rob

And then there is the old guy who dies at 102 who has smoked
since he was 12, and had a shot of whiskey every day since 16.
Died with all his faculties intact, being shot on the nest by
a jealous husband.

Or the guy of 43 who fell off the perch from CVD from smoking
and eating too much? Biological variation comes to mind.

><markd@toad-net.com> wrote in message
>news:419b6b1e$0$63175$4d5ecec7@reader.city-net.com...
>> Archives of Internal Medicine, Nov 2004
>>
>> The "Western" diet--one especially high in red and
>> processed meats and refined grain--linked to an increased
>> risk of type 2 diabetes, stroke, colon cancer, and heart
>> disease in women. The report's lead author, noted that
>> the "Western" eating pattern high in red and processed
>> meats, also has been linked in recent past studies to an
>> increased risk of stroke, colon cancer, and heart
>> disease.
>>
>> Nutrition Professor Teresa Fung of the Simmons College
>> School for Health Studies, noted that with this new
>> analysis. " we can add diabetes to the list. I think this
>> is another reason to shift away from that type of diet."
>>
>> The new study found that the "Western diet" high in red
>> and processed meats and refined grains, as opposed to a
>> diet low in those foodstuffs, is associated with an
>> elevated risk of type 2 diabetes in women.
>>
>> "Therefore," the study concluded, "it may be prudent to
>> reduce consumption of these foods items to decrease the
>> risk of type 2 diabetes."
>>
>> Fung says that for a long time, it was uncertain whether
>> diet directly affects the risk of type 2 diabetes. While
>> it is well known that obesity increases the risk, and
>> diet is related to obesity, little data was available to
>> see if diet has any influence beyond its effect on
>> weight. Fung's study broke away from the traditional way
>> of looking at foods one at a time to see if they were
>> related to diabetes risk, and instead looked at an
>> individual's entire dietary pattern.
>>
>> Archives of Internal Medicine, Nov 2004

[Dunne E .]

On 18 Nov 2004 06:17:13 -0600, jt <jt@ameritech.net> posted:

>On 17 Nov 2004 19:13:15 -0800, rangerhasten@yahoo.com
>(Wolfbrother) wrote:
>
>>Seriously what is your problem? Do you seriously buy into
>>that simple minded BS?? I will tell you what is the main
>>characteristic of the "western" diet moron. It is liquid
>>polyunsaturated vegetable oils and hydrogenated vegetable
>>shortenings. THAT smart guy is what distinguishes the
>>"western" diet from other healthy traditional diets around
>>the world, MANY of which include red meat but NONE of them!!
>>NONE include large amounts of liquid/hydrogenated veg oils
>>if any at all. The fact that those things were not even
>>mentioned is appalling and a total joke. Even someone so
>>obviously blind as you should see that simple fact. Can you
>>seriously not get that through your head? Are you that
>>incompetent?? Are you so stupid that you can not come to
>>that simple real conclusion for yourself? Are you really
>>unable to take into account ALL the facts and ALL the
>>elements of modern western diets as well as various other
>>diets around the world and honestly and logically analyses
>>and compare them. If you did you would be able to single out
>>elements which are most likely to be responsible for poor
>>health. Red meat is simply not one of them. While they got
>>it partly right in naming refined carbs even that is not the
>>main distinguishing factor of poor diets as there are some
>>healthy peoples who do eat a moderate amount of such things.
>>However the fact that they left out the true factor that
>>STICKS OUT LIKE A FUCKING SORE THUMB is absurd. It is just
>>as absurd for you to go along with it without even raising a
>>question. You need to start using your fucking brain and
>>think a little harder instead of regurgitating garbage like
>>that. You must not just compare diets of today with each
>>other but take into account diet patterns of the last 100
>>years. As I know you understand the "modernized" or
>>"western" diet is always followed by poor health within a
>>short time of a previously traditional diet being abandoned
>>during the modernization of a population. The number one
>>factor involved in the modernization of diet are cheap
>>manufactured liquid/hydrogenated vegetable fats being
>>introduced into a previously traditional diet. It happened
>>first in the US 100 years ago which is why we are so far
>>ahead of other countries in poor health. Other countries who
>>were modernized later in the century or have yet to be
>>modernized and still eat more traditional diets or did not
>>fully modernize their diets along with their society like
>>Japan. Do not take my word for it just look at this quote
>>from the Agricultural Utilization Research Institute about
>>the edible oil industry.
>>
>>"Worldwide vegetable oil consumption (of which soybean oil
>>represents 28%) is growing at a faster rate than
>>population—4.1% compared to 1.3% compounded over the past
>>five years. As the developing world continues to improve its
>>standard of living, this trend will continue. Per capita
>>vegetable oil consumption is a good measure of a country's
>>prosperity."
>>
>>And there you have it. The true food of prosperity and
>>modernization. THAT is what the modern "western" diet is all
>>about. That is why it is so unhealthy. And for some strange
>>reason it is almost never mentioned in any talk of unhealthy
>>modern western diets by the mainstream medical
>>establishment. I wonder why. hmmm. Of course that is
>>understandable considering the influence of certain
>>interests. What is not understandable is your dumb
>>compliance and total lack of any ability to question or
>>think for yourself. You need a big reality check.
>
>It is a tale Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
>Signifying nothing.

Couldn't have put it better myself. Thanks for saving me the
time to respond to this idiot's sound and fury.

[Rbr]

It seems that longevity is common for my mother's side of the
family. My grandfather, who was born in 1887, smoked since he
was 9 years old. He died of cancer ..... at 85 years of age.
One of my uncles died at age 91 while the other is alive and
kicking at age 89. Mom is 82 ... the baby of the family.

On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 12:59:54 +0800, Dunne E. Dawe
<never@never.again> wrote:

>On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 18:41:41 -0500, "Rob Ruddy"
><ruddyr@rogers.com> posted:
>
>>My great grandmother lived to age 96. She cooked with lard
>>and used butter and cream. Eggs and bacon were a regular
>>item on her diet. No margarine in that lady's diet! Oh and
>>she loved ice cream.
>>
>>Regards.
>>
>>Rob
>
>
>
>And then there is the old guy who dies at 102 who has smoked
>since he was 12, and had a shot of whiskey every day since
>16. Died with all his faculties intact, being shot on the
>nest by a jealous husband.
>
>Or the guy of 43 who fell off the perch from CVD from smoking
>and eating too much? Biological variation comes to mind.
>
>
>
>
>><markd@toad-net.com> wrote in message
>>news:419b6b1e$0$63175$4d5ecec7@reader.city-net.com...
>>> Archives of Internal Medicine, Nov 2004
>>>
>>> The "Western" diet--one especially high in red and
>>> processed meats and refined grain--linked to an
>>> increased risk of type 2 diabetes, stroke, colon cancer,
>>> and heart disease in women. The report's lead author,
>>> noted that the "Western" eating pattern high in red and
>>> processed meats, also has been linked in recent past
>>> studies to an increased risk of stroke, colon cancer,
>>> and heart disease.
>>>
>>> Nutrition Professor Teresa Fung of the Simmons College
>>> School for Health Studies, noted that with this new
>>> analysis. " we can add diabetes to the list. I think
>>> this is another reason to shift away from that type of
>>> diet."
>>>
>>> The new study found that the "Western diet" high in red
>>> and processed meats and refined grains, as opposed to a
>>> diet low in those foodstuffs, is associated with an
>>> elevated risk of type 2 diabetes in women.
>>>
>>> "Therefore," the study concluded, "it may be prudent to
>>> reduce consumption of these foods items to decrease the
>>> risk of type 2 diabetes."
>>>
>>> Fung says that for a long time, it was uncertain whether
>>> diet directly affects the risk of type 2 diabetes. While
>>> it is well known that obesity increases the risk, and
>>> diet is related to obesity, little data was available to
>>> see if diet has any influence beyond its effect on
>>> weight. Fung's study broke away from the traditional way
>>> of looking at foods one at a time to see if they were
>>> related to diabetes risk, and instead looked at an
>>> individual's entire dietary pattern.
>>>
>>> Archives of Internal Medicine, Nov 2004

[Wolfbrothe]

Dunne E. Dawe <never@never.again> wrote in message
news:<bn58q09hdeh6dhim2aa8e1p9sa10qr6j6i@4ax.com>...
> On 18 Nov 2004 06:17:13 -0600, jt <jt@ameritech.net> posted:
>
> >On 17 Nov 2004 19:13:15 -0800, rangerhasten@yahoo.com
> >(Wolfbrother) wrote:
> >
> >>Seriously what is your problem? Do you seriously buy into
> >>that simple minded BS?? I will tell you what is the main
> >>characteristic of the "western" diet moron. It is liquid
> >>polyunsaturated vegetable oils and hydrogenated vegetable
> >>shortenings. THAT smart guy is what distinguishes the
> >>"western" diet from other healthy traditional diets around
> >>the world, MANY of which include red meat but NONE of
> >>them!! NONE include large amounts of liquid/hydrogenated
> >>veg oils if any at all. The fact that those things were
> >>not even mentioned is appalling and a total joke. Even
> >>someone so obviously blind as you should see that simple
> >>fact. Can you seriously not get that through your head?
> >>Are you that incompetent?? Are you so stupid that you can
> >>not come to that simple real conclusion for yourself? Are
> >>you really unable to take into account ALL the facts and
> >>ALL the elements of modern western diets as well as
> >>various other diets around the world and honestly and
> >>logically analyses and compare them. If you did you would
> >>be able to single out elements which are most likely to be
> >>responsible for poor health. Red meat is simply not one of
> >>them. While they got it partly right in naming refined
> >>carbs even that is not the main distinguishing factor of
> >>poor diets as there are some healthy peoples who do eat a
> >>moderate amount of such things. However the fact that they
> >>left out the true factor that STICKS OUT LIKE A FUCKING
> >>SORE THUMB is absurd. It is just as absurd for you to go
> >>along with it without even raising a question. You need to
> >>start using your fucking brain and think a little harder
> >>instead of regurgitating garbage like that. You must not
> >>just compare diets of today with each other but take into
> >>account diet patterns of the last 100 years. As I know you
> >>understand the "modernized" or "western" diet is always
> >>followed by poor health within a short time of a
> >>previously traditional diet being abandoned during the
> >>modernization of a population. The number one factor
> >>involved in the modernization of diet are cheap
> >>manufactured liquid/hydrogenated vegetable fats being
> >>introduced into a previously traditional diet. It happened
> >>first in the US 100 years ago which is why we are so far
> >>ahead of other countries in poor health. Other countries
> >>who were modernized later in the century or have yet to be
> >>modernized and still eat more traditional diets or did not
> >>fully modernize their diets along with their society like
> >>Japan. Do not take my word for it just look at this quote
> >>from the Agricultural Utilization Research Institute about
> >>the edible oil industry.
> >>
> >>"Worldwide vegetable oil consumption (of which soybean oil
> >>represents 28%) is growing at a faster rate than
> >>population—4.1% compared to 1.3% compounded over the
> >>past five years. As the developing world continues to
> >>improve its standard of living, this trend will continue.
> >>Per capita vegetable oil consumption is a good measure of
> >>a country's prosperity."
> >>
> >>And there you have it. The true food of prosperity and
> >>modernization. THAT is what the modern "western" diet is
> >>all about. That is why it is so unhealthy. And for some
> >>strange reason it is almost never mentioned in any talk of
> >>unhealthy modern western diets by the mainstream medical
> >>establishment. I wonder why. hmmm. Of course that is
> >>understandable considering the influence of certain
> >>interests. What is not understandable is your dumb
> >>compliance and total lack of any ability to question or
> >>think for yourself. You need a big reality check.
> >
> >It is a tale Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
> >Signifying nothing.
>
> Couldn't have put it better myself. Thanks for saving me the
> time to respond to this idiot's sound and fury.

You are so full of shit. A dumb fuck like you couldnt give a
rational response even if you tried. You can not respond to
the reality which you chose to ignore. My points about diets
are more valid and relevant than any garbage you spew and
there really is nothing you can say to counter or explain away
such reality so you just ignore it. The data is there. The
research is there. The facts and the evidence are all there
you are just too damn stupid to accept it.

[Us Visa]

I found a great free recourse site to help people manage their
weight loss and live a healthy lifestyle. I used a few of
their tips and lost a ton of weight.

Hope this helps you also :) Visit
http://www.manageweightloss.com for more information