The report is reviewed well here

http://livinlavidalowcarb.com/blog/

Go Jimmy!!

Peter from Hyperlipid sums it up pretty nicely here:



Bold mine. To my knowledge, I'm not a genetically-crippled mouse, therefore I'm not sure anything discovered in this study is applicable to me.

Yeah, well... I don't think we'll ever see the end to that.

I don't necessarily think that it's the researchers who are impatient, but the public, the funding agencies, the politicians, etc. They want sound bites. They want the be-all, end-all, definitive statement of 'fact'.

You take a researcher who insists on making NO broad generalizations pertaining to human health after a mouse experiment, preferring to continue the slow but accurate practice of replicates and good science - and a researcher who puts out a press release to be picked up by bbc news citing the university or lab as a leading research institute (to show credibility) --- and which researcher has a happier boss, a happier institute, maybe even a better chance of getting funded next time?

Often you hear people complain about the amount of time it takes for a cure, an answer, anything substantial to be publicized about a disease or cure or health issue. They are impatient with the time it takes to get to human testing and the amount of variability inherent in the population, muddying the waters and hindering that definite statement of fact. They want answers tomorrow, not in 2012. Now the first stage experiments are picked up by the news media and sensationalized. What used to be one small brick in a large, well-built wall becomes a story in and of itself and it gives people a skewed impression of science and of the discovery process.

^above from your link...which states what others have been saying in this thread.

Yes, I know why it's happening; Gary Taubes describes the process in detail regarding the cholesterol thing in GCBC... it's just sort of a sad comment on society. The public demanding cures and answers is the same public complaining they're given conflicting advice every time they turn on the news, but they've engineered that situation by gobbling up any half-assed conclusion tacked onto studies like these.

The nice thing, though, is that you're only a victim of misinformation if you want to be; it's not so hard to unearth more information or background about things... it's just a matter of having enough interest to do so. I wouldn't be bothered too much if the whole world believed something I didn't about what I eat... I'm free to eat however I like, don't explain myself to people, and have little interest in converting anyone

http://www.examiner.com/x-867-LowCa...-not-for-humans

Another gem, from Hyperlipid:
Low carbohydrate, high protein and ApoE-/- mice

Actually, the study found their cholesterol levels, level of inflammation etc were all fine. It was their blood vessels that were not. So there is no contradiction, more like a confirmation and possible explanation. I think that it is the most interesting part of the study - there were no telling markers ... everything looked good and actually "improved".

It is well known for example that many people have good blood work but still die suddenly of heart disease, have arterial blockages etc.

It is easier to deal with mice because you can then kill them and easily look at their blood vessels plus the process can be sped up. Hopefully, this study will lead to human studies. Of course, this is not the first time a study/event has suggested low carb/heart related issues.

http://ang.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/10/817

From July 2009:

Development of Symptomatic Cardiovascular Disease after Self-Reported Adherence to the Atkins Diet
Ted D. Barnett, Neal D. Barnard, Tim L. Radak
Journal of the American Dietetic Association


I thought the lead doc made an interesting comment in terms of him seeing many low carbers for heart disease.

And this is why mice are generally used in experiments btw:
http://www.vetmed.ucdavis.edu/anima...ves/whymice.htm

Are you ever worried that government would one day be able to somehow "force" high carb diet onto people?
I mean - like someday in the future it will be hard / impossible to get foods like proper red meats, animal fats or full fat dairy and so on?

It probably sounds silly, but sometimes, when I read stupid bogus studies like this I am worried.

What happened with eg smoking (not that it´s a bad thing it is restricted or forbiden in some countries), but obviously government took steps when study after study showed its effects on lungs and cancer etc.

With all these "studies" showing lowcarb/high fat is "unhealthy" and with studies which prove otherwise getting ignored...

Actually, in reading the abstract of that article, it does not suggest a relationship between heart issues and low carb. It suggests a relationship between heart issues and *high protein* - just as the mouse study did.

But as has been mentioned here and in many other places, the diet most of us follow is not *high protein* at all. In fact I'd say I probably eat less protein now than I did when I was following the SAD. My protein intake is usually about 15-20% of my daily total. I don't think that would be considered "high". What virtually all low carbers do is eat a *high fat* diet - which didn't at all seem to be what the above study actually studied.

If that is what all low carbers do then they are not following the suggestions of atkins (30%-35%), zone 30% and probably not protein power. I do see people talking about increasing their fat and lowering their protein lately.

Most of the people I know who low carb eat a lot of protein, meat three times a day.

I lost 80 pounds on the Protein Power plan at one time. I followed it very closely, eating the amount of protein they suggested, and my protein still never exceeded about 25% of my calories. Of course others will eat differently, but you've made me curious enough now to think about starting another thread, and asking people about their protein intake. I think even the people who eat mostly meat eat the fattier cuts, as historically it's been shown that people get sick if their food intake is primarily only lean protein. I'm curious now to see what others think about their own eating plans.

The paleo diets have a protein emphasis too I believe.

Atkins is still a high fat diet, not high protein.