Opposite of an open mind

[JohnC]

The conclusion to this study is quite telling.

The researchers are refusing to consider a more obvious conclusion that could be starting them in the face; dogmatic thinking or what?

http://bjsm.bmj.com/cgi/content/abst....2007.044966v1

Is the "French paradox" really a paradox?! I think not!

[NU_nutrition_TS]

Quote

The conclusion to this study is quite telling.

The researchers are refusing to consider a more obvious conclusion that could be starting them in the face; dogmatic thinking or what?

http://bjsm.bmj.com/cgi/content/abst....2007.044966v1

Is the "French paradox" really a paradox?! I think not!

Well spotted JohnC! This is a perfect example of 'researchers' who enter into a study having already made their mind up about the conclusion!

In their (tiny-minded) world everyone knows a high (saturated) fat diet is atherogenic. If your study reveals that people eating this 'atherogenic' diet have the least (or none whatsover) atherogenicity it just has to be for reasons other than your premise going into the study is just plain wrong!

They should also be reminded that you don't do studies to prove your theory but rather to see whether or not it can be disproved! If it can't be disproved it has 'stronger legs' to stand on but it is by no means proven!

[Was_once_fat_dave]

My god, you got to be kidding, how blind can people be. If this is the kind of research that gets done then no wonder the governments won't accept that high fat/low carb can be any good.

Theres a contact email address in that report. Nu, why don't you send one of your legendary, well articulated responses to them. The kind you have been posting on here for months/years that have opened the eyes of us that where previously blinded by the government/coperations endless portraying of the 'evil fats'.

Would be interessting to see what, if any response you would get.

[Cakeface]

Quote

]

Is the "French paradox" really a paradox?! I think not!

I was under the impression that the "French paradox" was mainly due to how deaths are recorded in France, ie. unless the person has a history of cardiac problems their death (due to heart attack) is recorded as a natural death.

That may have changed recently of course.

[NU_nutrition_TS]

Quote

I was under the impression that the "French paradox" was mainly due to how deaths are recorded in France, ie. unless the person has a history of cardiac problems their death (due to heart attack) is recorded as a natural death.

That may have changed recently of course.

Not all heart attacks are caused by cardiovascular disease (i.e., atherosclerosis of the cardiac arteries), which is the cause normally 'attributed' to a high fat diet. Some can be caused by acute arrhythmias, swelling of the chambers of the heart, inflammation of the pericardium, other diseases, etc.

[James Copping]

Nice find John, totally rediculous!

[stronglikewood]

If everyone went high fat I doubt there'd be enough good food to go around? So let's just let the experts do their thing and we do ours

[Gareth83]

Quote

Theres a contact email address in that report. Nu, why don't you send one of your legendary, well articulated responses to them. The kind you have been posting on here for months/years that have opened the eyes of us that where previously blinded by the government/coperations endless portraying of the 'evil fats'.

Would be interessting to see what, if any response you would get.

well someone has today:

Quote

Thank you for this contemporary assessment of dietary intake among the Masai pastoralists. Through the paradigm-shifting lens of a recent comprehensive summary of the lack of science to implicate saturated fat as a cause for heart disease [1], and new studies which suggest carbohydrate to be more worrisome than saturated fat for atherogenesis [2-4], there is a simple explanation for why the Masai do not develop atherosclerosis despite consuming a high-fat diet that the authors did not consider: high-fat diets (not containing man-made fats) are not atherogenic.

1. Taubes G. Good Calories, Bad Calories. Knopf Publishing, 2007.
2. Krauss RM et al. Separate effects of reduced carbohydrate intake and weight loss on atherogenic dyslipidemia. Am J Clin Nutr 2006;83:1025-31.
3. Mozaffarian D et al. Dietary fats, carbohydrate, and progression of coronary atherosclerosis in postmenopausal women. Am J Clin Nutr 2004;60:1102-3.
4.Volek JS et al. Dietary carbohydrate restriction induces a unique metabolic state positively affecting atherogenic dyslipidemia, fatty acid partitioning, and metabolic syndrome. Prog Lipid Res 2008;Mar 15 (Epub ahead of print]

[NU_nutrition_TS]

Glad to see someone with more scientific gravitas beat me to it!

Here is another example of the bias of 'blinkered science':

Quote

As a possibly interesting sideline the mouse chow used in these studies, a 67% refined carb diet that goes by the name NIH-07, is NOT recommended for long-term animal studies due to the extremely high rates of death and degenerative disease associated with the NIH-07 diet. The really telling part is that the degenerative diseases like cancer, stroke, heart disease Parkinsons and Alzheimers are being attributed to the paltry 24% protein. This is how truly clueless and disconnected most of our medical establishment is with regards to nutrition. Just to be clear, this chow is not recommended for animals in long-term studies due to the fact that most of the animals die before the completion of the study due to their NIH-07 diet. And the problem in the eyes of the researchers is the protein! (Have these researchers ever heard of hyperinsulinemia?) What is amazing to me is that mice fed on this chow manage to live a very long time on the IF protocol. IF appears to very effectively protect the animals from the National Institutes of Health recommended food. That could make a fun headline: “Mice Seek Protection From NIH Endorsed Food”.

Robb Wolf, 'We need more on ketosis', perfomancemenu.com, March 27, 2006.

[NU_nutrition_TS]

Going back to JohnC's opening post: here is the actual data from the study he mentions. I found it on Regina Wishire's blog Weight Of The Evidence. Judge for yourself who has the healthier macro ratio:

The Masai reported a high-fat, low-carbohydrate dietary pattern.
The rural Bantu reported a low-fat, high-carbohydrate dietary pattern.
The urban Bantu reported a high-fat, high-carbohydate dietary pattern, similar to a Western diet

BMI (average)

Masai = 20.7
Rural Bantu = 23.2
Urban Bantu = 27.4 (as a whole, the group was, on average, overweight)

Incidence of Obesity (BMI at or higher than 30)

Masai = 3%
Rural Bantu = 12%
Urban Bantu = 34%

Waist-Hip Ratio (lower is better)

Masai = 0.87
Rural Bantu = 0.89
Urban Bantu = 0.93

Blood Pressure

Masai = 118/71
Rural Bantu = 134/80
Urban Bantu = 134/82

Prevalence of Hypertention

Masai = 4%
Rural Bantu = 16%
Urban Bantu = 21%

Total Cholesterol

Masai = 3.89mmol/L (152mg/dl)
Rural Bantu = 3.60mmol/L (140mg/dl)
Urban Bantu = 4.50mmol/L (176mg/dl)

HDL (higher is better)

Masai = 1.08mmol/L (42mg/dl)
Rural Bantu = 0.91mmol/L (36mg/dl)
Urban Bantu = 1.08mmol/L (42mg/dl)

LDL

Masai = 2.09mmol/L (82mg/dl)
Rural Bantu = 2.13mmol/L (83mg/dl)
Urban Bantu = 2.69mmol/L (105mg/dl)

Triglycerides

Masai = 1.36mmol/L (121mg/dl)
Rural Bantu = 1.45mmol/L (129mg/dl)
Urban Bantu = 1.61mmol/L (143mg/dl)

Total Cholesterol/HDL Ratio (less than 4 is 'ideal')

Masai = 3.72
Rural Bantu = 4.38
Urban Bantu = 4.53

LDL/HDL Ratio (the lower the better)

Masai = 2.21
Rural Bantu = 2.46
Urban Bantu = 2.69

ApoB/ApoA-1 Ratio (measure of LDL particle ratios, lower is better)

Masai = 0.74
Rural Bantu = 0.83
Urban Bantu = 0.81