• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

The Sugar Conspiracy - A fascinating article on why everything is Low Fat

This is an encouraging start. However the guardian has 'sanitised' the appalling history quite a bit. The low-fat high-carb vs low-carb high-fat debate goes back further than the news paper will admit, and they have omitted that keys seven country study was originally a twenty two country study. Overall it's about as good an intro to the history you'll get in the mainstream.
 
The point of the article isn't really about LCHF v HCLF, it's about how the personalities and characters of leading proponents in the scientific world on different sides of the argument affected the outcomes and the way the western diet has been formed. It touches on cherry picking of results and election of study countries as a snipe at Keys' (and nutrition in general's) lack of rigour in scientific method and demonstrates how important lobbying, charisma and politics have been in the obesity epidemic.

As such I think it makes good reading.
 
But does anyone trust any article that tells us we're all part of a conspiracy?

The title is not a good choice for any serious article.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I know! I have actually sent the article to a friend of mine. As I said it's a good start. I just wanted to point out that there's a LOT more than the article could hope to cover. I just hope that it Spurs more research into to issues. When I first read the full history I was astounded by how far and deep this goes. Including how such poor 'science' even became accepted.
 
SunnyExpat said:
But does anyone trust any article that tells us we're all part of a conspiracy?

The title is not a good choice not any serious article.
Click to expand...

why not. conspiracy happens. And i read the title as referring to the conspiracy of the scientists, manufacturers and politicians to dupe the rest of us.
 
@SunnyExpat that I believe is why they would choose such a title as conspiracy theories have such a bad rep!

I always advise people to read Gary Taubes 'The diet delusion' for a comprehensive look into the history. However thanks to the Internet anyone who desires to May research into the issue and find the truth. I certainly managed to verify much of what I've discovered that way.
 
Something that has really staggered me this past week, since i started tackling my diet, is the sheer amount of 'hidden' sugar in stuff. I am having to go back to basic food and cook from scratch now. I had no idea there were so many names for sugar. in fact, if i had just cut out chocolate and similar things, I would have reduced my sugar, but not to the extend I need to.

and that, to me, is a deliberate labelling choice on the part of the manufacturers.
 
serenity648 said:
why not. conspiracy happens. And i read the title as referring to the conspiracy of the scientists, manufacturers and politicians to dupe the rest of us.
Click to expand...

True, look at the stories of area 52, the most renowned conspiracy in mankind's history.
And that's where most people put 'conspiracy' theories unfortunately.
 
SunnyExpat said:
But does anyone trust any article that tells us we're all part of a conspiracy?

The title is not a good choice not any serious article.
Click to expand...

Someone has to!
 
It's an extremely well written piece, which is unusual for the Guardian.

If we think getting the scientific community to admit to their mistake will be difficult, getting the Governments to admit that they are the one's responsible for the poor health and obesity of their populations will be nigh on impossible.

As is often the case, the Comments section of any Guardian article are the most entertaining bit
 
What amazes me is they talk as if it only happens in nutrition science, but it happens in just about every single area of scientific endeavour. Look at the pushback against h. pylori and ulcers. Also read the book by the guy who discovered the Lucy hominid and the way his reputation was trashed. Science is full of people addicted to their own theories who refuse to accept it when the science moves on. I think the quote (I forget who coined it) about science advancing one death at a time just about sums it up.

Unfortunately the scientific method gets abused more often than we probably know. A lot of it is about research dollars, publication count and academic tenure. Scientists are just as corruptible as every other field of human endeavour, so it amazes me why we're meant to put them on pedestals. Legends in their own lunchtimes, it seems.
 
SunnyExpat said:
But does anyone trust any article that tells us we're all part of a conspiracy?

The title is not a good choice for any serious article.
Click to expand...

Actually, looking at the author's' new book he's pushing in the article, and his old book, it's probably right after all.
 
reading the comments, public education still has a way to go.

I am, however, miffed (the uk meaning of the term) to learn I have been listening to a lie for 30 years, have nearly doubled my weight, and have type 2 diabetes. Off to do some reading.
 

Thanks for drawing this to my attention. It's an excellent comprehensive summary of the events to date - a fab read and hopefully a lot of food for thought for the public!
 
This is a welcome article for at least two reasons. The one I am interested in, though, is in debunking the opinion that people are only interested in their health for three weeks when they forget their diet or to take their pills etc. and generally lie to their doctor. I have written elsewhere that people are very interested in their wellbeing since half an acre of health care products in Tesco and Holland and Barratt can't be wrong.

This article includes the phrase " Consumers dutifully obeyed. " as, in my opinion, they try to do. Thank goodness it's not all our fault for once.

Incidentally, I read Yudkin's book and he says that the Chairman of Tate and Lyle rubbished him by saying that no-one should listen to him since he is a Grammar school teacher (What's wrong with being a Grammar school teacher?). He actually was the Professor Emeritus at the Queen Elizabeth college, London University.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Science advances one step at a time. If only eh? at least then some of those deaths would be more acceptable, truth is that there need to be many, many deaths before a particular group of drugs is targeted, proved harmful and finally banned. A bit close to the bone this one as I`m absolutely convinced that statins were instrumental in my father in laws decline into dementia and eventual death. Sorry to go off topic like that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn More.…