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
FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   ^
Old Thu, Dec-07-23, 10:47
Demi's Avatar
Demi Demi is offline
Posts: 26,746
 
Plan: Muscle Centric
Stats: 238/153/160 Female 5'10"
BF:
Progress: 109%
Location: UK
Default Who Teaches Doctors About Cholesterol-lowering Drugs?

The latest blog post from Dr Cate Shanahan:

Quote:
Lowering cholesterol has failed to stop heart disease. Authoritative experts nevertheless now are recommending lower cholesterol targets than ever. In my latest post, I want to show you why it's never been more important to understand cholesterol for yourself, and who is really teaching our doctors about cholesterol's link to heart attacks.

I also want you to meet one brave physician who is standing up to challenge the consensus. His name is John Abramson and he wants you to know that today's medical education system is more broken than you think.

You can read about it here in my latest, heartbreaking post:

Who Teaches Doctors About Cholesterol-lowering Drugs?

It might seem like the science linking cholesterol to heart attacks is solid. It might seem like doctors know for sure where your cholesterol numbers need to be. But did you know that the number considered low enough has had to shift downward multiple times? Cholesterol-lowering “targets” are lower today than ever before.

If you don’t already know, LDL cholesterol is a kind of particle that circulates in our blood. It acts like a delivery vehicle for specific nutrients, including cholesterol itself. Most doctors believe these LDL cholesterol particles can cause heart attacks, and call LDL the “bad” cholesterol.

Cardiologists often talk about cholesterol as if it were a toxin. But cholesterol is not a toxin. Cholesterol is a building block for hormones like testosterone and for our body’s cell membranes.

https://drcate.com/who-teaches-doct...lowering-drugs/

Click on the link to read in full.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Thu, Dec-07-23, 11:28
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
Posts: 13,436
 
Plan: P:E/DDF
Stats: 225/150/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/28%/25%
Progress: 134%
Location: NC
Default

Includes a Library of the top videos on the topic. With the well known cholesterol skeptics...Drs. Malhotra, Diamond, Bikman, Ali, Kendrick and more.
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Sun, Dec-10-23, 06:16
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 14,682
 
Plan: EpiPaleo/Primal/LowOx
Stats: 220/130/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 129%
Location: USA
Default

It shows the power of advertising dollars, because that's where people are being driven.
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Sun, Dec-10-23, 09:31
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
Posts: 13,436
 
Plan: P:E/DDF
Stats: 225/150/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/28%/25%
Progress: 134%
Location: NC
Default

Of course, she has push-back on Twitter.

Her response:

Quote:
I want to respond to the commenter (to my dec 8 post) who posted a graph showing that cardiovascular deaths have declined since 1960 in men and women. This correlation might make one think that the American Heart Association's campaign to lower cholesterol is the driving factor.

My response is this: You have been misled. So have millions of doctors. This is what the AHA wants us all to belive. They've long taken credit for the dramatic reduction in deaths from cardiovascular disease. But the AHA has not helped the situation.

Firstly if you notice, the rates start to decline well before statins. The first statin was released in 1991.

Someone else also brought up stents. But the first heart stent was placed in the US around 1987. Again, the rates were already declining decades before.

So what's the explanation? Most likely the dramatic declines in per capita cigarette smoking. (Shown in my graph)

The AHA has added to the problem of heart disease by failing to show you this graph I created from readily available data sources, and by pushing a false scientific narrative for decades.

The data sources I used to create this image are at the bottom of an article I wrote called "Cholesterol: What the American Heart Association is Hiding from You (Part 3)"


More to come!
Reply With Quote
  #5   ^
Old Sun, Dec-10-23, 17:06
GRB5111's Avatar
GRB5111 GRB5111 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 4,044
 
Plan: Very LC, Higher Protein
Stats: 227/186/185 Male 6' 0"
BF:
Progress: 98%
Location: Herndon, VA
Default

Agree with Dr. Cate on this, as the science is not settled, but we’re getting there with new research. She’s brave in tackling the various social media posters on this topic, and we need more professionals to force this dialogue.

To answer the question of Who Teaches Doctors About Cholesterol-lowering Drugs?, however, is relatively easy. In the United States, it’s the pharmaceutical companies. The heavily subsidized medical schools receiving pharma money are required to develop their courses of studies to heavily emphasize pharmaceuticals as a primary course of treatment. Our newly minted doctors are more prepared to treat symptoms with a prescription than they are prepared to identify an accurate root cause. Sound medicine must be practiced as an art allowing doctors to draw upon their clinical experiences rather than blindly following a standards of care approach by playing “whack-a-mole” with prescription drugs.
Reply With Quote
  #6   ^
Old Mon, Dec-11-23, 07:09
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 14,682
 
Plan: EpiPaleo/Primal/LowOx
Stats: 220/130/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 129%
Location: USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GRB5111
Our newly minted doctors are more prepared to treat symptoms with a prescription than they are prepared to identify an accurate root cause.


We did a "whirlwind doctor round" with DH, who was getting some lower kidney numbers which concerned our GP. I fixed it by getting him on low oxalate, and he got 22 points up on his next exam.

I went for the source of the problem. It would seem DH's kidneys are sensitive to this dietary toxin, so removing it did far more than bump his numbers. If his kidneys are working better, it's probable that the rest of him is, too. It's a global change with significant benefits for all his organs.

But we also saw a kidney specialist, who announced he was throwing away our GP's carefully crafted regimen, which we saw considerable improvement under, to pursue his own ideas of what was causing the trouble. Needless to say, the first drug he wanted to remove sent DH into a spiral in decreasing health, so we pulled the plug on his ideas, and fired him.

Had we not, DH would have been chalked up to "non compliance" or "atypical." He wouldn't change course even if the patient was getting worse. Because it couldn't be his precious protocol.

Also notable? He ignored me like I was a talking plant stand. He ignored DH because he was the patient. Such an arrogant piece of work. How can I trust this person's medical judgement?
Reply With Quote
  #7   ^
Old Mon, Dec-11-23, 20:58
Bob-a-rama's Avatar
Bob-a-rama Bob-a-rama is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,961
 
Plan: Keto (Atkins Induction)
Stats: 235/175/185 Male 5' 11"
BF:
Progress: 120%
Location: Florida
Default

Who teaches doctors about drugs?

The drug companies.

What do they recommend?

The most profitable for the drug companies.

The reason for a corporation is to make the stockholders money. They care not about the customers, only about perpetual profit growth.

Once you really understand that, you've got it.
Reply With Quote
  #8   ^
Old Tue, Dec-12-23, 03:35
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 14,682
 
Plan: EpiPaleo/Primal/LowOx
Stats: 220/130/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 129%
Location: USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob-a-rama
The reason for a corporation is to make the stockholders money. They care not about the customers, only about perpetual profit growth.

Once you really understand that, you've got it.


I think this also masks how people process information. Remember Public Service Announcements? (If you say yes, then you're a certain amount of old.)

People act like the Influencers are telling them important things to shill their product. But they lie.
Reply With Quote
  #9   ^
Old Tue, Dec-12-23, 19:04
Bob-a-rama's Avatar
Bob-a-rama Bob-a-rama is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,961
 
Plan: Keto (Atkins Induction)
Stats: 235/175/185 Male 5' 11"
BF:
Progress: 120%
Location: Florida
Default

The advertisers support the media.

Therefore, most of what you see/read in the media, is either an overt or a covert ad.

If the corporation doesn't make more money this quarter than the last, and more than that in the next one, ad infinitum, the stockholders will sell their stock. Why own stock that doesn't increase in value?

But perpetual growth is impossible. So they do what they can for as long as they can.

I am old enough to remember "Three out of four doctors recommend Camel cigarettes." And I remember bogus tests that showed how the cigarette eased tensions, and promoted weight loss.

I've seen people calling themselves Doctors publish articles in the press that make you think that you need sugar in your diet or you will be sick.

Unless the article is published in a peer-reviewed , professional journal, I consider it highly suspect. And if it is peer-reviewed, I'm still skeptical, just not AS skeptical.

Bob
Reply With Quote
  #10   ^
Old Wed, Dec-13-23, 11:28
Calianna's Avatar
Calianna Calianna is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,895
 
Plan: Atkins-ish (hypoglycemia)
Stats: 000/000/000 Female 63
BF:
Progress: 50%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob-a-rama
The advertisers support the media.

Therefore, most of what you see/read in the media, is either an overt or a covert ad.

If the corporation doesn't make more money this quarter than the last, and more than that in the next one, ad infinitum, the stockholders will sell their stock. Why own stock that doesn't increase in value?

But perpetual growth is impossible. So they do what they can for as long as they can.

I am old enough to remember "Three out of four doctors recommend Camel cigarettes." And I remember bogus tests that showed how the cigarette eased tensions, and promoted weight loss.

I've seen people calling themselves Doctors publish articles in the press that make you think that you need sugar in your diet or you will be sick.

Unless the article is published in a peer-reviewed , professional journal, I consider it highly suspect. And if it is peer-reviewed, I'm still skeptical, just not AS skeptical.

Bob


Actually the claims that smoking helped with weight loss was true.

As pointed out in one of the other threads on here, it worked by keeping smoker's mouths busy with non-food, keeping their hands busy with the cigarette itself, and the smoke altered their sense of taste and smell so that food didn't taste all that good, so they were less inclined to eat when they weren't really hungry. So yeah, they were able to lose weight by taking up smoking.

ETA: Oh and smoking did ease tensions to a certain extent, since anyone trying to quit smoking (or even cut back on smoking) would definitely go through a sort of withdrawal. Maybe not the kinds of withdrawal symptoms associated with heroin, but they would certainly be tense from not getting their nicotine "hit".
Reply With Quote
  #11   ^
Old Thu, Dec-14-23, 03:54
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 14,682
 
Plan: EpiPaleo/Primal/LowOx
Stats: 220/130/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 129%
Location: USA
Default

I also think an unsustainable system gives warnings in a myriad of ways. Food and drink -- and I'm talking about giant sugared coffee drinks -- are the latest, cheapest, most indelible addiction.

The veterans of WWII had been plied with free cigarettes to keep everyone alert. Which nicotine does. It's like coffee that way.

If they could put nicotine in bottles without killing people... they would.
Reply With Quote
  #12   ^
Old Thu, Dec-14-23, 05:05
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
Posts: 13,436
 
Plan: P:E/DDF
Stats: 225/150/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/28%/25%
Progress: 134%
Location: NC
Default

They put it Vape products, add sweet flavoring and market it to children.

Last edited by JEY100 : Thu, Dec-14-23 at 08:08.
Reply With Quote
  #13   ^
Old Mon, Dec-18-23, 18:57
Bob-a-rama's Avatar
Bob-a-rama Bob-a-rama is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,961
 
Plan: Keto (Atkins Induction)
Stats: 235/175/185 Male 5' 11"
BF:
Progress: 120%
Location: Florida
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Calianna
<...snip...>
As pointed out in one of the other threads on here, it worked by keeping smoker's mouths busy with non-food, keeping their hands busy with the cigarette itself, and the smoke altered their sense of taste and smell so that food didn't taste all that good, so they were less inclined to eat when they weren't really hungry. So yeah, they were able to lose weight by taking up smoking.<...>

Yes, but the doctor is in charge of your health. And when they get cancer or emphysema from smoking and die, they will definitely eat less.

Digesting tape worm eggs will help you lose weight, too, but doctors don't recommend that anymore, so why something else that's deadly?

And I doubt the 4 out of 5 doctors who recommended Camel cigarettes in the advertisements were representational of all the GPs, but cherry-picked for their opinion, or else was simply a lie.

And I find it amazing that so many people still smoke cigarettes and cigars.

When I was young, I did, because everyone did. But as soon as I found out just how risky the habit was, I quit.

Back on topic.

The doctors are barraged with covert and overt ads in their journals placed there by big pharma. Tell the lie often enough and the lie becomes perceived as the truth. And big pharma goes to the bank and doesn't care about the patients, only selling what they have patents on.
Reply With Quote
  #14   ^
Old Tue, Dec-19-23, 09:00
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 14,682
 
Plan: EpiPaleo/Primal/LowOx
Stats: 220/130/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 129%
Location: USA
Default

They also hire good-looking sales people who take a doctor to lunch and flirt with them, while offering kickbacks.

That's a different kind of science.
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 16:23.


Copyright © 2000-2024 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.