SEARCH
WSJ: “A Low-Carb Strategy for Fighting the Pandemic’s Toll”
Related: atherosclerosis, Diabetes Mellitus, ethics in medicine, gears of the machine, health, metabolic syndrome, nutrient deficiency, nutrition, The Wall Street Journal
Read the books that may save your life; see Your Doctor is NOT Responsible for Your Health—YOU Are! Recommended Reading to Open Your Mind and Ask the Right Questions, Because Your Life Depends On It.
Federal guidelines in league with the medical establishment guidelines have been injuring and killing people for decades now; the horrible results are evident in the raging epidemics of obesity, heart disease, cancer and just about everything.
Funding for studies that would really improve public health by strengthening the organism as a whole (e.g. nutrtion and eliminating nutrient deficiencies) are rarely if ever done, because there is no funding for improving the health of 300 million people when it is not a drug that can be patented. The government and BigPharma and medical schools and doctors are all complicit in this highly unethical situatinon.
Could a change be slowly emerging?
WSJ: A Low-Carb Strategy for Fighting the Pandemic’s Toll
Federal dietary guidelines don’t reflect the evidence that eating fewer carbohydrates can help to reduce obesity, diabetes and heart disease.
The coronavirus has added a brutal exclamation point to America’s pervasive ill health. Americans with obesity, diabetes, heart disease and other diet-related diseases are about three times more likely to suffer worsened outcomes from Covid-19, including death. Had we flattened the still-rising curves of these conditions, it’s quite possible that our fight against the virus would today look very different.
To combat this and future pandemics, we need to talk about not only the masks that go over our mouths but the food that goes into them. Next month, an expert committee will issue its advisory report on the federal government’s official dietary guidelines for the next five years. First published in 1980, the guidelines are meant to encourage healthy eating, but they have self-evidently failed to stem the ever-rising rates of obesity, diabetes and other chronic diseases in the U.S.
Pills and surgery can treat the symptoms of such conditions, but diet-related problems require diet-related solutions. The good news is that changes in diet can start to reverse these conditions in a matter of weeks. In one controlled trial at the University of Indiana involving 262 adults with Type 2 diabetes, 56% were able to reverse their diagnosis by following a very low-carbohydrate diet, with support from a mobile app, in just 10 weeks. The results of this continuing study have been sustained for two years, with more than half the study population remaining free of a diabetes diagnosis.
...
Yet the federal government’s dietary guidelines themselves stand in the way of making low-carb diets a viable option for the 60% of Americans with at least one chronic disease. That’s because the guidelines call for a diet high in grains, with more than 50% of calories coming from carbohydrates. The guidelines aren’t mere advice: They drive the National School Lunch Program, feeding programs for the elderly and the poor, and military food. Many patients learn about the guidelines from their doctors and dietitians... To date, government experts overseeing the dietary guidelines have refused to publicly consider low-carbohydrate alternatives.
... the current committee, whose report is due in June, stated recently that it couldn't find a single study with carbohydrates below 25% of calories. In response, an advocacy group called the Low-Carb Action Network published a list of 52 such trials. One reason that the committee missed these studies is that it decided to exclude all trials on weight loss, even though two-thirds of Americans are overweight or obese.
... The reason is that the dietary guidelines focus solely on disease prevention in healthy people. Congress mandated in 1990 that the guidelines should address the “general public,” and in that year, most Americans did not have diet-related conditions. Now a majority of them do, yet federal officials have stated their reluctance to expand the scope of the guidelines.
... The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM) warned, in a 2017 report mandated by Congress, that “it will…be essential for the [dietary guidelines]…to include all Americans whose health can benefit by improving their diet…. Without these changes, present and future dietary guidance will not be applicable to a large majority of the general population.”
...
—Ms. Teicholz is a science journalist and the executive director of the Nutrition Coalition.
WIND: sadly, not one word on nutrient deficiency, which is the flip side of diet/nutrition.
On my recommended reading list, see The Big Fat Surprise: Why Butter, Meat, and Cheese Belong in a Healthy Diet by Nina Teicholz @AMAZON.
Translate “experts” to “ethically bankrupt players with conflicts of interest” and you will be closer to the mark when it comes to government committees. And why is the government involved at all? It guarantees intellectual corruption.
Any time a committe is involved, it is all but certain that its recommendations will be evasive, watered down and disingenuous. Key studies and findings will be hidden, or just left out if they might the money boat.
But maybe it will move things in the right direction.
Why change diet when you can prescribe a profitable drug that doctors are all but mandated to prescribe by the guidelines, a drug that will not cure the patient but one that will usually cause other problems, and thus require still more profitable drugs? It’s a fantastic situation for drug companies and keeping that appointment calendar fully booked.
See A Prescription for Harm: the Modus Operandi of Modern Medicine and Loserthink in Modern Medicine: Goal-Oriented instead of Systems-Oriented.
