Study: Low-Fat Diets Don't Cut Health Risks - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 02-10-2006, 12:13 PM   #16
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,473
Local Time: 05:42 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


Missing from the equation is genetic make-up of the people in the two locations.

I know there are many "studies" which point us in different directions. And many result in new diet changes, even though the studies may involve small numbers of people over relatively short periods of time.

I would tend to give more emphasis on a study of this magnitude, but didn't sit down to a plateful of Oreos to celebrate.

Perhaps it is a matter of being in tuned with how your body responds to different foods. I've also eliminated many of the same things you cite from my diet and generally feel better.


i also wonder how genetic make-up is influence by generations of particular diets? are people in Okinawa less likely to get cancer because of how they themselves eat, or is it because of how their parents and grandparents and so on have eaten have made their offspring more or less genetically predisposed to cancer? what affect does diet, over generations, have on genetics?

i suppose i find all studies like this to be interesting, yet ultimately they usually have little affect on my eating habits. i think broad lifestyle changes work best, and it simply makes logical sense, to me, to avoid processed foods as much as possible. fast food can't be good food, can it? if it sits in a vending machine for 6 months, how good could it be for you?
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 02-10-2006, 02:42 PM   #17
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Utoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lovetown
Posts: 8,343
Local Time: 06:42 AM
Quote:
The investigators added that the best dietary advice was to follow federal guidelines for healthy eating--less saturated fats and trans fats, more grains and more fruits and vegetables.

Not everyone was convinced. Some, like Dr. Dean Ornish, a longtime promoter of low-fat diets and president of the Preventive Medicine Research Institute in Sausalito, California, said that the women did not reduce their fat to low enough levels or eat enough fruits and vegetables. He also said the study, even at eight years, did not give the diets enough time.

Others said that diet could still make a difference, at least with heart disease, if people were to eat the so-called Mediterranean diet, low in saturated fats like butter and high in oils like olive oil. The women in the study reduced all kinds of fat.

The diets studied "had an antique patina," said Dr. Peter Libby, a cardiologist and professor at Harvard Medical School. These days, Libby said, most people have moved on from the idea of controlling total fat to the idea that people should eat different kinds of fat.
This is the most important section.

See, the problem with non-medical people (i.e., the media) interpreting medical studies, coming up with a one-line headline like "Low-Fat Diet Doesn't Affect Health," and then spreading it all around---is that it twists what's actually in the study and confuses everybody.

I'm in my final 2 months of medical school, and one of the most important things I've learned in these 8 years of studying medical material is that one must read into what's really presented in a study that makes big claims.

Reading into this one, you'll see that the study was flawed in that they only decreased total fat---but paid no attention to what kinds of fat they kept or took out. That's a huge flaw. The problem is that the study began well over 8 years ago. Since that time, it's become much more widely known that different types of fat affect cholesterol & other negative factors differently.

To assume that diet doesn't affect health based on the results of this study is pretty daggone ignorant. Iron Horse, your great uncle ate veggies seasoned with fatback, but he also grew his own veggies and raised his own livestock----doesn't sound like he ate many things with preservatives or synthesized chemicals, and I'll bet that "seasoning" things with fatback still resulted in less daily fat intake than a Big Mac every day. And certainly, a cigar now and then won't kill you. As you say, everything in moderation for sure! And while we do not have total control over our health or when we die--we don't have a total lack of control, either. I can stand in front of a train right now and have a pretty good amount of control then!

Irvine---just about everything you've suggested is spot-on.

I will add a thought about genetics.... It's a pretty common cop-out these days to use genetics as an excuse for one's current health. "My dad had high cholesterol, so that's why I have it." "My whole family's overweight---it must be genetics." Sure, there's a genetic cause of hypercholesterolemia (high cholesterol)----but if you have this rare condition, your cholesterol will be well over 500, not something in the 200s! for weight, the way that scientists find out that there's a genetic factor in weight is by genetically modifying rats to either have waaaay too much or a complete lack of a certain protein called leptein. You are not genetically modified---rather, you have some level in between these man-made rats, not near the extremes.

The real issue in the "genetics" excuse isn't really genes, but instead socialization. Someone's whole family is fat not because of genes, but instead of that family's traditions. If your family has eaten crap for the last 2 or 3 generations, and your family isn't one that places an emphasis on exercise, well you're not going to be skinny. And unless you make an active change in your lifestyle, you'll pass on the same traditions to your kids. You're passing genes on, too, but what's going to make your kids fat is what habits you instill in your kids.

Irvine, there certainly are differences because of what people in various locations have eaten for generations. However, it doesn't really affect the genes. In order for it to affect the genepool, people with bad genes would have to not reproduce for some reason. Essentially, the idea is that "bad" genes would somehow keep you from reproducing. That would happen if 1). you die because of your condition before you reproduce, or 2). you don't reproduce because of "sexual selection"--no one will mate with you because of your condition. Diet thus shouldn't shape the genepool. The only way the diet of your grandparents can affect your genetic makeup would be if your granddad's diet somehow caused a mutation in one of his sperm cells--a pretty rare occurence, considering that the mutation could have occured in any of the billions of cells in his body----and then was passed on to your father/mother, and then passed on to you. If diet caused any genetic mutation, it's more likely to occur in one of your non-sperm or non-egg cells, thus affecting only you and not your offspring.

As far as we know, the cancer differences between races/countries arise somewhat in part of genes, but more often due to the conditions that those cultures experience. For example, as hinted at in the article, there is a lower rate of heart disease in Mediterranean areas---mainly because of the types of fats that they consume (i.e., olive oil)---fats that result in higher HDL (good cholesterol) and lower LDL (bad one). There are lower cancer rates in Asian areas that eat more fish---for the same reasons related to the type of fat. However, Japan has a higher rate of a certain type of gastric cancer than we in the US do. It's not related to genes, but instead related to the fact that they eat so many cured foods compared to us. Nitrites, common in cured fish & meats, can increase the risk of gastric cancer. The most common foods with nitrites in the US are chargrilled meats, but we eat less of that on a daily basis than some Asian countries eat cured fish & meats.

Anyway, after all that here's the cliff notes:

1). Yes, everything in moderation.
2). In my post-medschool opinion, most genes define a spectrum on which you might fall, and your environment/habits define where along that spectrum you go--and for things like weight and cholesterol, you get a pretty darn big spectrum to work with.
3). Diet certainly affects your health, and it's foolish to think otherwise. It's not merely the amount of fat or bad things you eat, but the type of fat & other foods that you eat.
4). Be sure to try and figure out what a study is really saying--and what it's not saying.
5). Thanks for listening!
__________________

__________________
Utoo is offline  
Old 02-10-2006, 02:45 PM   #18
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Utoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lovetown
Posts: 8,343
Local Time: 06:42 AM
P.S.---One more health/food tidbit:

Whole grains are big right now--and they should be. But the key to why whole grains are good is the fiber they provide. Don't get suckered by companies like General Mills that print "WHOLE GRAIN" in giant letters on a package, but only give you a measly 1 gram of fiber in the cereal, etc. If there's only 1 gram of fiber, who cares if it's whole grain?? Get the whole grain product with fiber. Example: don't bother with "whole grain" bread that has 1 gram of fiber per serving---find the one that gives at least 3 grams.

Okay, off my soapbox.
__________________
Utoo is offline  
Old 02-10-2006, 10:30 PM   #19
Refugee
 
fly so high!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: St Andrews NSW Australia
Posts: 1,835
Local Time: 08:42 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Utoo


Okay, off my soapbox.
[/B]
You are not ranting, you are spot on!
__________________
fly so high! is offline  
Old 02-10-2006, 10:37 PM   #20
Refugee
 
wizard2c's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,580
Local Time: 10:42 AM
reply

Unless it's written in a published hardcover book.....I will not buy it. Then they will come up with another sequel to the contrary.....and thus it swings like a pendulum clock...........eat.....don't eat.......eat........don't eat.........
__________________
wizard2c is offline  
Old 02-11-2006, 10:44 AM   #21
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Utoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lovetown
Posts: 8,343
Local Time: 06:42 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by fly so high!


You are not ranting, you are spot on!
Shucks!

Just read an article about this study------According to this article, only 14% of women in the study actually stuck to the diet that they were given. Makes me even more surprised that these folks made a conclusion and published it....
__________________
Utoo is offline  
Old 02-11-2006, 11:13 AM   #22
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 10:42 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Utoo
P.S.---One more health/food tidbit:

Whole grains are big right now--and they should be. But the key to why whole grains are good is the fiber they provide. Don't get suckered by companies like General Mills that print "WHOLE GRAIN" in giant letters on a package, but only give you a measly 1 gram of fiber in the cereal, etc. If there's only 1 gram of fiber, who cares if it's whole grain?? Get the whole grain product with fiber. Example: don't bother with "whole grain" bread that has 1 gram of fiber per serving---find the one that gives at least 3 grams.

Okay, off my soapbox.
Yes! I don't eat certain cereals that don't have a high bran content.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 02-11-2006, 05:01 PM   #23
Refugee
 
fly so high!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: St Andrews NSW Australia
Posts: 1,835
Local Time: 08:42 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Utoo


Shucks!

Just read an article about this study------According to this article, only 14% of women in the study actually stuck to the diet that they were given. Makes me even more surprised that these folks made a conclusion and published it....
I know, there are lots of articles like this! They are so inaccurate!
__________________
fly so high! is offline  
Old 02-12-2006, 09:17 AM   #24
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 02:42 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Utoo

Just read an article about this study------According to this article, only 14% of women in the study actually stuck to the diet that they were given.
That may be a good reflection of how individuals maintain diets over 8 years.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 02-12-2006, 09:55 AM   #25
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Utoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lovetown
Posts: 8,343
Local Time: 06:42 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


That may be a good reflection of how individuals maintain diets over 8 years.
Very possible..... But the article is claiming that it's a good reflection on the benefits of a low-fat diet, which it's not.
__________________
Utoo is offline  
Old 02-12-2006, 08:52 PM   #26
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
the iron horse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: in a glass of CheerWine
Posts: 3,251
Local Time: 05:42 AM
"Moderation in all things."

~Saint Paul

*i know, i've posted it before*
...trying to stay one step ahead of the THouGht PoLicE

__________________
the iron horse is offline  
Old 02-13-2006, 02:10 AM   #27
Refugee
 
fly so high!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: St Andrews NSW Australia
Posts: 1,835
Local Time: 08:42 PM
We had a "Food crisis" here a copule of weeks ago!
Suddenly the news broadcasted SHOCK,HORROR.... we eat fruit & veg that is kept in storage from anywhere from 2 weeks to 1 year!

A scientist concluded that our F&V is no good!
I mean,really......i know they are fortified,insecticided and god know what else...but how else are we going to eat.

I wonder if the western world would be able to survive on the F&V that each of our lands toil, also count into consideration the Seasons too!

I reckon we would starve!!
__________________

__________________
fly so high! is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com