View Single Post
  #4   ^
Old Sun, Dec-30-18, 08:53
M Levac M Levac is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 6,483
 
Plan: VLC, mostly meat
Stats: 202/200/165 Male 5' 7"
BF:
Progress: 5%
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Default

Quote:
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.

“The Food Guide has benefited from the input of many stakeholders,” the email said. “We are taking all feedback into consideration.”

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:
Quote:
The response was a form letter. The women answered it with a more detailed version of their initial correspondence, this time citing the current, relevant studies and signed by 700 medical professionals including doctors, nurses and pharmacists. They received a deeper response from federal Health Minister Ginette Petitpas Taylor.

It said her ministry was relying on “high quality reports with systematic reviews of associations between food and health” from federal agencies in the U.S. and around the world. And that it continued to monitor for more evidence.

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.
Reply With Quote