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, Sep-01-18, 05:19
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
To Good Health!
Posts: 10,320
 
Plan: IF Fung/LC Westman/Primal
Stats: 222/171/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/25.3%/24%
Progress: 96%
Location: NC
Default It's Not the Fat That Makes Us Unhealthy

The title is not that unusual here, but this admission, from this author, editor of JAMA for 17 years [his CV bolded by me], certainly is.


Quote:
Hello and welcome. I am Dr George Lundberg, and this is At Large at Medscape. Today I am in my angry-old-man persona. I often write about nutrition and disease. And I usually admit in advance to knowing little about nutrition, much like most of my physician readers.

It has been 11 years since independent investigative science journalist Gary Taubes published his best-seller, Good Calories, Bad Calories,[1] after 15 years of serious study, enabled by that amazing new tool, the Internet. Turns out, it's not fat that makes us unhealthy. In 640 total pages with 459 notes, 1700 references, and 924 Amazon customer reviews, Taubes demolished what the medical, scientific, and nutrition fields (since at least the 1960s) had spent countless billions of dollars building and profiting (but also dying) from: the fat food theory of the causation of "diseases of human civilization"—atherosclerosis, coronary artery heart disease, diabetes, obesity, hypertension, stroke, cancer, dementia, and even osteoporosis and arthritis.

As the ultimate insider (me: organized-medicine member since 1967; JAMA journals editor for 17 years; faculty at University of Southern California, University of California, Northwestern, Harvard, Stanford) through that entire time, I am struck by how the ultimate independent outsider (Taubes) could look at the same mass of information all the rest of us had access to and come to such different conclusions.

In addition to the newly comprehensive access provided by the Internet, science-educated investigator Taubes also brought the open and questioning journalist's mind, unfettered by the conflicts of traditional scientific education; professorial authoritarianism; established career path dogma; addiction to grant support; the limits imposed by establishment peer review; the medical publishing business; need for and love of medical money and collegial esteem; opportunities for vast commercialization; invidious government power and political "scientific" positions; mass production and marketing of professional and consumer products; plus advocacy groups and influence.

Big Public Health. Big Farming. Big Agriculture. Big Government. Big Academia. Big Industry. Big Marketing. Big Advertising. Big Advocacy. Big Medicine. Big Publishing. All were marching to the tune composed by what they thought—in good faith, I believe—was good science.

And it wasn't all bad science. The massive effort at culture change—stop eating this, that, or the other fat—was excessive, considering the meager amount of supporting data. The unintended effects were so extreme and went so unrecognized because of this huge effort based on what had become dogma: that eating fat is bad (9 calories per gram vs 4 calories for protein and carbs). The laws of thermodynamics—calories in, calories out—had been everything in weight control.

As the scientist, medical journal editor, insider, I was even involved in the mass "Campaign Against Cholesterol,"[2] led by the American Medical Association, doing everything we could from within organized medicine, and using many industry partners who, of course, stood to profit via their new low-fat products.
Real-world application is where the science, and especially the public health, communities failed. They did not keep their eyes open to the evolving real-world experience. They did not challenge the dogma and prevailing practices as the truth became more and more obvious during the mass-fattening of the population in the developed world.


Note to Dr. Lundberg...if you are an angry old man, imagine what the American people who have suffered these "diseases of human civilization" are feeling right now.

Medscape is subscription newsletter for physicians, anyone can sign up. Since many do not have it, I copied the transcript, but it is a video:

https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/900495
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Sat, Sep-01-18, 05:57
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
To Good Health!
Posts: 10,320
 
Plan: IF Fung/LC Westman/Primal
Stats: 222/171/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/25.3%/24%
Progress: 96%
Location: NC
Default

And while I am being an angry old lady this morning, will add

The lucrative story of cotton seed oil

Quote:
Looking back over the last 40 years, it’s hard to understand how we could have been so gullible. We believed that fat, and more specifically saturated fat (found primarily in animal foods), was thought to increase cholesterol and cause heart disease. Instead, we should switch to ‘heart healthy’ vegetable oils, like cottonseed, corn, safflower and soy oils. But recent evidence suggests this was a Faustian bargain. The industrially processed seed oils were much, much worse. It was all a terrible mistake that began with Crisco.

Cotton plantations for fabric were cultivated in the United States as early as 1736. Prior to this, it was largely an ornamental plant. At first, most cotton was home-spun into garments, but the success of the crop meant that some could be exported to England. From a modest 600 pounds of cotton in 1784, it grew to over 200,000 by 1790. The invention of the cotton-gin by Eli Whitney in 1793 led to a staggering 40,000,000 pounds of cotton production.

Cottonseed But cotton is actually two crops – the fiber and the seed. For every 100 pounds of fiber, there was 162 pounds of cotton seeds which were largely useless. Only 5% of this seed was required for planting. Some could be used for livestock feed but there was still a mountain of garbage. What could be done with this garbage? Mostly it was left to rot or simply dumped illegally into rivers. It was toxic waste.

Meanwhile, in the 1820’s and 1830’s increased demand for oil used in cooking and lighting from a rising population and decreased supply of whale oil meant that prices rose steeply. Enterprising entrepreneurs tried to crush the worthless cotton seeds to extract the oil, but it was not until the 1850s that the technology matured to the point that commercial production could commence. But in 1859, something happened that would transform the modern world. Colonel Drake struck oil in Pennsylvania in 1859 introducing a massive supply fossil fuels to the modern world. Before long, the demand for cottonseed oil for lighting had completely evaporated and cottonseeds went back to being classified as toxic waste.


Many graphs and links...best to read at:


https://www.dietdoctor.com/the-lucr...cotton-seed-oil
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Sat, Sep-01-18, 05:59
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is online now
Posts: 10,498
 
Plan: Epi-Paleo/IF
Stats: 220/161/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 84%
Location: USA
Default

Yep. We’ve been fed toxic waste. Wish it was a metaphor.
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Sat, Sep-01-18, 08:26
GRB5111's Avatar
GRB5111 GRB5111 is offline
Posts: 2,314
 
Plan: Ketogenic (LCHFKD)
Stats: 227/186/185 Male 6' 0"
BF:
Progress: 98%
Location: Herndon, VA
Default

I sincerely hope that Dr. Lunberg continues to stay on message and influences some change in the medical community. The following statement is a sad indictment of the scientific and medical communities (bold sections added by me):
Quote:
In addition to the newly comprehensive access provided by the Internet, science-educated investigator Taubes also brought the open and questioning journalist's mind, unfettered by the conflicts of traditional scientific education; professorial authoritarianism; established career path dogma; addiction to grant support; the limits imposed by establishment peer review; the medical publishing business; need for and love of medical money and collegial esteem; opportunities for vast commercialization; invidious government power and political "scientific" positions; mass production and marketing of professional and consumer products; plus advocacy groups and influence.

The worst part is that we've got hallowed institutions like Harvard employing people like Willett who will argue with Taubes' findings for the purpose of pushing an anti-meat, anti-saturated fat agenda. Harvard still has credibility to many, and these contentions are bought by the masses who believe whatever these credentialed and precise epidemiologists say.
Reply With Quote
  #5   ^
Old Sat, Sep-01-18, 08:47
cotonpal's Avatar
cotonpal cotonpal is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 4,107
 
Plan: very low carb real food
Stats: 245/128/135 Female 62
BF:
Progress: 106%
Location: Vermont
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GRB5111
I sincerely hope that Dr. Lunberg continues to stay on message and influences some change in the medical community. The following statement is a sad indictment of the scientific and medical communities (bold sections added by me):

The worst part is that we've got hallowed institutions like Harvard employing people like Willett who will argue with Taubes' findings for the purpose of pushing an anti-meat, anti-saturated fat agenda. Harvard still has credibility to many, and these contentions are bought by the masses who believe whatever these credentialed and precise epidemiologists say.


We even see it here on the forum and other such places where people have dared to put their feet in the waters of alternative ways of eating and then one stupid headline appears and they are thrown, "coconut oil is poison", "saturated fat will kill you", "red meat gives you cancer", "low carb will shorten your lifespan", "a plant based diet is the healthiest way to eat" and on and on and on. And like scared rabbits they run back to the insidious and ubiquitous truly poisonous advice that got them into this predicament in the first place. I am glad that there are doctors getting on the bandwagon but even better are people who take the responsibility for their health into their own hands and minimize or even eliminate their need for a doctor except in acute situations. Time we took the doctors from their pedestals.
Reply With Quote
  #6   ^
Old Sat, Sep-01-18, 08:50
GRB5111's Avatar
GRB5111 GRB5111 is offline
Posts: 2,314
 
Plan: Ketogenic (LCHFKD)
Stats: 227/186/185 Male 6' 0"
BF:
Progress: 98%
Location: Herndon, VA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cotonpal
I am glad that there are doctors getting on the bandwagon but even better are people who take the responsibility for their health into their own hands and minimize or even eliminate their need for a doctor except in acute situations. Time we took the doctors from their pedestals.

Well stated.
Reply With Quote
  #7   ^
Old Sat, Sep-01-18, 11:08
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is online now
Posts: 10,498
 
Plan: Epi-Paleo/IF
Stats: 220/161/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 84%
Location: USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GRB5111
From statement:

mass production and marketing of professional and consumer products


THIS is what really convinced people to avoid fat in all its forms. Snackwells, low fat yogurt, low fat everything was a marketing gimmick which convinced people it was something "everybody knows" and now infests the population.

That is the most pernicious element we are fighting, and it is certainly the least reliable.
Reply With Quote
  #8   ^
Old Sat, Sep-01-18, 13:04
GRB5111's Avatar
GRB5111 GRB5111 is offline
Posts: 2,314
 
Plan: Ketogenic (LCHFKD)
Stats: 227/186/185 Male 6' 0"
BF:
Progress: 98%
Location: Herndon, VA
Default

Agree, and it's those types of junk food, ironically, that are perceived as healthy by so many.
Reply With Quote
  #9   ^
Old Sun, Sep-02-18, 04:44
M Levac M Levac is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 6,420
 
Plan: VLC, mostly meat
Stats: 202/200/165 Male 5' 7"
BF:
Progress: 5%
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Default

Sounds like a mea culpa - angry-old-man at himself. Good for him. Even though it's just an opinion piece and we all know what that makes him, it feels very powerful. I gotta wonder if something personal happened to him, like going low-carb just to see what's what. It worked for me and I believe for pretty much everybody on this forum. The facts, when faced with them in-your-face kinda way, just can't be ignored.

Ima pin this as another historical point. I mean, things must be happening if that kind of guy says something like that.
Reply With Quote
  #10   ^
Old Sun, Sep-02-18, 05:50
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is online now
Posts: 10,498
 
Plan: Epi-Paleo/IF
Stats: 220/161/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 84%
Location: USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M Levac
Ima pin this as another historical point. I mean, things must be happening if that kind of guy says something like that.


I agreed. Something has shifted.
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 18:58.


Copyright © 2000-2018 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.