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 Sun, Dec-30-18, 02:08
Blue Ruby Blue Ruby is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 543
 
Plan: atkins
Stats: 200/170/160 Female 5'7"
BF:
Progress: 75%
Location: BC
Lightbulb 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
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Sun, Dec-30-18, 03:17
s93uv3h s93uv3h is offline
Posts: 1,180
 
Plan: Atkins & IF / TRE
Stats: 000/014.5/015 Male 5' 10"
BF:
Progress: 97%
Default

Bravo.





Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Sun, Dec-30-18, 04:50
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
To Good Health!
Posts: 11,155
 
Plan: IF Fung/LC Westman/Primal
Stats: 222/171/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/25.3%/24%
Progress: 96%
Location: NC
Default

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 )
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Sun, Dec-30-18, 08:53
M Levac M Levac is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 6,485
 
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
  #5   ^
Old Fri, Jan-11-19, 06:28
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
To Good Health!
Posts: 11,155
 
Plan: IF Fung/LC Westman/Primal
Stats: 222/171/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/25.3%/24%
Progress: 96%
Location: NC
Default

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
Reply With Quote
  #6   ^
Old Fri, Jan-11-19, 09:59
GRB5111's Avatar
GRB5111 GRB5111 is offline
Posts: 3,012
 
Plan: Ketogenic (LCHFKD)
Stats: 227/186/185 Male 6' 0"
BF:
Progress: 98%
Location: Herndon, VA
Default

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 . . .
Reply With Quote
  #7   ^
Old Fri, Jan-11-19, 14:25
deirdra's Avatar
deirdra deirdra is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 3,983
 
Plan: HF/vLC/GF,CF,SF
Stats: 197/136/150 Female 66 inches
BF:
Progress: 130%
Location: Alberta
Default

"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.
Reply With Quote
  #8   ^
Old Fri, Jan-11-19, 16:58
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is offline
Posts: 11,723
 
Plan: Epi-Paleo/IF
Stats: 220/136/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 120%
Location: USA
Default

Every time I see this headline I want steak and cheese...
Reply With Quote
  #9   ^
Old Fri, Jan-11-19, 20:36
M Levac M Levac is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 6,485
 
Plan: VLC, mostly meat
Stats: 202/200/165 Male 5' 7"
BF:
Progress: 5%
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Default

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

The Star:
Quote:
Since 2016, the women, who founded Canadian Clinicians for Therapeutic Nutrition, a national non-profit, have lobbied the government, with letters, an Ottawa meeting and a parliamentary petition signed by nearly 5,000 Canadians, to reconsider the diet advice they believe Health Canada plans to deliver in the next iteration of the Food Guide, which is due out in early 2019, according to a Health Canada spokesperson.


DietDoctor:
Quote:
CCTN is warning Canadians not to follow the advice of the current Canadian food guide, which still advises a low-fat, higher-carb diet.

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:
Quote:
A dynamic group of Canadian doctors
...
The group represents a 4,500 doctors
...
Dr. Barbra Allen Bradshaw, one of the founders of the organization
...
Another member of the organization, Dr. Supriya Joshi, a gastroenterologist and hepatologist
...
doctors in the CCTN group

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.
Reply With Quote
  #10   ^
Old Fri, Jan-11-19, 21:49
nawchem's Avatar
nawchem nawchem is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 8,701
 
Plan: No gluten, CAD
Stats: 196.0/158.5/149.0 Female 62
BF:36/29.0/27.3
Progress: 80%
Default

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.
Reply With Quote
  #11   ^
Old Sat, Jan-12-19, 07:15
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is offline
Posts: 11,723
 
Plan: Epi-Paleo/IF
Stats: 220/136/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 120%
Location: USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nawchem
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!
Reply With Quote
  #12   ^
Old Tue, Jan-15-19, 11:32
CityGirl8 CityGirl8 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 756
 
Plan: Protein Power, IF
Stats: 238/204/145 Female 5'8"
BF:53.75%/46.6%/25%
Progress: 37%
Location: PNW
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M Levac
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.


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.
Reply With Quote
  #13   ^
Old Tue, Jan-15-19, 06:12
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
To Good Health!
Posts: 11,155
 
Plan: IF Fung/LC Westman/Primal
Stats: 222/171/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/25.3%/24%
Progress: 96%
Location: NC
Default

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.


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

Last edited by JEY100 : Tue, Jan-15-19 at 06:19.
Reply With Quote
  #14   ^
Old Tue, Jan-15-19, 12:02
rightnow's Avatar
rightnow rightnow is offline
Every moment is NOW.
Posts: 20,484
 
Plan: LC (ketogenic)
Stats: 520/359/280 Female 66 inches
BF: Why yes it is.
Progress: 67%
Location: Ozarks USA
Default

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
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 20:18.


Copyright © 2000-2019 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.