Select Page

Author: VWheelock

10.What is the Evidence that being Overweight or Obese as Determined by BMI is dangerous?

  In 2005 the authoritative Journal of the American Medical Association published the results of a study conducted by Katherine Flegal and colleagues at the respected Center for Disease Control (CDC).  This work is an analysis of data derived from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) conducted in the USA. It was started in the 1970s and has continued until the present day. Large numbers of people are involved. Participants report regularly to a centre where various measurements are taken by professional health workers to ensure that the quality of the data is absolutely first class. The normal BMI range has been taken as the benchmark and given a value of 1.00. The results are shown in Table 1. TABLE 1 CDC STUDY RELATIVE RISKS ALL-CAUSE MORTALITY BMI 25-59 Years 60-69 Years >70 Years <18.5 Underweight 1.38 2.30 1.69 18.5-25 Normal 1.00 1.00 1.00 25-30 Overweight 0.83 0.95 0.91 30-35 Obesity Class I 1.20 1.13 1.03 >35 Obesity Class II 1.83 1.63 1.17   These results show that risks of dying are slightly smaller in the ‘’Overweight’’ category than in the ‘’Normal’’ one.  The risks of those in ‘’Obese (Class I)’’ are only marginally increased, especially those aged over 70 years(1). In Canada 11,326 men and women aged 25+ at the outset were monitored over a 12-year period commencing in 1994/1995 as part of the National Population...

Read More

9.The Conventional Approach To Obesity #obesity #lowcarb

According to official government strategy published in 2008: “Britain is in the grip of an epidemic. Almost 2/3 of adults and 1/3 of children are either overweight or obese……These figures will rise to almost 9 in 10 adults and 2/3 of children by 2050.” “We are facing a public health problem that the experts have told us is comparable with climate change in both its scale and complexity” The rationale for this strategy is a report entitled “Tackling Obesities: Future Choices” prepared by Foresight which answers directly to the Government Chief Scientist and the Cabinet. This report definitely concludes that: “….being overweight or obese increases the risk of a wide range of chronic diseases principally type 2 diabetes, hypertension, cardiovascular disease including stroke as well as cancer “. This policy has been continued and re-affirmed by the present government.  In his introduction to “Healthy Lives, Healthy People: A call to action on obesity in England” (13 October 2011) Andrew Lansley  wrote; “Excess weight is a leading cause of type 2 diabetes, heart disease and cancer, adding costs to the NHS”                 “Overweight and obesity are a direct consequence of eating and drinking more calories and using up too few…..for most of us who are overweight and obese, eating and drinking less is the key to weight loss”                 “The Government….will ensure that local effort is supported by high quality...

Read More

8. The rationale for reducing fat (is fundamentally flawed) Part 2

Continued This is a continuation of Blog 6 and provides further information which challenges the conventional wisdom that the cholesterol in the blood(TC) is an indication of the risk of developing heart disease and that if the TC is lowered there will be a corresponding reduction in that risk. The results of a major investigation in which 5201 men and women recruited from 4 different centres in the US were  monitored for an average of 4.8 years during which time there were 646 deaths are shown in Table 1. It is evident that the higher the LDL cholesterol (the so-called “bad” one) the lower the death rate(1).   TABLE 1 LDL CHOLESTEROL AND DEATH RATE LDL Cholesterol,mmol/L (mg/dl) Death rate per 1000 person-years <2.48 (96) 36.9   2.48-3.02(96-117) 26.3   3.02-3.46 (117-134) 25.3   3.46-3.96 (134-153) 26.5 >3.96(153) 19.0   In the Honolulu Heart Programme the TC was measured between 1965 and 1968 in 7961 men of Japanese origin who were born between 1900 and 1919. During the period of this study the men were monitored on 3 occasions and there were 2072 deaths. Details of cause of death was recorded and then related to the values which had been obtained for cholesterol. The results (Table 2) confirm that in this group of men the death rate attributed to coronary heart disease is directly associated with the TC level. However for deaths from stroke...

Read More

7.Do not follow a low carb diet??? A reply to Dr Tom Smith’s comments in the Guardian 19 Jan 2013 #lowcarb

According to GP Tom Smith in The Guardian on Saturday 19th January 2013, he would NEVER follow a low carb diet because it may KILL YOU! His conclusion is based on the results of a study conducted on women in Sweden who were monitored for an average of 15 years. The report was published in the British Medical Journal on 26 June 2012 (http://www.bmj.com/content/344/bmj.e4026) Dr Smith states that; “Those who stuck to the low carbs and high protein had a rising risk of dying from heart attacks and strokes, depending on how strict they were and for how long they endured them. There was a staggering 62% higher risk among the women eating the strictest diet over those who ate normally.” If Dr Smith had bothered to keep himself informed of the latest developments in human nutrition (see for example the publications of Gary Taubes, Barry Groves, Malcolm Kendrick and Uffe Ravnskov) he would have realised that these conclusions just do not ring true The reality is that this work was an appalling piece of research which the editors of the BMJ should never have agreed to publish. It was subject to devastating criticisms in the immediate aftermath of the publication( and it seems that Dr Smith is unaware of these or has chosen to ignore them. (http://www.bmj.com/content/344/bmj.e4026?page=1&tab=responses)  Here is a selection of the comments: The actual incident rate...

Read More

6. The rationale for reducing fat (is fundamentally flawed) Part 1

The basis for the recommendations to reduce fat and saturated fat is the Diet-Heart Theory which is generally accepted by the medical and public health bodies.  Essentially it concludes that the concentration of total cholesterol in the blood (TC) is a risk factor for heart disease. It follows from this that any factor which increases TC will increase the chances of dying from heart disease. By the same logic anything that reduces TC will also reduce the risks of heart disease. Saturated fat (SFA) is considered to increase TC and therefore increase the risk of developing heart disease whereas polyunsaturated fat (PUFA) is believed to have the opposite effect and will therefore reduce the risks. These are the precise grounds for concluding that SFA is ‘’bad’’ and should therefore be reduced and PUFA is ‘’good’’ and an increase would be beneficial to health. The NHS in the UK has endorsed this rationale. According to the NHS Choices website, TC should be lowered because there is evidence which: “strongly indicates that high cholesterol can increase the risk of: narrowing of the arteries (atherosclerosis), heart attack , stroke , mini-stroke This is because cholesterol can build up in the artery wall, restricting the flow of blood to your heart, brain and the rest of your body. It also increases the chance of a blood clot developing somewhere.” It goes on to...

Read More

Categories

Twitter

  • Conflict of interest (effectively meaning corruption) is now endemic in much of science. https://t.co/umkephxeu5
    about 15 mins ago
  • Some tips on how to adjust to a #LCHF (ketogenic) diet. https://t.co/NHt0JqgZfG
    about 35 mins ago
  • Suppliers of drugs/medical equipment exploit health services while many diseases eg T2D and Alzheimer's get worse. https://t.co/gPOlFIn2S1
    about 56 mins ago
  • On exit day – 29 March 2019 – UK exports of food to EU member states are likely to cease. https://t.co/hMq1XBdaXg
    about 1 hour ago
  • The Eatwell Guide is an absolute disaster... a recipe for T2D and most other chronic diseases.… https://t.co/t8QPqOdhuG
    about 2 hours ago