The American Heart Association's "New look" at nutrition research

(Paul) #21

Sounds generally ok apart from…2, 3, (still that old dogma) 5, and 8 which is crazy in its own right. The others would give big problems to diabetics, fruit and grains were the biggest problems in stabilizing my blood sugar. Now on a carnivore, I seem to be recovering from syndrome x after all the years of not knowing about it…Drs…???

(Bacon is a many-splendoured thing) #22

I thought of going back to take a look at these points again.

  1. Balance food and calorie intake with physical activity . . . in other words, eat less, move more.

  2. . . . get a full rang of nutrients from food . . . That I can agree with, but not the first part of the sentence.

  3. Grains, even whole grains, are problematic for many people, especially diabetics.

  4. “Lean/low-fat” is the same old unsubstantiated advice we’ve been seeing since the 1950’s. Nothing new there.

  5. “Use . . . liquid oils” is typical of AHA advice since Crisco Oil gave them the donation in 1948 that put the organisation on the map, so to speak. They’ve been grateful ever since. So, again, nothing new here.

  6. “Choose minimally processed foods” is good advice, but as I mentioned earlier, it certainly contradicts point 5, since the industrial seed oils are extensively processed. (The fruit oils, avocado, coconut, and olive, not so much.)

  7. “Minimize . . . added sugars” is something we can all agree on—except the Coca-Cola Corp., of course.

  8. " . . . foods with little or no salt"—see the PURE study, and that other study that was published around the same time, for what the healthy intake of sodium turns out to be.

  9. “Limit alcohol consumption” is probably wise, especially if you are among the 20% of us who are vulnerable to alcohol addiction.

  10. Apply this guidance everywhere is a good idea, but not entirely helpful, as many comments on these forums illustrate. Many people need help strategising how to apply their dietary preferences in the face of family pressure, and when at events where their eating pattern is not provided for.

(Bob M) #23

My mother is currently in the hospital. They’ve put her on a “heart healthy” diet, which has very low salt and NO meat. She most likely has heart failure, and there are plenty of new studies indicating that the failing heart loves ketones.

Furthermore, she has cancer. So, what are they feeding her? High sugar foods like pancakes.

This is completely wrong, and the AHA is KILLING people. They are not saving them. They are f-ing KILLING them.

She should be on a ketogenic diet and eating as much salt as she wants. The ketogenic diet has studies indicating this would help her heart failure, help her cancer, and help her COPD. Will it cure those things? Unlikely. Will it make them better and provide an improved life, even in the short term? I believe so.

I am not a conspiracy theorist. But in this case, the ties between the AHA and their sponsors are too close to ignore.

For the love of God, the AHA needs to STOP telling people what to eat. And maybe read a freaking study every once in a while.

(Bob M) #24

AHA, maybe get a freaking computer with an Internet connection, and do some freaking research?

(Michael - When reality fails to meet expectations, the problem is not reality.) #25

Consensus is like a freight train. Influence, money, ideology, profits, prestige - are the tracks.

(Bob M) #26

More evidence the AHA’s guidelines can cause HARM for many:

image

That’s right, not benefit, but harm.

(Jane) #27

I’m so sorry, Bob. I lost my Mom to COPD in 2001 and I KNOW a ketogenic diet would have prolonged her life and eased some of her suffering. But I didn’t know about keto and not sure she would have followed it if I did. She was on a very limited income but I would have bought her all the meat, eggs and cheese she could eat if she was still alive.