http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a...rt-disease.html

A pretty good article, for the Mail, but they unfortunately neglect to mention the inflammatory effects of vegetable oils, soya, insulin and sugar but they do give a nod to vitamin D and immune system being important in fighting inflammation. I'm sure some commentators will put them right. Could this be a small step to the tide turning away from statination and profits at the expense of health?

Sure but the more DIFFERENT voices the better. When the same names keep appearing those individuals tend to get written off as being particularly obsessed or having a vested interest in the matter. The science is there to support the argument but 1000 characters is not much space to get the message across.
It would also help if those comments that do make relevant points are supported.

This is happening in the USA. It was very noticeable in equivalent articles in the New Yorker and UK INDEPENDENT recently that THE New Yorker article attracted a much higher quality of response, fewer nutters, cranks and idiots than the UK article.

There is absolutely no reason why the response to articles in the UK press should be dominated by the least intelligent least articulate members of society.

Most of the UK people who contribute to this forum are capable of making similarly intelligent and articulate comments in response to newspaper articles.

So where are you?

Why don't you make your personal effort to show the editors of these papers that the UK general public are sufficiently intelligent to see where and how we are being ill served by the current NHS advice that isn't dealing adequately with the higher level of inflammation and lower levels of natural anti inflammatory status that is underlying much of the current increase in chronic illness.