ABC ARE NOW INTO MEGA CHARLATANISTIC QUACKERY!
To say they should be ashamed of themselves for running AND massively promoting junk that is simultaneously an astonishing insult to the intelligence is an understatement.
- Never mind the classical conspiracy theorists touted by the denizens of dumbness.
- Never mind that all their charlatans are provable charlatans AKA quacks.
- Never mind that the insult to the intelligence lies in the fact that the above lunatics were unable to impress anyone else to run these idiocies: good old ABC - one can rely on them to give you unorthodox provable asinity which anyone with half the average allocated neurons by GAIA*** would be able to work out. And here is the rub - the penultimate insult: ALL THIS CAN BE WORKED OUT EFFORTLESSLY, SEAMLESSLY BY ONESELF!! DO NOT BOTHER GOOGLING ANY OF THE BELOW - either PM or the much - promoted Catalyst ex Thursday night ABC TV.
- Anyone curious to contemplate the ULTIMATYE insult? It is the plain fact that 'NO ONE' IS / WAS / EVER WILL DISCUSS any of this pap.
- What about the other obvious fact - no one in the medical profession will be sued as a result of this asinine programme. One would think that some person would sue, non? Someone must have died of heart disease - and the progeny would use the above of building a prima - facie case? THERE IS NO ONE!!
- THE ABC have distorted politics.
- They have played pathetic legal games a few years ago in trying to prove the innocence of hooligans..research to come.
- Now they insist on finding new ways of humiliating themselves. Why? Have they no one with the elemental accumen to work things out?
- Pathetically this is the way they are.
- I will send a link of this to ABC HQTRS - I suggest they will not even be ashamed of being imbeciles! No doubt they will claim I am offensive herein: congratulations - they are responsible for not mismanaging and distorting matters of potential import - dangerous import - if anyone takes their advice!
- I demand a retraction - I will write said retraction for them!
Thursday 24 October 2013
Scientific links betweem cholesterol and heart disease called into question
Peter Lloyd reported this story on Thursday, October 24, 2013 18:34:00
PETER LLOYD: For the last 40-odd years we've been told that saturated fat clogs our arteries and that high cholesterol causes heart disease.
But an investigation by the ABC TV program Catalyst has revealed that link has never been proven, and the majority of people taking drugs to lower their cholesterol won't live any longer.
Dr Maryanne Demasi is the host of Catalyst.
MARYANNE DEMASI: The idea first gained traction in the '50s by an American nutritionist called Ancel Keys and he was curious to find out what this sharp rise in heart disease was caused by after World War II. And he hypothesised that maybe diet had something to do with it and he thought that saturated fat and cholesterol would build up in the arteries, clog the arteries and cause heart disease.
So he went about to do a quite ambitious study where he looked at the fat consumption of certain countries and he measured that up against the level of heart disease in these countries and he chose six countries. And it was almost a perfect correlation: the more fat you had, the increased risk of heart disease.
PETER LLOYD: Just one problem, though?
MARYANNE DEMASI: There was just one problem. There was actually data available for 22 different countries and even the American Heart Association wasn't convinced at the time and people looked closer at the data and when you actually plot all 22 different countries, the correlation isn't quite as perfect as it seemed.
So people were already off-side with the idea that Ancel Keys had virtually cherry-picked the data and he was accused of scientific fraud, for deliberately withholding data that would affect his hypothesis.
And I think that's been a common criticism of mainstream ideas around this diet heart hypothesis, is that those who feel very strongly about saturated fat and cholesterol causing heart disease only look at the data that supports their ideas and seem to ignore or excuse other data that refutes their hypothesis.
PETER LLOYD: So would it now be correct to say that the cholesterol theory of heart disease is based on a medical myth?
MARYANNE DEMASI: Well, this is what our experts are arguing. We're not saying that cholesterol has nothing to do with heart disease. It's certainly involved with the build-up of the atherosclerotic plaque, but the question is: what actually causes the plaque to form in the first place?
So we explore some of the alternate views about how damage actually begins in the artery wall and one of the theories is that the high pressure of blood that's coursing through the arteries actually causes damage on that thin lining that lines the inside of your arteries.
And we know atherosclerosis actually begins when you're a foetus, and it's a chronic disease that progresses for years and years and years. So it's not something that just happens when you're older. I mean, this has been happening for years and years and years in your arteries.
PETER LLOYD: And these scientists in your film say cholesterol is found at the scene of the crime but it isn't the criminal?
MARYANNE DEMASI: It isn't the perpetrator. That's what they say. It's like blaming firemen for causing fires just because they're always at the scene of the crime.
PETER LLOYD: It begs the question, then: what is the cause? Is it sugar?
MARYANNE DEMASI: Well, I think one the hypotheses is that we've been so focused on cholesterol that we haven't really looked at other causes, and we know that because fats - especially saturated fats - have been so demonised in the '80s, we've taken all of the fat out of our food and replaced it with sugar.
So we know that people have had an increase in the level of carbohydrate in their diets because they've been so desperately trying to lower the fat in their diet.
Now the evidence is coming out that a low-fat, high-carbohydrate diet is actually worse for heart disease.
So the National Heart Foundation are not really going to turn around and say, oh, you know, oops. We've made a mistake here. They're now just sort of slightly shifting the goal posts and saying, well okay, all right. Maybe it wasn't low fat. Maybe we jumped to conclusions. We know that high-carbohydrate diets are not so good for us. Maybe we need to switch to polyunsaturated fats, the vegetable oils that you find in a lot of processed foods.
PETER LLOYD: Why is it so hard for them to admit that they're wrong and they've been telling us the wrong story?
MARYANNE DEMASI: Well, there might be litigation involved. I mean, there's a lot of money involved. It's scientists' reputation at stake. I think that it would be difficult to acknowledge that the last 30 or 40 years, if you've concentrated on this area in your research career, to turn around and say, well, yeah. You know, I've been looking in the wrong place.
And we know that, you know, a Mediterranean diet and exercise and cutting smoking is going to reduce your risk more than any medication that lowers your cholesterol.
PETER LLOYD: That's Dr Maryanne Demasi. And you can watch part one of Catalyst's special tonight at 8pm on ABC1, and there's an extended version of that interview on our webpage shortly.