Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"
To study the effect of the WHI low-fat dietary pattern on heart disease, researchers looked at how many participants had coronary heart disease (heart attack or death from heart disease). They found that the low-fat dietary pattern did not reduce the risk of heart disease, although the intervention was not designed specifically to reduce heart disease. In WHI Dietary Study participants, there were 1422 cases of coronary heart disease, with similar rates in the Dietary Change (on average, 35 per 10,000 women per year) and the Comparison (on average, 36 per 10,000 women per year) groups. The 2% difference (decrease) in risk of coronary heart disease was not statistically significant. When women who had a history of heart disease when they joined the study were removed from the analyses, there was a 7% reduction in heart disease, but this was not statistically significant.There was also no statistically significant effect on stroke.
There were, however, small favorable effects of the low-fat dietary pattern on some risk factors. There were small but significant improvements in body weight, low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, diastolic blood pressure, and Factor VII C (a blood clotting factor). One important finding from the Dietary Study is that a low-fat, high carbohydrate diet does not necessarily increase body weight, blood triglycerides, or indicators of increased risk of diabetes such as blood glucose or insulin levels.
There was no greater effect of the intervention on heart disease in women who participated in most of the study activities, or in women who started with higher fat intakes. Those who reached the lowest levels of saturated fat or trans fat and the highest level of fruits and vegetables had greater reductions in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol and heart disease. However, because these analyses involved smaller groups of women, the findings are not as reliable as those which include the entire group. The most likely explanation for the lack of a statistically significant effect on heart disease is that the dietary pattern reduced all types of fat, in order to test whether reduction in total fat prevents breast cancer. It was anticipated that reducing total fat would also lead to reductions in saturated fat with a consequent lowering of blood cholesterol. The lowering of blood cholesterol in Dietary Change participants was less than anticipated, and therefore there was no effect on heart disease. A diet designed to reduce risk of heart disease would focus specifically on reducing saturated and trans fats, and would not reduce polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fats. Studies have shown that such a diet leads to lower blood cholesterol and reduces the risk of heart disease."
Like I said in my previous post, the study did not show a statistically significant reduction in CANCER with the consumption of fruits/vegs during this study.
I dont think its possible to do a double blind study on the effects of food.
Or the effects of exercise.
Or the effects of tobacco.
Or the effects of psychotherapy.
The answer is NOT to throw up our hands. Its to use the clinical studies we have, the epidemiological evidence, etc, etc. Which AFAICT is pretty decisive, and the scientific consensus is pretty strong.
Well, first off if they cannot do a TRUE clinical study with reference to fat and heart disease how would they come to the recommendations they have put forth is such a strong manner?
You see, the issue of food is not about only science, it is filled with politics and so-called experts who want to put their own bias into the equation. There are just as many well schooled people on the side of low carb who would scoff at the idea of a high carb diet being healthy for most, they just do not have the POLITICAL traction that the low fat side has. AND IT IS A FACT THAT MANY TYPE 2 DIABETICS CANNOT ACHIEVE NORMAL BS LEVELS ON THE ADA RECOMMENDED DIET, MUST CONTINUE TO TAKE TOXIC DRUGS. MANY OF THESE PEOPLE COULD GET OFF OF THESE DRUGS ON A LOW CARB DIET AND VASTLY IMPROVE THEIR HEALTHY.
And the other things you listed (tobacco, exercise, psychotherapy) would be quite easy to test in a clinical study, I am sure they have been. Food is much more tricky because it is hard to get someone to eat exactly what you want...... for say a 6 month period.
Low-carb diets have worked very well for me, I also watch my fat intake because I am afraid of having gall bladder problems.You can eat "good" fats and should to keep your hair skin and nails in good shape as well!
Low-carb diets have worked very well for me, I also watch my fat intake because I am afraid of having gall bladder problems.You can eat "good" fats and should to keep your hair skin and nails in good shape as well!
Uh, what do you consider "good" fats??? If you mean true Omega 3 (Dha/Epa) then I am with ya.
I have read that a high fat diet will help prevent Bilary Cholestasis because your Gallbladder is very active when you consume a lot of fat, prevents old bile from building up in the Gallbladder.
Like I said in my previous post, the study did not show a statistically significant reduction in CANCER with the consumption of fruits/vegs during this study.
yes, the evidence for that was much weaker than the evidence for the impact of saturated fat on cardio vascular disease.
Well, first off if they cannot do a TRUE clinical study with reference to fat and heart disease how would they come to the recommendations they have put forth is such a strong manner?
from the clinical studies that to do exist even though they are not double blind, from the epidemiological evidence, and from studying specific mechanisms of disease..
Quote:
You see, the issue of food is not about only science, it is filled with politics and so-called experts who want to put their own bias into the equation. There are just as many well schooled people on the side of low carb who would scoff at the idea of a high carb diet .
No one is suggeting a high carb diet. You keep fighting a straw man.
.
Quote:
being healthy for most, they just do not have the POLITICAL traction that the low fat side has..
And again, they are not calling for eating no fat either. They are calling for reductions in saturated fat and transfat, and for eating more mono and poly unsaturated fat instead. Again, a straw man.
Quote:
AND IT IS A FACT THAT MANY TYPE 2 DIABETICS CANNOT ACHIEVE NORMAL BS LEVELS ON THE ADA RECOMMENDED DIET, .
and that will be true of ANY diet. There are no magic bullets.
.
Quote:
And the other things you listed (tobacco, exercise, psychotherapy) would be quite easy to test in a clinical study,.
certainly not a gold standard double blind one using placebos.
.
Quote:
I am sure they have been. Food is much more tricky because it is hard to get someone to eat exactly what you want...... for say a 6 month period.
as for the politics, one of the cites on the wiki page supporting the healthfulness of a high fat diet happens to be the American Dairy Association. There are very considerable, very wealty lobbies with an interest in opposing the "mainstream" views on nutrition.
I've had plenty of success on a low-carb way of life. When done properly, it's a very healthy diet.
As you get started, read everything you can about low-carbing, and cobble together a plan that works best for you and that you can stick with -- and don't be discouraged if it takes you some time to find your groove. There are plenty of great resources on the internet and in the library.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnonChick
If you choose to go the Atkin's route, I'd recommend making your own food from scratch and NOT buying their packaged products.
Underscore, underscore, underscore! If you're going to make this a lifestyle change, you have to learn to prepare the food yourself, if for no other reason that to avoid becoming bored. You'll find loads of great recipes on the internet.
Also: Drink plenty of water; try for at least a half-gallon (8 8 oz. glasses) a day.
I can't cite studies or trials that support a position either way about the Atkins diet.
I can only relate my personal experience with it. In Jan 2010, my cardiologist wanted me to have a complete blood test ... something which hadn't been done in 25 years. This was after doing my annual Bruce Protocol stress echo with excellent results, over 12 minutes on the treadmill (98% level for my age group) and an excellent echo result. The blood test results indicated high bad cholesterol levels, etc. She said that I'd be going on some serious meds to control/reduce the bad stuff if I didn't get my act together ... and she gave me the option of trying to control my cholesterol and triglycerides with a diet.
Willing to try various diets to see which one worked for me ... and in light of my existing diet of locally raised produce and meats, very little processed foods, no fast food, etc .... she put me on the Atkins diets as our first try at this. I cut out all the starches ... no more potatoes, no more corn, no more rice ... and chose foods with a low glycemic index. That eliminated the juicing I'd been doing, too. I'd already been on a low sodium and wheat-free diet for years, with no sodas and no caffeine beverages for about 12 years.
The first three weeks weren't easy to stick to the diet, but I stayed with it. Certain food cravings ... like chips and salsa (I make my own) ... were pretty strong.
But the results were worth it. A second blood test two months later revealed that my cholesterol and trigylceride levels had dropped in to normal ranges ... not just into those ranges, but down into the middle of the ranges.
I've recognized that this is a permanent lifestyle change for me. I try to consume no more than 50 grams of carbs per day, with a top limit of 100 now and then. I eat a high protein/low carb, low glycemic index diet ... mostly from fresh foods, nothing prepared or processed. Along the way, I've also lost 25 lbs, which has stayed off so far ... although losing weight wasn't a primary goal.
Will the Atkins diet work for you and give you these results, too? There's only one way to find out.
PS: As I'm also a believer in ND's, I went to my local practice recently after a year on the Atkins diet. The doc was pretty wide-eyed when he did the NRT, as he couldn't find anything that was a stressor for me. He commented that I was the healthiest person he'd seen through his practice in 40 years. I had some seasonal allergy issues that I'd hoped he could assist me with, so going to try some supplement from him for that ... my results with over the counter meds has been a lot of undesired side effects.
yes, the evidence for that was much weaker than the evidence for the impact of saturated fat on cardio vascular disease.
Yeah really, put your money where your mouth is. Point me to a LARGE SCALE CLINICAL STUDY that shows a scientific link between CVD and Saturated fat. And no, I am not talking about a Meta-Analysis or a Biased book by a so called expert or a Survey Study or any of the other BS that is passed off as science.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
