Why are there so many points of view regarding nutrition?

There can be a tendency for researchers and commentators to become attached to one particular area and not be able to see the relationship and interconnectedness with the different aspects of the same disease.

Also, much research is focused on individual components of nutrition, such as individual minerals, vitamins, or components such as fats or saturated fats.

Once again, researchers can become attached to one particular element of nutrition. We search for the magic supplement or the one miraculous cure.

Nutrition is the result of endless number of components in food. Health is the result of the relationship between all that we eat (and absorb during digestion), our relationships with others, the community that we live in and the world that we inhabit.

Looking at individual components of food in isolation can never give a complete picture.

Read more ⇒

MRFIT Study – What did it tell us?

The Australian Broadcaster ABC televised the program Heart of the Matter Part 1 – Dietary Villains on Thursday, 24 October 2013. This program listed the MRFIT study as more evidence that cholesterol is not implicated in heart disease.

The Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial (MRFIT) was a coronary heart disease prevention trial that was conducted at 22 US clinical centres (18 cities) from 1973 to 1982. The multiple risks evaluated were elevated serum cholesterol, elevated blood pressure and cigarette smoking.

A number of popular commentators use this trial as proof that cholesterol is not implicated in heart disease.

The tobacco industry also used the results of the MRFIT study to argue that smoking is not harmful.

Read more ⇒

Diet Does Not Affect Breast Cancer?

The objective of The Women’s Healthy Eating and Living (WHEL) Randomized Trial [1] was to:

To assess whether a major increase in vegetable, fruit, and fiber intake and a decrease in dietary fat intake reduces the risk of recurrent and new primary breast cancer and all-cause mortality among women with previously treated early stage breast cancer.

The conclusion of this “controlled trial of dietary change in 3088 women previously treated for early stage breast cancer” was:

Among survivors of early stage breast cancer, adoption of a diet that was very high in vegetables, fruit, and fiber and low in fat did not reduce additional breast cancer events or mortality during a 7.3-year follow-up period.

This made headlines all over the world.  This is the proof people were waiting for – that changes to your diet has no impact on breast cancer.  Medical practitioners, dieticians and the public now have the evidence that there is no need to change your diet.

It appears that the authors are deliberately being deceptive.

Read more ⇒

Dr. Neal Barnard’s Program for Reversing Diabetes

For a person with Type II diabetes, the problem is that sugar (glucose) is not able to pass from the bloodstream into the cells. Since the glucose cannot get into the cells, it ends up in the blood stream and removed from the body in urine.

It seems obvious that if you have too much sugar in your blood then you need to limit the amount of sugar and starch in your diet. Starches are complex carbohydrates that consists of many glucose molecules.

The diet of people that live in countries that have low incidence of diabetes do not have a diet remotely like the standard diabetic diet. They eat a diet that is high in complex carbohydrates.

Read more ⇒

But we are all individuals

“But we are all individuals.”

This is a frequent response to the suggestion that dietary and lifestyle changes will be beneficial to a person’s well being.

“But we our all individuals. Just because it may be good for some people, it does not mean it will be good for me. I will continue to do whatever I feel is right.” What is really meant is, “I will continue to do whatever I feel like doing.”

Read more ⇒