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 Sat, Aug-12-17, 05:59
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
To Good Health!
Posts: 9,557
 
Plan: IF Fung/LC Westman/Primal
Stats: 222/171/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/25.3%/24%
Progress: 96%
Location: NC
Default analysis of the Seven Country Study by Dr Zoe Harcombe

http://www.zoeharcombe.com/2017/08/...s-study-part-1/

Part One of a long analysis of the Seven Country Study by Dr Zoe Harcombe:

Quote:
Response to The True Health Initiative White Paper


On 1st August 2017, a ‘white paper’ was published called “Ancel Keys and the Seven Countries Study: An Evidence-based Response to Revisionist Histories.” It was commissioned by an organisation called The True Health Initiative. It was written by Katherine Pett, Joel Kahn, Walter Willett and David Katz. Calling one’s work a white paper (typically the preserve of government) is an arrogant start. However, the business definition of ‘white paper’ is “A report that informs readers about an issue, which is often used to convey an organization’s philosophy and persuade potential customers.” On that basis, let’s review this white paper. ...

This response to the True Health Initiative white paper will be in two parts: Part 1) to review the allegations made in the white paper and Part 2) to present the real criticisms of the Seven Countries Study, which the white paper did not mention. This is Part 1. Part 2 will follow......

continues at link.



https://www.dietdoctor.com/ancel-ke...ries-study-part

Was Ancel Keys a Fraud? Dr. Harcombe on the Seven Countries Study, Part I

Quote:
Seven countries and Ancel Keys

Did the famous researcher Ancel Keys use misleading statistics to start the low-fat craze, with his “Seven Countries Study”? Yes, says many people today. No, says a new white paper commissioned by the vegan-leaning organization True Health Initiative.

Are you interested in the details? Dr. Zoe Harcombe offers a detailed analysis: Dr. Zoe Harcombe, PhD: The Seven Countries Study – Part 1

Personally, I think it’s clear that Keys’ and his collaborators’ bias contributed to the way they cherry-picked their countries, which helped them get the results they predicted. However, this is mostly interesting from a historical perspective, as these kinds of statistical correlations can normally never prove cause and effect anyway.

Last edited by JEY100 : Sat, Aug-12-17 at 06:05.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Sat, Aug-12-17, 09:01
cotonpal's Avatar
cotonpal cotonpal is online now
Posts: 3,362
 
Plan: very low carb real food
Stats: 245/128/135 Female 62
BF:
Progress: 106%
Location: Vermont
Default

Zoe Harcombe always provides a very careful analysis of the evidence but, as she says,

Quote:
being vegetarian/vegan is akin to religion. It is a belief system in itself – it is not the logical outcome of studying nutritional science


so facts have little to do with the conclusions reached by most vegan/vegetarian enthusiasts.

Jean
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Sat, Aug-12-17, 10:42
teaser's Avatar
teaser teaser is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 11,461
 
Plan: ketosis/IF
Stats: 190/158/154 Male 67inches
BF:
Progress: 89%
Location: Ontario
Default

http://www.truehealthinitiative.org...THI_.8-1-17.pdf

I find this part of the White paper baffling, seeing that it's supposed to support the objectivity of the whole pursuit;

Quote:
Of the seven countries, the United States and the Netherlands each provided a single
cohort, the former Yugoslavia (now Croatia and Serbia) provided five, Italy three, and
Japan, Greece, and Finland each contributed two.
1–4 In most cases, cohorts within each
country were selected because of purported differences in eating habits, thus potentially
providing dietary variation between a region’s cohorts. In the analysis, comparisons were
therefore made between individual cohorts as well as between countries.
The United States was an obvious choice because the research team was based in
Minnesota.
3 Researchers and public health officials were interested in discovering factors
linked to the relatively high incidence of coronary heart disease plaguing middle-aged
men in the U.S.


Japan had an extremely low rate of reported coronary heart disease and a national diet
uniquely low in fat, though it was unclear whether particular health outcomes reported
were due to diet, the Japanese tendency to record sudden deaths as cerebrovascular, or
both.
1 The Japanese cohort in Tanushimaru was a farming community, while the
Ushibuka cohort was a fishing community with a diet higher in seafood.18


North Karelia, Finland, was known for high-fat diets and allegedly had extremely
high rates of coronary heart disease. The West Finland cohort included men in two rural
villages, where coronary heart disease was purportedly lower than in East Finland.18

The Greece cohorts in Crete and Corfu were included because they reported low
mortality from coronary heart disease, but high intakes of fat, particularly olive oil


The defense against the charge of cherry-picking countries here looks a lot like a description of how countries were cherry-picked.

Also Zoe highlights this;

Quote:
Additionally, other than preferential addition of developed nations with very diverse diets
to improve the power of the study, lack of interest, preparation, or funding were the only
reasons for excluding countries


If you noticed this;

Quote:
Researchers and public health officials were interested in discovering factors
linked to the relatively high incidence of coronary heart disease plaguing middle-aged
men in the U.S


There's a reason why France might not have been interested in a study looking at the possibility of a connection between saturated fat and heart disease. Japan and Greece had "yay, team" going for them, let's see what's so wonderful about out diet. Places with high heart disease had good reason to participate. "French Paradox" might not have been in use yet, but might have kept France--and other "paradox" countries from seeing any point in participating.
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Mon, Aug-14-17, 09:17
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
To Good Health!
Posts: 9,557
 
Plan: IF Fung/LC Westman/Primal
Stats: 222/171/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/25.3%/24%
Progress: 96%
Location: NC
Default

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 10:21.


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