Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Low-Carb Studies & Research / Media Watch > LC Research/Media
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   ^
Old Sun, Jun-22-08, 11:51
Feinman Feinman is offline
 
Plan: My own
Stats: 208/180/165 Male 70 inches
BF:
Progress:
Default ACCORD and petition to the NIH.

Biomedical science needs your help. You can sign a petition at
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/ge...xperts-who-have
that is a first step towards trying to bring rationality back to medicine.

The results from the ACCORD study were recently published in New England Journal of Medicine. Even to those of us used to the excesses of medical science, this is quite remarkable. The conclusions, as stated in the abstract, are
"As compared with standard therapy, the use of intensive therapy to target normal glycated hemoglobin levels for 3.5 years increased mortality and did not significantly reduce major cardiovascular events. These findings identify a previously unrecognized harm of intensive glucose lowering in high-risk patients with type 2 diabetes."

The intensive therapy is not described (certainly unlikely to include carbohydrate restriction) and, in fact, includes numerous different drugs in different combinations. Rather than identifying which of the treatments might cause the increased mortality, authors jump to the conclusion that lowering HbA1c is the culprit. This lack of scientific reasoning would not be accepted from an undergraduate student.

Scientists are stymied. Fighting with the NIH is, of course, generally not a career builder, and in any case, the number of people involved in the trial numbers in the hundreds and who will stand up alone to the writing committee? Only the public can help.

A first step is to sign the petition at http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/ge...xperts-who-have

Please help.

Richard Feinman
Professor of Biochemistry
SUNY Downstate Medical Center
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Sun, Jun-22-08, 12:07
lowcarbUgh's Avatar
lowcarbUgh lowcarbUgh is offline
Dazed and Confused
Posts: 2,927
 
Plan: South Beach
Stats: 170/132/135 Female 5'10
BF:
Progress: 109%
Location: Flip-flop, FL
Default

ACCORD is a travesty of science! Furthermore, diabetics are reporting that their doctors are waving it their faces and could possibly use it to deny type 2s a prescription for insulin such as Lantus.

It is important for everyone to sign, even if ACCORD doesn't affect you personally.
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Sun, Jun-22-08, 12:11
Judynyc's Avatar
Judynyc Judynyc is offline
Attitude is a Choice
Posts: 29,969
 
Plan: SBD->atkins twist->paleo
Stats: 274/000/160 Female 5'6"
BF:stl/too/mch
Progress: 240%
Location: NYC
Default

OK...you got me!!
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Sun, Jun-22-08, 12:35
Feinman Feinman is offline
 
Plan: My own
Stats: 208/180/165 Male 70 inches
BF:
Progress:
Default Thanks. You guys are #112 and 113.

The petition was posted on June 19 and we have 113 signers.
Thanks.
RF
Reply With Quote
  #5   ^
Old Sun, Jun-22-08, 14:25
Mossling's Avatar
Mossling Mossling is offline
I'll get there yet!
Posts: 1,393
 
Plan: Atkins/nutritionist blend
Stats: 319/284.4/150 Female 66.5 inches
BF:way/too/much
Progress: 20%
Location: Belmont, CA
Default

Don't know what number I am, but I signed it, too.
Reply With Quote
  #6   ^
Old Sun, Jun-22-08, 17:45
fujiwara fujiwara is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 217
 
Plan: VLC
Stats: 198/150/145 Female 63 inches
BF:
Progress: 91%
Default

Signed. I hope it helps. The cynical part of me doubts it, though.
Reply With Quote
  #7   ^
Old Sun, Jun-22-08, 18:16
LCivility LCivility is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 63
 
Plan: no sugar no starch
Stats: 210/170/160 Female short
BF:
Progress: 80%
Default

I hope it helps.

You would think that the NIH had at least heard of Gary Taubes. I am no scientist. Why is this so plain to me and so unfathomable to the "experts" at NIH?
Reply With Quote
  #8   ^
Old Sun, Jun-22-08, 19:05
M Levac M Levac is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 6,132
 
Plan: VLC, mostly meat
Stats: 202/200/165 Male 5' 7"
BF:
Progress: 5%
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Default

I added this to my signature of the petition:

"Considering the toxic nature of blood glucose in any quantity above normal, it's nonsensical to conclude that lowering blood glucose to normal blood level, even aggressively through drug therapy or otherwise, is the cause of death of those unfortunate that died during the ACCORD trial.

Lowering blood glucose to normal level through diet alone i.e. low carbohydrates produces no harmful effect that we can see. On the contrary, the lowering of blood glucose to normal level through diet alone brings about a slew of beneficial effects that result from this lower, normal blood glucose. Effects such as reversal of many related diseases such as obesity, diabetes type 2 and atherosclerosis.

Accordingly, if the subjects of the ACCORD trial did die of causes related to the trial's methods, then it's clearly not because their blood glucose was lowered to normal level. Instead, the only possible alternative is to consider that the method of lowering their blood glucose level is the cause of death: Intensive and as-of-yet never before tried drug therapy."
Reply With Quote
  #9   ^
Old Sun, Jun-22-08, 20:10
Rocketguy Rocketguy is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 197
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 245/193/170 Male 67 inches
BF:
Progress:
Default Personal Comment on Signing

The use of a low carbohydrate diet was a moderately successful treatment for type 1 diabetes before the discovery of injected insulin. The main control of blood glucose was removal of the source, which by and large are carbohydrates.

Later, more drugs are used to control blood glucose in diets heavy in carbohydrates - which metabolize mainly to blood glucose.

It is like the "modern" way of fighting fires. 1) avoid the use of old fashioned fireproof materials, 2) use bigger water pumps, hydrants and hoses to put out the flames of combustion instead.
Reply With Quote
  #10   ^
Old Sun, Jun-22-08, 20:57
KarenJ's Avatar
KarenJ KarenJ is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,564
 
Plan: tasty animals with butter
Stats: 170/115/110 Female 60"
BF:maintaining
Progress: 92%
Location: Northeastern Illinois
Default

Well, I'm half asleep after a long day in the garden, but here is what I wrote:

"Blaming the lowering of blood sugar with increased mortality without even mentioning the "other" interventions is infantile, irresponsible, and an egregious misappropriation of the public trust that is in direct contratiction to the actual science. Please, wake up, read the mountains of research done in the past 100 years, and see the real picture. Type II Diabetes, CVD, and Hypertension is caused by the excessive consumption of processed, refined carbohydrate."

I guess I could have been a little more diplomatic, and certainly more factual, but hey, it's late, and I'm covered in dirt and slime.
Reply With Quote
  #11   ^
Old Mon, Jun-23-08, 08:39
Feinman Feinman is offline
 
Plan: My own
Stats: 208/180/165 Male 70 inches
BF:
Progress:
Default Petition needs help.

I am surprised that we have only 140 signers of the petition. If nothing else, the ACCORD study was done with tax-payer dollars and the NEJM article has the statement "This study was not designed to test the components of the intervention strategy." I know it is hard to say that a large collection of medical researchers are simply not thinking like scientists but there it is. How could they do a study without testing the key independent variables? Perhaps these very limitations will allow us to make head-way on the general unwillingness to face carbohydrate restriction. In any case, if you believe in this, please sign the petition and encourage those of your friends who believe in it to do so also.
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/ge...xperts-who-have
RF
Reply With Quote
  #12   ^
Old Mon, Jun-23-08, 09:03
Dodger's Avatar
Dodger Dodger is offline
Posts: 8,236
 
Plan: Paleoish
Stats: 225/181/175 Male 71.5 inches
BF:18%
Progress: 88%
Location: Longmont, Colorado
Default

I just signed and let a comment.
Reply With Quote
  #13   ^
Old Mon, Jun-23-08, 10:43
lowcarbUgh's Avatar
lowcarbUgh lowcarbUgh is offline
Dazed and Confused
Posts: 2,927
 
Plan: South Beach
Stats: 170/132/135 Female 5'10
BF:
Progress: 109%
Location: Flip-flop, FL
Default

You should post this in the diabetes forum too. All the diabetics would sign.
Reply With Quote
  #14   ^
Old Mon, Jun-23-08, 12:48
rightnow's Avatar
rightnow rightnow is offline
Every moment is NOW.
Posts: 17,649
 
Plan: keeps changing
Stats: 520/414/350 Female 66 inches
BF: Why yes it is.
Progress: 62%
Location: NE OK USA
Default

I hope I wasn't supposed to be gentle. But I signed it.
Reply With Quote
  #15   ^
Old Mon, Jun-23-08, 16:01
MizKitty's Avatar
MizKitty MizKitty is offline
95% Sugar Free!
Posts: 7,010
 
Plan: Very high fat LC/HCG
Stats: 310/155.4/159 Female 67 inches
BF:
Progress: 102%
Location: Missouri
Default

I signed too.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:43.


Copyright © 2000-2017 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.