Healthy Eating: The Big Mistake is now available to order on Amazon
We have now reached the point where there is absolutely no doubt that recommendations such as those in the UK, which advises the population to:
“base meals on carbohydrates” are totally incorrect and directly responsible for ill-health on a scale that is unimaginable. Despite the overwhelming evidence, policies based on false premises continue to be implemented and there is very powerful resistance to any attempt to have them revised. As a consequence many people are given advice by the mainstream health professionals that causes a deterioration in their condition. Meanwhile, at the same time many are discovering for themselves that their diseases can be controlled or even reversed by following advice that is in direct conflict with the official line.
However, things may be about to change. The flawed dietary recommendations originated in the USA, because of undue influence from the big food and pharmaceutical companies. With RF Kennedy Jnr taking charge of health in the USA, there is every likelihood the dietary advice will be fundamentally altered so that it is in line with the conclusions set out in “Healthy Eating: The Big Mistake”.
In view of the very positive response to the first edition, I have now done an updated version to include some of the issues that have emerged in recent years. In particular, the damage to health caused by the consumption of diets that have a high content of “seed oils” and Ultraprocessed Foods.
Assessment of the science
Current public health policies are based primarily on evaluations that are conducted by the “great and the good” of the scientific world. It is claimed that if/when a consensus is reached this must be an accurate picture of the state of the science. However repeated exercises, which go back to the basic research, demonstrate conclusively that these official bodies have failed miserably to conduct a comprehensive objective examination of all the relevant research. Perhaps the most spectacular example is the “diet-heart” theory, which identifies the level of cholesterol in the blood (TC) as the predominant risk factor for heart disease.
Cholesterol and statins
As a result, we have massive programmes in many countries that are devoted to monitoring the TC of the population and applying measures designed to reduce the level if it is deemed to be too high. This is, of course, the justification for the widespread use of statins. The hard reality is that we now have robust research which shows conclusively that those who comply with the cholesterol guidelines have the highest all-cause mortality (ACM). Even more bizarre, in women, the life expectancy increases with TC so that those with the highest values live longest! It simply does not make sense to attempt to lower the TC value. Patients are not normally given this information and are invariably advised that it is vital they take statins regularly. For the record, statins do have marginal benefits for middle-aged men who have suffered from heart disease but it is accepted by the authorities that 77 men have to be on statins for three years for a SINGLE person to benefit. Not exactly a big deal. Factor in the possibility of nasty side effects and it becomes clear to any rational individual that there is no case for using statins.
Recommendations on fat
The “cholesterol theory” is also the basis for the dietary advice to reduce the intake of saturated fat (SFA) and increase the intake of the polyunsaturated fats (PUFAs). This is because the SFA are supposed to increase the TC, while the PUFAs may lower it with resulting benefits for the risks of heart disease.
The reality is that SFAs are a very valuable source of energy. They are especially beneficial because, unlike carbohydrates, they do not trigger any increase in insulin. There may even be a case for considering them as essential nutrients. Furthermore, the vilification of the SFAs has been used as a justification for reducing the consumption of meat and milk because they are a source of SFAs.
Even worse, the official recommendations advise people to increase their consumption of PUFAs.
The net effect is that the traditional sources of dietary fat such as butter and lard have been replaced by seed oils, which, we now know, contain toxins. These are one of the most important causes of many common chronic diseases, including several different cancers.
There are also strong recommendations to reduce the intake of “total fat” because that is believed to be an effective way of reducing calorie intake and therefore help people to lose weight/control obesity. Once again, the contents of the book will explain why this rationale is false, not to mention the fact that there is not a shred of evidence to show that this approach has ever worked. However, the food industry has seized on this. The “low fat” message has been well and truly hammered home so that here in the UK and in many other countries the fat content of the national diet has fallen.
Inevitably, this has resulted in an increase in the intake of carbohydrates.
Diabetes
There has been a steady increase in the incidence of Type 2 Diabetes (T2D) in many countries. In the UK this has approximately doubled in the past 15 years and all the indications are that it will continue to increase in the foreseeable future. This may be regarded as a modern day scourge and is probably just the tip of the iceberg because those who suffer from T2D have much higher risk of developing most of the other common chronic diseases, including heart disease, various cancers and Alzheimer’s Disease.
As we show in the book, the cause of T2D is quite simply an excess of glucose in the blood (BG), which is caused by a high consumption of sugar and carbohydrates. The solution is obvious; eat less sugar and carbohydrates. Not only is there research which confirms this, but there are numerous case histories from individuals who have worked this out for themselves. The scandal is that so many people are being advised to follow the official advice to increase carbohydrates and reduce fat. Hence their condition deteriorates.
Conclusion
Much of public health practice and policy is in a mess. There is little emphasis on preventing disease and for those who suffer from diseases, far too often treatments are directed at symptoms rather than the primary causes. We now know that a diet that has a high content of sugar, carbohydrates and seed oils is likely to be detrimental to the health of many and that conversely, a diet high in healthy fats and low in carbohydrates is an important component of a healthy life style. The issues can be quite complex. This book delves into the background and raises many questions not usually considered. It is hoped that readers will have an improved understanding of various factors that play a part in the nutrition advice from the official sources.