Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Install the app
Install
Reply to Thread
Guest, we'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the
Diabetes Forum Survey 2024 »
Home
Forums
Diabetes Discussion
Type 2 Diabetes
Reducing Carbs and Eating fat with raised cholestrol
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="phoenix" data-source="post: 210794" data-attributes="member: 12578"><p>Personally not Taubes, nor Kendrick nor members of THINCS. and I have read some of all their writings.</p><p> I think this summary shows where we are now</p><p><a href="http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/123/20/2274.full" target="_blank">http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/123/20/2274.full</a></p><p></p><p>I'd prefer to have a pattern of eating that simulates those people with the lowest risks</p><p></p><p>This gels with my own perceptions, on diagnosis (after 3 years of neglect) my doctor was worried about the state of my arteries(from echograph results) now there seems to be far less of a problem, my blood flow is better.The echographs on my arteries are now good for my age.</p><p>I conciously don't eat too much sat fat but do eat other fats ie I don't eat a very low fat diet but I do choose which fats to eat. I eat lots of fruit, veg , fish oils (from whole fish) and some whole grains. I eat almost no factory prepared foods, I do lots of excercise It works for me. </p><p></p><p> I read the research. I am less likely to believe those who write populist books and blogs. Going through sections of Taubes, checking references and looking for the references he left out showed to me that he was very selective on his evidence. Unfortunately, none of us have the time or energy to go through the whole book. ( he has a bibliography and doesn't use a careful referencing system...makes checking very difficult). I do not think there is some world wide conspiracy to distort the evidence from reputable sources. I do think there is distortion in some internet sources for example the idea that fructose is a major culprit in the development of CVD and obesity. Compare the US intake of fructose with that of the UK and Australia... similar obesity problems, similar CVD problems but fructose is a tiny element of the latter 2 countries diet!)</p><p></p><p>My son, is a physicist (physical chemist, bit like Taubes, but he wouldn't claim to have any expertise in biochemistry or diets ) He researches and lectures at Oxford. As a research scientist his work is precarious. I've discussed with him the influences of industry on scientific research. Maybe he's naive (not much money in investigating spinning electrons) but it's a topic that has been discussed at 'high table'. He is adamant that most of his fellow scientists are aghast at the idea that they are, for sale. It is the method and results that count, and not the financiers. Research that is published and can be replicated or falsified is imperative. The credibility of the journal is also important .. (a lot of the research we find referenced on diabetes forums comes from very low impact factor journals, that is one of the results of the internet, in the days of paper journals, lesser quality research would never have reached publication) </p><p>Ayone discovered to be falsifying or biasing their results because of research fund would lose credibility as a scientist and for them that is the most important thing. Certainly, it's not income, most of them would get paid far more elsewhere.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="phoenix, post: 210794, member: 12578"] Personally not Taubes, nor Kendrick nor members of THINCS. and I have read some of all their writings. I think this summary shows where we are now [url=http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/123/20/2274.full]http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/123/20/2274.full[/url] I'd prefer to have a pattern of eating that simulates those people with the lowest risks This gels with my own perceptions, on diagnosis (after 3 years of neglect) my doctor was worried about the state of my arteries(from echograph results) now there seems to be far less of a problem, my blood flow is better.The echographs on my arteries are now good for my age. I conciously don't eat too much sat fat but do eat other fats ie I don't eat a very low fat diet but I do choose which fats to eat. I eat lots of fruit, veg , fish oils (from whole fish) and some whole grains. I eat almost no factory prepared foods, I do lots of excercise It works for me. I read the research. I am less likely to believe those who write populist books and blogs. Going through sections of Taubes, checking references and looking for the references he left out showed to me that he was very selective on his evidence. Unfortunately, none of us have the time or energy to go through the whole book. ( he has a bibliography and doesn't use a careful referencing system...makes checking very difficult). I do not think there is some world wide conspiracy to distort the evidence from reputable sources. I do think there is distortion in some internet sources for example the idea that fructose is a major culprit in the development of CVD and obesity. Compare the US intake of fructose with that of the UK and Australia... similar obesity problems, similar CVD problems but fructose is a tiny element of the latter 2 countries diet!) My son, is a physicist (physical chemist, bit like Taubes, but he wouldn't claim to have any expertise in biochemistry or diets ) He researches and lectures at Oxford. As a research scientist his work is precarious. I've discussed with him the influences of industry on scientific research. Maybe he's naive (not much money in investigating spinning electrons) but it's a topic that has been discussed at 'high table'. He is adamant that most of his fellow scientists are aghast at the idea that they are, for sale. It is the method and results that count, and not the financiers. Research that is published and can be replicated or falsified is imperative. The credibility of the journal is also important .. (a lot of the research we find referenced on diabetes forums comes from very low impact factor journals, that is one of the results of the internet, in the days of paper journals, lesser quality research would never have reached publication) Ayone discovered to be falsifying or biasing their results because of research fund would lose credibility as a scientist and for them that is the most important thing. Certainly, it's not income, most of them would get paid far more elsewhere. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post Reply
Home
Forums
Diabetes Discussion
Type 2 Diabetes
Reducing Carbs and Eating fat with raised cholestrol
Top
Bottom
Find support, ask questions and share your experiences. Ad free.
Join the community »
This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn More.…