|
|
| Author |
Message |
Juhana Harju
medicine forum Guru
Joined: 06 May 2005
Posts: 1056
|
 Posted: Thu Jun 22, 2006 5:55 am Post subject:
Re: Comments on new AHA recommendations
|
|
|
David R. Throop wrote:
: In article <4ftlelF1jhq1vU1@individual.net>,
: Juhana Harju <shantigiriorama@gmail.com> wrote:
:
:: http://tinyurl.com/7yeh5
:
:: http://tinyurl.com/j3yrv
:
: Thanks for posting this. I'd seen the second one but not the first.
: Reading these, I'd agree that there's pretty good evidence that animal
: derived sat fat causes a small but measurable increase in cholesterol
: and CHD. That is sat fat vs a calorie-equiv amount of carbs, and the
: GI of the carbs isn't specified. It probably doesn't apply to people
: whose carb metabolism is impaired.
It is interesting that saturated fats seem to increase CHD even in the
context of a typical Western diet were the quality carbs is poor (refined
and high GI). If better quality carbs would have been substituted with
saturated fats one could reason that the outcome would be even worse.
: It doesn't make sense to ask "Does dietary sat fat cause CHD?" It
: only makes sense w.r.t. some other macronutrient for which sat fat is
: substituting. It's probably true that there there's an implicit "in
: the context of a typical American/European diet" (the SAD) in all
: these judgements.
For the large audience it still does. The message has to be sufficiently
simple to get understood.
: Subbing 5% sat fat for carbs probably has different
: effect for someone eating SAD than for somebody on a low carb, low GI
: diet.
:
: I like that the review gets specific about various sat fats and
: doesn't treat them all as equal.
I agree with these.
: Thanks for the post
You are welcome.
--
Juhana |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Juhana Harju
medicine forum Guru
Joined: 06 May 2005
Posts: 1056
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 22, 2006 8:25 am Post subject:
Re: Comments on new AHA recommendations
|
|
|
Juhana Harju wrote:
: David R. Throop wrote:
:: In article <1150899450.122616.258370@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
:: TC <tunderbar@hotmail.com> wrote:
::
::: I think you mean Canola, not rape. They are not the same. Rape is
::: the original plant from which the Canola plant was derived thru
::: selective genetic manipulation.
::
:: Mostly right. Canola is a low-erucic-acid cultivar of rape (aka
:: Swedish turnip) grown in Canada. There are other low EA rape
:: cultivars, grown in Europe and not sold under the name Canola.
:
: The Lyon Diet Heart Trial was a European study and a special rape
: seed oil based margarine was used in the study. Canola, on the other
: hand, is a Canadian marketing name for LEAR rape seed oil. Also the
: rape seed oil sold for food consumption in Europe is low-erucic-acid
: although it is just called simply rape seed oil.
To be even more specific, in Finland where I live the rape seed oil is
actually made from turnip rape seed (Brassica rapa var. oleifera, previously
Brassica campestris) while in neighboring country Sweden the oil is made
from rape seed (Brassica napus var. oleifera). Still the both cultivars are
low-erucic-acid and have a similar lipid profile.
--
Juhana |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
David R. Throop
medicine forum beginner
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 41
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 22, 2006 1:10 pm Post subject:
Re: Comments on new AHA recommendations
|
|
|
In article <4fun6iF1ko0meU1@individual.net>,
Juhana Harju <shantigiriorama@gmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | While I agree that various saturated fats have different effects
this is also an issue of successful communication. From the public
health point of view it is very difficult to get the message through
if the message is too complicated. However, there could be some
advanced level of recommendations for people who are particularly
interested in nutritional matters.
|
Indeed. Especially given that the AHA (and ADA) recommendations are
what many clinicians use. The AHA recommendations aren't just
consumed by people with 8th grade reading levels. They're the basis
of care rendered by doctors, dieticians, CDEs.
DRT |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Susan
medicine forum Guru
Joined: 05 May 2005
Posts: 932
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 22, 2006 1:42 pm Post subject:
Re: Comments on new AHA recommendations
|
|
|
x-no-archive: yes
David R. Throop wrote:
| Quote: | In article <4fun6iF1ko0meU1@individual.net>,
Juhana Harju <shantigiriorama@gmail.com> wrote:
While I agree that various saturated fats have different effects
this is also an issue of successful communication. From the public
health point of view it is very difficult to get the message through
if the message is too complicated. However, there could be some
advanced level of recommendations for people who are particularly
interested in nutritional matters.
Indeed. Especially given that the AHA (and ADA) recommendations are
what many clinicians use. The AHA recommendations aren't just
consumed by people with 8th grade reading levels. They're the basis
of care rendered by doctors, dieticians, CDEs.
DRT
|
Those recommendations have led to a national epidemic of type 2 DM in
children, kidney disease and a population loaded with statins, bp meds
and DM drugs.
Susan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jim Chinnis
medicine forum Guru
Joined: 30 Apr 2005
Posts: 1030
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 22, 2006 2:01 pm Post subject:
Re: Comments on new AHA recommendations
|
|
|
"Juhana Harju" <shantigiriorama@gmail.com> wrote in part:
| Quote: | David R. Throop wrote:
: In article <im3k929qn239ia4n5efgrlem2nivufh7gp@4ax.com>,
: Jim Chinnis <jchinnis@SPAMalum.mit.edu> wrote:
:
::: I like that the review [by Hu and Willet] gets specific about
::: various sat fats and doesn't treat them all as equal.
:
:: The AHA recommendations that Dr.Westman thinks need better
:: justification treat them all exactly the same.
:
: I'm with Westman on that.
While I agree that various saturated fats have different effects this is
also an issue of successful communication. From the public health point of
view it is very difficult to get the message through if the message is too
complicated. However, there could be some advanced level of recommendations
for people who are particularly interested in nutritional matters.
|
Boy, do I ever disagree on that. The dumbing down of nutrition/medical
advice is what led to the huge push to reduce ALL fats in the diet,
contributing to the development of Olestra-fried chips and the rampant
increase in obesity, strokes, diabetes, and heart disease that is out there
now.
The government isn't there to "manage" our thinking.
Even a very complicated nutrition story could be solved with intelligent
labeling, revision of government subsidy programs, and such.
--
Jim Chinnis Warrenton, Virginia, USA |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TC
medicine forum Guru
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 1814
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 22, 2006 2:06 pm Post subject:
Re: Comments on new AHA recommendations
|
|
|
Juhana Harju wrote:
| Quote: | Jim Chinnis wrote:
: "Juhana Harju" <shantigiriorama@gmail.com> wrote in part:
:
:: Jim Chinnis wrote:
::: "Juhana Harju" <shantigiriorama@gmail.com> wrote in part:
:::: Jim Chinnis wrote:
::::
::::: "Show me a study where these recommendations [for reducing
::::: saturated-fat intake] have led to improved outcomes: there isn't
::::: one.
::::
:::: In the Lyon Diet Heart Trial patients were adviced to replace
:::: saturated fats with olive oil, rape seed oil and rape seed oil
:::: based margarine. And there are other studies as well.
:::
::: Juhana, I believe Dr. Westman meant a decently-designed study that
::: enables one to see the effect of the saturated fats. The Lyon study
::: is impossible to sort out. One can say that the "Lyon" diet was
::: better than the control diet, but not which factors made it so.
:::
::: Would you be able to argue that the Lyon diet reduced the number of
::: heart attacks because of its reduced saturated fat?!
::
:: Here we go again. I think that there is compelling evidence against
:: saturated fats. Just look at these two Harvard reviews:
::
:: http://tinyurl.com/7yeh5
::
:: http://tinyurl.com/j3yrv
:
: Well, I have to say that I think Dr. Westman is spot on. But I would
: entertain data from a well-controlled study. I certainly have no
: vested interest in saturated fat. (Except for cocoa butter, I guess.)
I read a couple of reviews Dr. Westman had taken part in and I found those
studies very biased with a strong low-carb agenda. I find the Harvard
approach by Hu and Willett much more balanced - they are looking at issues
open-mindedly without any fixed agenda.
Nutrition is not an exact science as there are too many factors affecting
the outcome. That is one reason I am not looking for water proof evidence
but rather what is the most probable answer.
--
Juhana
|
Nutrition IS an exact science. It just happens to involve a lot of
factors and is thus a tad complex.
And a lot of confusion is added to the topic from massive marketing and
marketing "research" by the food industry and govt departments trying
to help sell farmers products and pharmaceuticals. Just because most
people are confused by the contradictory crap science, does not negate
the real science of nutrition. You just have to be real critical and
research the researchers. If they have industry funding, their research
is most likely crap. Once you learn to identify the agenda driven
researchers in the research industry, the real science jumps out at you
everything falls into place and makes a lot of sense.
When you learn to identify and remove the industry funded
resarch/marketing/bullshit, you can find the real science and it is
surprisingly exact.
TC |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jim Chinnis
medicine forum Guru
Joined: 30 Apr 2005
Posts: 1030
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 22, 2006 2:09 pm Post subject:
Re: Comments on new AHA recommendations
|
|
|
throop@cs.utexas.edu (David R. Throop) wrote in part:
| Quote: | Reading these, I'd agree that there's pretty good evidence that animal
derived sat fat causes a small but measurable increase in ... CHD.
|
What would be the strongest evidence you have seen that shows that
causation?
--
Jim Chinnis Warrenton, Virginia, USA |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jim Chinnis
medicine forum Guru
Joined: 30 Apr 2005
Posts: 1030
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 22, 2006 2:19 pm Post subject:
Re: Comments on new AHA recommendations
|
|
|
"Juhana Harju" <shantigiriorama@gmail.com> wrote in part:
| Quote: | Jim Chinnis wrote:
: "Juhana Harju" <shantigiriorama@gmail.com> wrote in part:
:
:: Jim Chinnis wrote:
::: "Juhana Harju" <shantigiriorama@gmail.com> wrote in part:
:::: Jim Chinnis wrote:
::::
::::: "Show me a study where these recommendations [for reducing
::::: saturated-fat intake] have led to improved outcomes: there isn't
::::: one.
::::
:::: In the Lyon Diet Heart Trial patients were adviced to replace
:::: saturated fats with olive oil, rape seed oil and rape seed oil
:::: based margarine. And there are other studies as well.
:::
::: Juhana, I believe Dr. Westman meant a decently-designed study that
::: enables one to see the effect of the saturated fats. The Lyon study
::: is impossible to sort out. One can say that the "Lyon" diet was
::: better than the control diet, but not which factors made it so.
:::
::: Would you be able to argue that the Lyon diet reduced the number of
::: heart attacks because of its reduced saturated fat?!
::
:: Here we go again. I think that there is compelling evidence against
:: saturated fats. Just look at these two Harvard reviews:
::
:: http://tinyurl.com/7yeh5
::
:: http://tinyurl.com/j3yrv
:
: Well, I have to say that I think Dr. Westman is spot on. But I would
: entertain data from a well-controlled study. I certainly have no
: vested interest in saturated fat. (Except for cocoa butter, I guess.)
I read a couple of reviews Dr. Westman had taken part in and I found those
studies very biased with a strong low-carb agenda. I find the Harvard
approach by Hu and Willett much more balanced - they are looking at issues
open-mindedly without any fixed agenda.
Nutrition is not an exact science as there are too many factors affecting
the outcome. That is one reason I am not looking for water proof evidence
but rather what is the most probable answer.
|
No one comes to any issue with a blank slate. The question would be how they
treat the data that are out there. It's easy to see a "low-carb bias" if you
yourself have a high-carb bias.
This is why I keep asking for the data. Reducing saturated fats is becoming
the new mantra--now that reducing ALL fats is dead. So there should be some
prospective randomized trials showing increased heart disease or events when
diets include more sat fat (a mix of some sort, I guess) and less of the
other normal dietary components. (It seems to me that sat fat is usually
bound up with protein and other fats, so in practice reducing sat fat might
mean increasing carbs and decreasing protein and certain unsaturates.) And
the evidence deserves to be unequivocal.
Maybe it is. I'm just still looking.
--
Jim Chinnis Warrenton, Virginia, USA |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Juhana Harju
medicine forum Guru
Joined: 06 May 2005
Posts: 1056
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 22, 2006 2:43 pm Post subject:
Re: Comments on new AHA recommendations
|
|
|
Jim Chinnis wrote:
: "Juhana Harju" <shantigiriorama@gmail.com> wrote in part:
:: While I agree that various saturated fats have different effects
:: this is also an issue of successful communication. From the public
:: health point of view it is very difficult to get the message through
:: if the message is too complicated. However, there could be some
:: advanced level of recommendations for people who are particularly
:: interested in nutritional matters.
:
: Boy, do I ever disagree on that. The dumbing down of nutrition/medical
: advice is what led to the huge push to reduce ALL fats in the diet,
: contributing to the development of Olestra-fried chips and the rampant
: increase in obesity, strokes, diabetes, and heart disease that is out
: there now.
:
: The government isn't there to "manage" our thinking.
In Europe the role of government has been quite different from U.S. In the
past there has been some large and very succesful public health campaigns in
Europe were 'the goverment' has indeed been 'managing' the thinking of
public. Nowadays people are more individualised even in Europe and so they
are more sceptical about any health advice given by public health officials.
Still there are always some people looking for predigested information given
by authorities.
What do you think is the proper role of official recommendations?
: Even a very complicated nutrition story could be solved with
: intelligent labeling, revision of government subsidy programs, and
: such.
In principle yes... but I wonder what impedes this? Lack of consensus of
what should be done?
--
Juhana |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jim Chinnis
medicine forum Guru
Joined: 30 Apr 2005
Posts: 1030
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 22, 2006 2:56 pm Post subject:
Re: Comments on new AHA recommendations
|
|
|
"Juhana Harju" <shantigiriorama@gmail.com> wrote in part:
| Quote: | Jim Chinnis wrote:
: "Juhana Harju" <shantigiriorama@gmail.com> wrote in part:
:: While I agree that various saturated fats have different effects
:: this is also an issue of successful communication. From the public
:: health point of view it is very difficult to get the message through
:: if the message is too complicated. However, there could be some
:: advanced level of recommendations for people who are particularly
:: interested in nutritional matters.
:
: Boy, do I ever disagree on that. The dumbing down of nutrition/medical
: advice is what led to the huge push to reduce ALL fats in the diet,
: contributing to the development of Olestra-fried chips and the rampant
: increase in obesity, strokes, diabetes, and heart disease that is out
: there now.
:
: The government isn't there to "manage" our thinking.
In Europe the role of government has been quite different from U.S. In the
past there has been some large and very succesful public health campaigns in
Europe were 'the goverment' has indeed been 'managing' the thinking of
public. Nowadays people are more individualised even in Europe and so they
are more sceptical about any health advice given by public health officials.
Still there are always some people looking for predigested information given
by authorities.
What do you think is the proper role of official recommendations?
: Even a very complicated nutrition story could be solved with
: intelligent labeling, revision of government subsidy programs, and
: such.
In principle yes... but I wonder what impedes this? Lack of consensus of
what should be done?
|
What impedes it is the attitude you displayed in the top paragraph above!
--
Jim Chinnis Warrenton, Virginia, USA |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Juhana Harju
medicine forum Guru
Joined: 06 May 2005
Posts: 1056
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 22, 2006 3:05 pm Post subject:
Re: Comments on new AHA recommendations
|
|
|
Jim Chinnis wrote:
: throop@cs.utexas.edu (David R. Throop) wrote in part:
:
:: Reading these, I'd agree that there's pretty good evidence that
:: animal derived sat fat causes a small but measurable increase in ...
:: CHD.
:
: What would be the strongest evidence you have seen that shows that
: causation?
This paper in BMJ is something that might be of interest to you:
http://tinyurl.com/c5dwr
--
Juhana |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TC
medicine forum Guru
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 1814
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 22, 2006 3:05 pm Post subject:
Re: Comments on new AHA recommendations
|
|
|
Jim Chinnis wrote:
| Quote: | "Juhana Harju" <shantigiriorama@gmail.com> wrote in part:
Jim Chinnis wrote:
: "Juhana Harju" <shantigiriorama@gmail.com> wrote in part:
:
:: Jim Chinnis wrote:
::: "Juhana Harju" <shantigiriorama@gmail.com> wrote in part:
:::: Jim Chinnis wrote:
::::
::::: "Show me a study where these recommendations [for reducing
::::: saturated-fat intake] have led to improved outcomes: there isn't
::::: one.
::::
:::: In the Lyon Diet Heart Trial patients were adviced to replace
:::: saturated fats with olive oil, rape seed oil and rape seed oil
:::: based margarine. And there are other studies as well.
:::
::: Juhana, I believe Dr. Westman meant a decently-designed study that
::: enables one to see the effect of the saturated fats. The Lyon study
::: is impossible to sort out. One can say that the "Lyon" diet was
::: better than the control diet, but not which factors made it so.
:::
::: Would you be able to argue that the Lyon diet reduced the number of
::: heart attacks because of its reduced saturated fat?!
::
:: Here we go again. I think that there is compelling evidence against
:: saturated fats. Just look at these two Harvard reviews:
::
:: http://tinyurl.com/7yeh5
::
:: http://tinyurl.com/j3yrv
:
: Well, I have to say that I think Dr. Westman is spot on. But I would
: entertain data from a well-controlled study. I certainly have no
: vested interest in saturated fat. (Except for cocoa butter, I guess.)
I read a couple of reviews Dr. Westman had taken part in and I found those
studies very biased with a strong low-carb agenda. I find the Harvard
approach by Hu and Willett much more balanced - they are looking at issues
open-mindedly without any fixed agenda.
Nutrition is not an exact science as there are too many factors affecting
the outcome. That is one reason I am not looking for water proof evidence
but rather what is the most probable answer.
No one comes to any issue with a blank slate. The question would be how they
treat the data that are out there. It's easy to see a "low-carb bias" if you
yourself have a high-carb bias.
|
I understand that no one comes to an issue with a blank slate. But that
can mean a lot of things, some of a relatively minor nature and some of
a very significant nature.
It glosses over and fails to address those "researchers" that make a
career from industry funding as researchers and as consultants and are
given prestigious sounding posts at prestigious sounding "institutes"
that are primarily funded by industry to advance the marketing of their
products. These researchers know damned well that they are pushing a
marketing agenda and are willing to ignore scientific fact and
substitute their own "facts".
Entire university nutrition departments have become little more than
funding seeking partners of industry, either the pharma industry or the
food industry. It is so blatant that they will brag about it in press
releases and on their websites. Non-profits are now pretty much owned
by industry, just check out the American Diabetes Assoc website and see
where they get their funding from. And they underwrite resarch too.
The American Dental Assoc has accepted million dollar donations from
CocaCola. Do you honestly believe that this will not skew their
activities?
Money makes the world go round. Researchers are just as greedy as the
rest of society.
TC
| Quote: |
This is why I keep asking for the data. Reducing saturated fats is becoming
the new mantra--now that reducing ALL fats is dead. So there should be some
prospective randomized trials showing increased heart disease or events when
diets include more sat fat (a mix of some sort, I guess) and less of the
other normal dietary components. (It seems to me that sat fat is usually
bound up with protein and other fats, so in practice reducing sat fat might
mean increasing carbs and decreasing protein and certain unsaturates.) And
the evidence deserves to be unequivocal.
Maybe it is. I'm just still looking.
--
Jim Chinnis Warrenton, Virginia, USA |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Juhana Harju
medicine forum Guru
Joined: 06 May 2005
Posts: 1056
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 22, 2006 3:06 pm Post subject:
Re: Comments on new AHA recommendations
|
|
|
Jim Chinnis wrote:
: "Juhana Harju" <shantigiriorama@gmail.com> wrote in part:
:
:: Jim Chinnis wrote:
::: "Juhana Harju" <shantigiriorama@gmail.com> wrote in part:
::
:::: While I agree that various saturated fats have different effects
:::: this is also an issue of successful communication. From the public
:::: health point of view it is very difficult to get the message
:::: through if the message is too complicated. However, there could be
:::: some advanced level of recommendations for people who are
:::: particularly interested in nutritional matters.
:::
::: Boy, do I ever disagree on that. The dumbing down of
::: nutrition/medical advice is what led to the huge push to reduce ALL
::: fats in the diet, contributing to the development of Olestra-fried
::: chips and the rampant increase in obesity, strokes, diabetes, and
::: heart disease that is out there now.
:::
::: The government isn't there to "manage" our thinking.
::
:: In Europe the role of government has been quite different from U.S.
:: In the past there has been some large and very succesful public
:: health campaigns in Europe were 'the goverment' has indeed been
:: 'managing' the thinking of public. Nowadays people are more
:: individualised even in Europe and so they are more sceptical about
:: any health advice given by public health officials. Still there are
:: always some people looking for predigested information given by
:: authorities.
::
:: What do you think is the proper role of official recommendations?
::
::: Even a very complicated nutrition story could be solved with
::: intelligent labeling, revision of government subsidy programs, and
::: such.
::
:: In principle yes... but I wonder what impedes this? Lack of
:: consensus of what should be done?
:
: What impedes it is the attitude you displayed in the top paragraph
: above!
Can you please clarify.
--
Juhana |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jim Chinnis
medicine forum Guru
Joined: 30 Apr 2005
Posts: 1030
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 22, 2006 3:12 pm Post subject:
Re: Comments on new AHA recommendations
|
|
|
"Juhana Harju" <shantigiriorama@gmail.com> wrote in part:
| Quote: | Jim Chinnis wrote:
: "Juhana Harju" <shantigiriorama@gmail.com> wrote in part:
:
:: Jim Chinnis wrote:
::: "Juhana Harju" <shantigiriorama@gmail.com> wrote in part:
::
:::: While I agree that various saturated fats have different effects
:::: this is also an issue of successful communication. From the public
:::: health point of view it is very difficult to get the message
:::: through if the message is too complicated. However, there could be
:::: some advanced level of recommendations for people who are
:::: particularly interested in nutritional matters.
:::
::: Boy, do I ever disagree on that. The dumbing down of
::: nutrition/medical advice is what led to the huge push to reduce ALL
::: fats in the diet, contributing to the development of Olestra-fried
::: chips and the rampant increase in obesity, strokes, diabetes, and
::: heart disease that is out there now.
:::
::: The government isn't there to "manage" our thinking.
::
:: In Europe the role of government has been quite different from U.S.
:: In the past there has been some large and very succesful public
:: health campaigns in Europe were 'the goverment' has indeed been
:: 'managing' the thinking of public. Nowadays people are more
:: individualised even in Europe and so they are more sceptical about
:: any health advice given by public health officials. Still there are
:: always some people looking for predigested information given by
:: authorities.
::
:: What do you think is the proper role of official recommendations?
::
::: Even a very complicated nutrition story could be solved with
::: intelligent labeling, revision of government subsidy programs, and
::: such.
::
:: In principle yes... but I wonder what impedes this? Lack of
:: consensus of what should be done?
:
: What impedes it is the attitude you displayed in the top paragraph
: above!
Can you please clarify.
|
"From the public health point of view it is very difficult to get the
message through if the message is too complicated."
Public health agencies therefore dumb it down, frequently wreaking havoc.
--
Jim Chinnis Warrenton, Virginia, USA jchinnis@alum.mit.edu |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Juhana Harju
medicine forum Guru
Joined: 06 May 2005
Posts: 1056
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 22, 2006 3:18 pm Post subject:
Re: Comments on new AHA recommendations
|
|
|
Jim Chinnis wrote:
: "Juhana Harju" <shantigiriorama@gmail.com> wrote in part:
:: Jim Chinnis wrote:
::: "Juhana Harju" <shantigiriorama@gmail.com> wrote in part:
:::: Jim Chinnis wrote:
::::: "Juhana Harju" <shantigiriorama@gmail.com> wrote in part:
::::
:::::: While I agree that various saturated fats have different effects
:::::: this is also an issue of successful communication. From the
:::::: public health point of view it is very difficult to get the
:::::: message through if the message is too complicated. However,
:::::: there could be some advanced level of recommendations for people
:::::: who are particularly interested in nutritional matters.
:::::
::::: Boy, do I ever disagree on that. The dumbing down of
::::: nutrition/medical advice is what led to the huge push to reduce
::::: ALL fats in the diet, contributing to the development of
::::: Olestra-fried chips and the rampant increase in obesity, strokes,
::::: diabetes, and heart disease that is out there now.
:::::
::::: The government isn't there to "manage" our thinking.
::::
:::: In Europe the role of government has been quite different from U.S.
:::: In the past there has been some large and very succesful public
:::: health campaigns in Europe were 'the goverment' has indeed been
:::: 'managing' the thinking of public. Nowadays people are more
:::: individualised even in Europe and so they are more sceptical about
:::: any health advice given by public health officials. Still there are
:::: always some people looking for predigested information given by
:::: authorities.
::::
:::: What do you think is the proper role of official recommendations?
::::
::::: Even a very complicated nutrition story could be solved with
::::: intelligent labeling, revision of government subsidy programs, and
::::: such.
::::
:::: In principle yes... but I wonder what impedes this? Lack of
:::: consensus of what should be done?
:::
::: What impedes it is the attitude you displayed in the top paragraph
::: above!
::
:: Can you please clarify.
:
: "From the public health point of view it is very difficult to get the
: message through if the message is too complicated."
:
: Public health agencies therefore dumb it down, frequently wreaking
: havoc.
Do you mean that by overly simplifying the message public health agencies
actually lead people astray? If that is your opinion I partly agree with
you.
--
Juhana |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Google
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
The time now is Fri Dec 05, 2008 1:03 am | All times are GMT
|
|
Credit Cards | Bad Credit Mortgages | Tax | Property Search | eBay
|
|
Copyright © 2004-2005 DeniX Solutions SRL
|
|
Other DeniX Solutions sites:
electronics forum,
Science forum
Unix/Linux blog
Unix/Linux documentation
Unix/Linux forums
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Forum index
»
Medicine forums
»
cardiology
