In case you havent seen this…
http://www.australiannationalreview.com/world-renown-heart-surgeon-speaks-heart-disease/
We physicians with all our training, knowledge and authority often acquire a rather large ego that tends to make it difficult to admit we are wrong. So, here it is. I freely admit to being wrong…
Oh wow. That’s a huge post! Might be better to just post the link 
Good article. Is this the one that was published March of 2016? Ah yes. I see it is.
You can. See the three dots at the bottom of your post? Next to the chain link and heart? Click on that and a pencil will appear. That is the edit.
Let me know if you need more help with editing 
Thank you for posting this. I’ll share it with my spouse. He has been a bit hesitant to believe that low carb, high fat can be good for you. He does see that I am having more success losing weight eating LCHF than I have ever had. This might encourage him to examine this woe for himself.
I shared this article on my Facebook page last night and someone posted this about Dr Lundell in response:
https://www.quackwatch.org/11Ind/lundell.html
I wonder how true the allegations are or whether as I suspect, it’s a similar situation to Prof Noakes and Dr Gary Fettke because he went against the dogma.
Yeah, well the guy that wrote that (Stephen Barrett, M.D) is also an honorary member of the USDA (formally the American Dietetic Association). Guess what they promote…
It’s possible that the allegations are true AND the doc is right about the true cause of heart disease. The two aren’t necessarily mutually exclusive.
The quackwatch post is an example of “Poisoning the Well,” a form of ad hominem argumentation:
When someone chooses to address the person, rather than what the person is arguing, there’s often a reason for that.
And Quackwatch has “form” for this kind of thing. A website I take care to avoid.
If you go to the quackwatch page you’ll also find listed as quacks Dr. Robert Atkins, Weston Price, and David Perlmutter. And many, many others from Linus Pauling to Joe Weider. My guess is that anyone who has expressed an opinion that the site’s maintainer doesn’t agree with gets listed as a quack.
I read why he calls Weston Price, David Perlmutter and Linus Pauling quacks and the arguments have some merit though I still think the term quack is a bit strong and discounts the positive things each has done. No argument is presented for labelling Dr. Atkins a quack and that bothers me. I’ve seen Dr. Atkins speak in YouTube videos and was impressed with the careful way he presented his arguments, cited science and presented the results achieved with his patients. He took far more care than many who go unchallenged such as Joel Fuhrman and Dean Ornish to not over state and over generalize his results. My guess is the argument against Atkins would be that he very successfully commercially exploited his “controversial” diet, but without any evidence that he faked his results or his diet doesn’t work as claimed I find labelling Atkins a quack offensive.
Thank you for the post. However, the link seems to have gone bad. Do you know if the article is still up elsewhere? Thanks again, Lori
@mykittashi, Google searching on the quotation in the original post found this:
https://healthimpactnews.com/2012/heart-surgeon-admits-he-was-wrong-about-low-fat-diet-and-heart-disease/