Framingham Heart Deception--studies that prove the development of the low-fat lie

[Voyajer]

Dr. Enig's argument surrounding the deception and strong-arm tactics behind publications and studies in the medical field is well-grounded. She points out the the Framingham Heart Study, a well-financed epidemological study begun in 1966. It was expected that it would prove the prediction in 1957 by Keys et al in Circulation "Prediction of serum cholesterol responses of men to changes in fats in the diet." Lancet 1957, 2:959-966. What it did show was that there was a percentage of people who died of heart disease that had high cholesterol. What it omitted was how these people ate to get their high cholesterol. Even the
Director of the Framingham Study, Dr. William Castelli, kept his mouth shut about what was really going on until 1992 when he wrote a tiny article in an obscure journal admitting the following in Castelli, William, "Concerning the Possibility of a Nut..." Archives of Internal Med, Jul 1992, 152:(7):1371-2:

"For example, in Framingham, Mass, the more saturated fat one ate, the more cholesterol one ate, the more calories one ate, the lower the person's serum cholesterol." He went on to say that controlled feeding in hospitals may show different results, but that in the population, this is what took place. He says further,
"In view of this, this study fails to describe a relationship of those traditional dietary constituents, saturated fat and cholesterol, known to have an adverse effect on blood lipids, and thereby, on the subsequent development of coronary disease end points." He is then thankful for studies that do show a correlation between dietary cholesterol and CHD. He is thankful because his studies on Framingham spurred the movement toward low-fat when he himself knew what they were eating.

Although Castelli himself admitted this in 1992, researchers were still pointing out that you mustn't eat fat. This study in 1993 contradicts itself. First it says that Framingham men and women had lower cholesterol levels than the normal population, and it says Framingham men and women ate more fat and less carbs than the norm, but then it gives the wonderful recommendation that they shouldn't do such a thing! How dare they! They should go on a low-fat diet! So despite these results, they recommend a low-fat, high carbohydrate diet.

Int J Epidemiol 1993 Dec;22(6):1014-25

Diet and heart disease risk factors in adult American men and women: the Framingham Offspring-Spouse nutrition studies.
Posner BM, Cupples LA, Franz MM, Gagnon DR.

Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Boston University School of Public Health, MA 02118.

The 1984-1988 dietary and cardiovascular disease risk factor profiles of the Framingham Offspring-Spouse population (n = 3787 Framingham males and females, 22-79 years) were compared to earlier estimates from the 1976-1980 NHANES II and 1977-1978 USDA Nationwide Food Consumption surveys. The goals were to assess whether differences exist among population estimates, to determine whether national population-based nutrition recommendations for cardiovascular disease risk reduction are appropriately targeted, and to identify focus areas for future preventive nutrition interventions. Overall, population mean levels of cardiovascular disease risk factors were high but mean total cholesterol and blood pressure levels and rates of dyslipidaemia were lower in Framingham men and women and hypertension appeared higher in Framingham compared with NHANES II. Severe overweight appeared more prevalent in Framingham men but similar in Framingham women in comparison with NHANES. Population estimates of total fat (36-41% of calories) and saturated fat (12.5-13.7% of calories) intakes were higher and carbohydrate intakes were lower (40-46% of calories) than current recommended levels. Dietary cholesterol and sodium intakes in Framingham women appeared to have reached recommended levels but were high in men. While the goals of current nutrition recommendations remain appropriate, future population-based preventive nutrition interventions to lower cardiovascular disease risk need to emphasize weight reduction, lowering intakes of foods rich in animal and plant fats, increases in dietary sources of complex carbohydrates, fibre and micronutrients, and lower sodium intakes, particularly in adult men.

So based on the Framingham study the Amer Heart Assoc recommends cholesterol lowering drugs and diet modification. But they don't mention that if you want low cholesterol, eat a lot of saturated fat like the Framinghammers.

http://circ.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/full/97/18/1876

[rkaplan16]

I've read that editorial being quoted before by WP Castelli. Do you know where I can find the full article online? I went to the source, the Internal Medicine articles of JAMA and found the article "Concerning the Possibility of a nut," but they only have the title and you cannot view the abstract/article. Do you know where I can find a copy online? Thanks!

Also, to comment on your statement at the end of your post regarding eating a great deal of saturated fat and lowering cholesterol. I'm not sure if it's saturated fat that needs to be ingested to lower cholesterol. It could just be fat in general, or that when more fat is eaten, less carbohydrate is ingested if we want to take in the same number of calories. We know that the USDA basically told America that fat is "bad," but had little evidence to support it. If the Framingham subjects ingested the same number of calories from FAT, but less were coming from saturated fat, I don't think we would see a rise in total cholesterol. The only way I could see that happening would be due to levels of HDL rising as many studies have conlcluded that unsaturated fat (particularly mono-unsaturated fat, like those found in Olive Oil and nuts) raised HDL and lowered incidence of CHD. And the studies also show that more is better, meaning the people who ingest a great deal of unsaturated fat see HDL rising further and CHD less prevelant. And common sense tells us that if these people are getting a large amount of calories from fat, then they must be eating a lower percentage of carbohydrates (and to a lesser extent, protein) in the diet.

A major point of this is the evidence, like you said, leads to the conclusion that eating more fat (albeit for most studies, unsaturated) lowers our incidence for coronary heart disease, yet most prescribe the 12/30/58 PROTEIN/FAT?CARBOHYDRATE ratio from the reports by the USDA.