He's so right. If you have to obsess over something, obsess over insulin resistance, metabolic syndrome, T2DM. Rest is pretty irrelevant. Latest study from the Women's Health Initiative reported in JAMA in January FINALLY proves this jamanetwork.com/journals/jamac…
Study's SO IMPORTANT because it comes from Women's Health Initiative which began in 1993 with specific goal of proving that low-fat "heart-healthy" US Dietary Guidelines will prevent T2DM, CHD, cancer, obesity etc. So authors' bias would always be to find in favour of that diet
So what did the study find?
T2DM increased risk of developing CHD 10-FOLD; metabolic syndrome 6-fold; hypertension 5-fold; obesity 4-fold! The best biomarker was lipoprotein insulin resistance at 6.4 fold increased risk. Nothing else came close. But what of LDL-Cholesterol?
Well LDL-cholesterol was associated with a 1.4 fold increased (associational) risk which is meaningless.
So in summary: The much vaunted $700 million Women's Health Initiative - a key component of which was to prove we should all be eating a low-fat "heart-healthy" diet - has now provided the ultimate disproof of that hypothesis. Nina Teicholz @bigfatsurprise was right all along.
So too was Dr Robert Atkins MD. This study shows that if you want to prevent CHD, you must prevent T2DM, Metabolic Syndrome and hypertension- all features of insulin resistance. @virtahealth study (and others) shows most effective way to do that is to eat LCHF diet of real foods
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I've spent the last 12 months writing this @CrossFitHealth series on the great Ancel Keys Cholesterol Con. This column introduced 70 key events that happened over the past 100 years which first established the Con and then helped sustain it right to today crossfit.com/health/ancel-k…
The reason why I've spent so long on this project is because since 2012 I've been accused repeatedly of "cherry-picking" evidence. Of course that's nonsensical since in my #HPCSA trial, as reported in #RealFoodonTrial, I presented 9.5 days of testimony without "cherry picking"
In these 70 events I've included every single (credible) study that has ever been used to support Keys Great Cholesterol Con. There is no "cherry picking". Which would be silly anyway since, when properly analysed, there are none, as far as I can see, that support his hypothesis.
1/20 In rebuttal Drs Willett and Hu of @HarvardChanSPH continue to press Harvard’s plant-based anti-meat agenda. Was not always so at @HarvardChanSPH. May 1952 edition of Postgraduate Medicine carried an Editorial – Comments on Cholesterol – by Harvard’s Hegsted, Mann and Stare
@HarvardChanSPH 2/20 ‘…it should be pointed out that when exhaustive statistical analysis is required to show the correlation between two variables, such as lipoprotein level and atherosclerosis, it usually means that there are many other variables …’
@HarvardChanSPH 3/20 ‘whose effects are unknown or uncontrolled and that such correlations are of relatively LITTLE VALUE for predictive purposes. The fact that one may be able to show statistically significant correlation between two variables…’
Suggestion: The 1977 USDGA should be called the President Eisenhower Diet after first eminent person to be prescribed the diet (by Ancel Keys PhD and Paul Dudley White MD in 1955) following President's 1st heart attack amzn.to/2ZzyigE
Over next 14 yrs, Eisenhower suffered 6 further heart attacks. His heart was defibrillated 14 times. He died in intractable heart failure. Heart transplant was not considered, amongst other reasons, because it was finally realised that he had T2DM (diagnosis originally missed)
At autopsy ”coronary atherosclerotic occlusive disease, multifocal, severe, with multiple recanalized thrombi” (p.321) is reported. His right coronary artery is patent; left anterior descending coronary artery has 10% narrowings; his circumflex artery is totally obstructed.
Thanks @J_Imagineering So here’s my argument. 1. Humans eating rapidly assimilated carbohydrates develop post-prandial hyperglycemia in proportion to the rate at which glucose is absorbed from the intestine bit.ly/1ExzbZs (primate study noted).
2. Is there any evidence that postprandial hyperglycemia is good and serves an evolutionarily valuable function? Answer: Probably not. Supporting evidence: Why do human have a total circulating blood glucose mass of only 5 grams?
3. If post-prandial hyperglycemia is not desirable (in fact, probably harmful – see problems in T2DM) and has no evolutionary value, then why does it happen?