Canadian Doctors say eat steak and cheese...
 

Are steak and cheese healthy? Doctors group says Canada’s Food Guide is wrong on diet
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada...ng-on-diet.html

Bravo.

:agree:

:thup:

:)

Here is more of the long winding history of this group.
https://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=475772

Unless there has been a change in the advisory committees that review the studies for Health Canada (similar to what Nutrition Coalition has pushed for in the US) it is unlikely there will be much of a change on nutrition advice. As Tom Naughton’s has said for years, change will not be from top down, but will happen from bottom up as social media spreads stories of success.

Note in other news, Ketogenic Diet is a #1 Goggle Search, while Good Housekeeping, ABC and NBC recently had stories of "Worst diet trends" or similar titles where both the Keto Diet and Carnivore Diet were labeled dangerous by RDs. These RDs go to Health Canada for diet advice, the rest of us use Google (or Duck, Duck Go in my futile attempt to limit tracking :lol: )

We'll let you shout and yell, to give you the illusion we're listening, then when you're done, we'll just do what we want anyway, cuz you're not a stakeholder. That's what happened with the US MyPlate when they asked for our opinion, there's no reason to expect any different from the Canadian Food Guide. Ima go ahead and do what Tom did: Stop listening to the Anointed. Cuz really:

Nope, not high quality reports. In fact, those reports are of the lowest possible quality from a scientific point of view. It says it right here: "...associations...". It's even lower quality than possible in any scientific field, cuz this: "...between food and health". Only two types of associations exist in this context. Per-capita food availability, and food questionnaires. Neither can show causality, thus neither can support any advice on same.

Conversely, a single experiment done right can refute any hypothesis derived from all those associations between food and health. Namely, the A-TO-Z study by Chris Gardner. But there isn't just one, there's plenty that basically say the same thing - the official guidelines are wrong on every level. But then, the official guidelines aren't intended to be right by whomever writes them.

Canadian Doctors continue the Revolt!

Canadian doctors rock awareness-raising about low-carb eating

More Canadian newspapers have carried this story.

https://www.dietdoctor.com/canadian...low-carb-eating

I like it. There should be a nutrition revolt in every country, as we are witnessing a worldwide health epidemic that can be slowed and eventually managed with food and lifestyle changes. Keep the revolts coming . . .

"In an email to the Star, Health Canada said that as the new advice is finalized, it is also updating its evidence base with the latest nutrition science and that too will be released to the public in early 2019."

Hmm, sounds like they came up with the advice and then looked for evidence to cite to support it.

Every time I see this headline I want steak and cheese...

The Star and DietDoctor put a very different twist to the story.

The Star:


DietDoctor:

On a side note, when I first read the original Star piece, I stopped at the "the women" and thought that, while it may be a correct characterization of the CCTN group (if individuals in the group are all women, no men) or even of the two women interviewed (the two doctors are indeed women), it gave me the impression that it wasn't a very serious group as a whole. You know, it's just a bunch of women (or just a couple of women), as opposed to what the group is actually composed of in context - physicians and health professionals, both genders (I checked, it ain't just a bunch of women). I'm not sure how else to explain this impression I got. Got it. Imagine if the two persons were men, the group was the same (both men and women, physicians and health professionals), and the phrase started with "the men" or "the dudes" or "the guys", or even if nothing was different but the two women were referred to as "the chicks" or "the gals". The two women interviewed are indeed women, but that has exactly no bearing whatsoever on the topic of the Star piece, the group's purpose and goals or its composition.

Conversely, the DietDoctor piece characterizes the group much differently:

The point is I got (mis)led to pre-think my first comment in a particular direction, while the DietDoctor piece led me to pre-think a 180. I hate being misled by (although correct as may be) irrelevant characterizations. On the other hand, I'm quite happy those two chicks/gals/women/doctors/physicians/health professionals/persons/CCTN founders/lobbyists/interviewees/whatever else they may be, are on my side.

I hate steak, hopefully cheeseburgers and bacon count!

I was recently anemic and completely recovered eating red meat daily. This got a frown from my RN friend.

It is always a bizarre response from a medical professional when you get better, but not in an “approved” way!

Doctors who champion low-carb, high-fat diets go against the grain

Latest version of Canada Food Guide doubles down on whole grains, advises limiting saturated fat

CBC Radio · January 11

Link to this 26 minute podcast was in above post but want to single this one out.


Links to new Food Guide review and a COOL photo of Dr. Jay Wortman. :)
I'll take his advice if I can slip in and out of a Triumph at his age. :lol:


https://www.cbc.ca/radio/whitecoat/...W4AnRwa TQUqzw

I had the same reaction. It made it sound like it was just a couple of women with no qualifications sitting around a kitchen table staging a letter writing campaign.

But I wonder how much of that is me? When I hear people described by their gender do I assume that they're less qualified. As someone who was raised as a vocal feminist, it's a horrifying thought. Still, if their qualifications were given earlier and the sentence said "the men," I'm not sure I would have noticed anything.

I thought it was some kind of women's group. Good point Martin. Yeah... there's a lot of bias like that in media. The worst part is sometimes I think the writer isn't devious, just completely un-self-aware of what they're doing.

PJ