Popular newsletter says (chol and low-carb)

[Songwriter]

Everyday Health newsletter:

As more and more people adopted these diets, food manufacturers and restaurants began promoting products to fit into this eating plan. Some of the low-carb diets (like the South Beach Diet) distinguish between good fats and bad fats, but some (like Atkins) don’t. Without any advice on which fats to eat, people tend to load up on the bad ones that they love: bacon, cheese, steak, and eggs, for example. But this approach leads to an unbalanced diet that’s way too high in saturated fats.

In fact, a study that used various equations to estimate the impact of certain diets on long-term health estimated that the Atkins diet would raise the average American’s cholesterol by 51 mg/dL. However, in more surprising news, some studies found that low-carb diets have a similar effect on cholesterol levels as low-fat diets, or in some cases even a better effect. For example, a six-month study of 79 obese people found that a low-carb diet had a similar effect on HDL and LDL levels compared with a low-fat diet, but the low-carb diet had a more favorable impact on triglyceride levels.

But other studies have found the opposite. So at this point there’s just not enough unbiased information out there to give a green light to eating bacon cheeseburgers (with or without the bun) every day. Plus, with what we do know about diet and cholesterol, it is illogical to conclude that long-term consumption of a low-carb, high-saturated fat, high-protein diet would be healthy:
The link between saturated fat and heart disease is well established; studies also suggest an increased risk for stroke, but the link is not as strong.
Low-carb diets are very low in fiber. Many studies worldwide link a high intake of fiber with a reduced risk of heart disease and diabetes.
The Atkins diet is very low in fruits and vegetables. Many studies link a high intake of fruits and vegetables with a reduced risk of heart disease and stroke.
Low-carb diets are very high in protein. Protein is essential for health. However, in animals, large amounts of protein accelerate the aging of the kidneys, and high-protein diets are harmful for some people with kidney disease. In addition, a high intake of protein causes calcium loss that may increase the risk of osteoporosis and kidney stones.
These diets are likely to be high in sodium (salt). A high intake of sodium is associated with an increased risk of high blood pressure in some people.
The best study to date on the subject found that even though low-carb dieters initially lose weight faster than low-fat dieters, at the end of a year, the two groups are neck-and-neck in the weight-loss race.On the plus side, low-carb diets often do lower triglyceride levels nicely, and they may have a less pronounced effect on lowering HDL, which often happens on low-fat diets. So, if you have high triglycerides, a low-carb diet could lead to a substantial reduction in triglycerides and thus in total cholesterol, although it is unlikely to have a beneficial impact on LDL cholesterol.

newsletter Source (http://www.everydayhealth.com/publicsite/index.aspx?puid=ae5e0d25-b0d9-4ac4-ba65-201a40d469b5&p=12)

So, whaddya think? Pretty sad, eh? I see several things Dr. Mike would rip apart. What a shame, we've a long way to go.

[maxlharris]

The link between saturated fat and heart disease is well established; studies also suggest an increased risk for stroke, but the link is not as strong.
Low-carb diets are very low in fiber. Many studies worldwide link a high intake of fiber with a reduced risk of heart disease and diabetes.
The Atkins diet is very low in fruits and vegetables. Many studies link a high intake of fruits and vegetables with a reduced risk of heart disease and stroke.
Low-carb diets are very high in protein. Protein is essential for health. However, in animals, large amounts of protein accelerate the aging of the kidneys, and high-protein diets are harmful for some people with kidney disease. In addition, a high intake of protein causes calcium loss that may increase the risk of osteoporosis and kidney stones.
These diets are likely to be high in sodium (salt). A high intake of sodium is associated with an increased risk of high blood pressure in some people.
The best study to date on the subject found that even though low-carb dieters initially lose weight faster than low-fat dieters, at the end of a year, the two groups are neck-and-neck in the weight-loss race.So, whaddya think? Pretty sad, eh? I see several things Dr. Mike would rip apart. What a shame, we've a long way to go.

Faith vs. Science. Pure and simple. You look at the first bullet point. It's well established in the minds of many, but it's not really well established in the research.

Bullet 2: The benefits of fiber as controversial, rather than plain and simple. NTL: many LC dieters do fine on fiber from a dietary perspective, since it's essentially free on most plans (not Kimkins, but that's controversial too).

Bullet 3: Atkins diet is low in fruits & vegetables, except that if you are doing Atkins, you start with three servings per day, which is more than most people were eating before, and then you add more servings in to jack your carb count up. Oh, and fruits. Nevermind that researchers found that LC dieters eat 4.5 servings of fruit and veg a day, which would be more than the average dieter or American or whatever. Never, mind you, NEVER let facts get in the way of empire.

Bullet 4: The protein-kidney fear again. Old hat. Yes, if you have impaired kidney function, you probably shouldn't do LC. You probably have bigger fish to fry. But, if you have functioning kidneys, you have no worries. That's my understanding. Course, you can never find a study saying anything based on research about protein vs. healthy kidneys. But, none-the-less, we should be very afraid. Again, don't let facts get in the way of empire.

Bullet 5: High sodium. First, we don't KNOW know that sodium is really bad for you. Sure, you retain some fluid, but, well, is there something long term sinister? Second, just because you are doing LC doesn't mean you are eating bacon and brie all the time (as one Dean Ornish has suggested... though bacon and brie are both good and acceptable LC foods). You can do this nutritional approach without high sodium. You can do it in a low sodium format. So, again, don't let facts get in the way of empire.

Bullet 6: The LF catch up. First, I would rather lose weight quickly up front than have a very long slog. Who wouldn't? So, if I lose more in the first 6 months with LC, I'm a lot closer to goal a lot faster. If someone on LF catches up six months later, whoopie. I measure on my own ladder. There are two types of flaw with the LF catches up/LC slows down hypothesis. 1- It talks in terms of total pounds, not in terms of percentage of goal. It is possible that LC dieters lose to goal faster, then go to maintenance while LF people still have goal to make. That would level loss off on one curve, and not the other. 2- We're not looking at compliance. If you're not looking at the ease of sticking to the program, what's the point. I am sure people will lose a lot of weight on Ornish's tightest recommendation. But how many can? According to the JAMA published study, not many. Not that Atkins compliance was great, but it was a lot better than the other diets studied. At any rate, if you were looking about for how to lose weight, you might give an LC approach a 3 month trial, see how it feels and see how it compares to the life of LF dieting you've been up to. Or, you might let an empire based newsletter like this make your decision for you. Either way.

Last thought: When I am talking about empire, I am suggesting that there are a large group of forces that are very interested in maintaining a high carb, low fat kind of universe. There is a large consumer packaged goods industry with deep pockets that get deeper when people read stuff like "Whole Grain is great for you." There is a large industry upstream from them with deep pockets that stay deep as long as the government keeps the farm bill on the post WWII model. There is a large pharmaceutical industry with a lot of interest in people having high cholesterol, high blood pressure, high blood sugar, high everything. They also have very deep pockets. All of these groups have a large incentive to keep you afraid of LC, afraid of high cholesterol, high blood pressure, unfocused on your blood sugar until it's too late, the pan flu, the killer bees, superpredator kids, and anything else that will keep you buckled down and asking only one question: "What can I buy to keep the new disaster at bay?"

Post-script: this is super anti-everyone and that's a little out of character for me. But I'm an economist, I look for incentives, because that's what makes people do whatever they do. If you can understand the incentives, you can understand everything else. And, frankly, the incentives of these groups don't work for you, not in the way you want them to. I'm sure the person or group that published this newsletter feels they are doing a public service for all who happen to read it. They probably don't have an incentive other than the good feeling they get from helping people. But, the system is so broken they can't tell the difference.

[Karole]

Good points Max. We need to constantly be aware of who is behind all this "health information"

[Anniesnan]

Last thought: When I am talking about empire, I am suggesting that there are a large group of forces that are very interested in maintaining a high carb, low fat kind of universe. There is a large consumer packaged goods industry with deep pockets that get deeper when people read stuff like "Whole Grain is great for you." There is a large industry upstream from them with deep pockets that stay deep as long as the government keeps the farm bill on the post WWII model. There is a large pharmaceutical industry with a lot of interest in people having high cholesterol, high blood pressure, high blood sugar, high everything. They also have very deep pockets. All of these groups have a large incentive to keep you afraid of LC, afraid of high cholesterol, high blood pressure, unfocused on your blood sugar until it's too late,




I agree with you 100%. The packaged foods are exactly what I have stopped buying, doing lc. I buy very few packaged foods anymore, I try and stick with the "original sources".
And the more of a purist approach you take, the less packaged stuff you will buy.