Dr. John Briffa in his post today, here, talks about the statistics regarding mammograms. We are often given high percentages of lives saved from mammograms. New studies now tell us the percentage of lives saved is way lower than the 25% number bandied about, perhaps as low as 3%. Why? Well, the cancer may have been easily detected by other means and treated successfully at a later date. The cancer may have been one the woman could die WITH--not of. Just because a mammogram detected a cancer early does not guarantee that it was life-saving! But those who sell mammograms don't necessarily want you to hear those statistics.
While we're on this subject, let's ask more questions--like is there a downside to mammograms? It turns out there are big ones, not the least of which is that mammograms are executed with ionizing radiation. Ionizing radiation can cause genetic changes that result in cancers! WHAT? The diagnostic tool for cancer can cause cancer? What's with that?
It turns out there are some other problems with this cancer screening tool and others, too, that the purveyors of these tests do not tell you, although these downsides are well known, well documented and you OUGHT to know them!! How come? Well, I bet you thought medicine was about helping people be healthier, didn't you? No, FIRST, medicine is a money making business. And like all money-making businesses, the thing they're about (making money) takes precedence over all other concerns.
I know, I sound very cynical, don't I? Perhaps. And I don't think you should give up doctors and medicine. What I think is that you darn well ought to know more about what you're signing on for before you do. For more about the risks of various cancer screening tests -- the ones you don't hear from those who order, execute or profit from these tests, read my e-book, "How to be a Smarter Health Care Consumer" here.
Even more importantly, remember in a culture that promotes fear of cancer, we have a huge body of evidence that all cancers fall into the category of "diseases of civilization." Indigenous populations all over the earth for millions of years, but even today--when they eat their native diet--do not have cancers of any kind!
I just finished a book "Nutrition and Physical Degeneration" by Weston Price, written in 1939 after he and his wife traveled the world documenting native populations before and after they were exposed to 'civilized' foods. We've been sold a huge bill of goods about what's healthy eating--not the least of which is the whole grains crap and the low fat/saturated fat fiasco. So to wrap up this blog today, let me just say and cancer does not have to be a consideration for modern people, but if you believe conventional wisdom and eat that way (putting toxins in your mouth three times a day) maybe you have good reason to be afraid of cancer and other diseases of civilisation. But it doesn't have to be so.
Vibrant good health is your birthright, but you have to quit believing what you hear from the Medical Industrial Complex and what the grain growers and vegetable oil producers of the world would have you believe. Read more, follow the money and enjoy (or return to) your healthy birthright.
Ellie http://mindingthemiddleagedmiddle.com
Friday, November 18, 2011
Saturday, November 12, 2011
This is So Frustrating
Stanford University just came out with a new study that says osteoarthritis is not just a disease of wear and tear on joints. It’s actually a disease process of the body’s inflammatory response that damages joints. WOW!
This is NOT new information. What this information is, is not mainstream, but very well known by all but the most mainstream of modern medicine. I’ve been saying that for a couple years, and I came to it quite late—unfortunately, so late that I now have four metal joints.
The very name of osteo arthritis tells us it is inflammation of joints. Here’s the frustrating part. In the article they do mention why a pill won’t cure it, then conclude with this: “And it is likely that a healthy diet makes a difference, too, with enough nutrients.”
Well, duh! But they do not say what constitutes a healthy diet, of course, because what’s a healthy diet for human beings (one that avoids all disease and disability) is not popular. It’s hard in our culture to eat a healthy diet because there are enormous financial and political interests pushing an unhealthy diet. And a huge medical industrial complex that thrives on your dis-ease.
No, the doctors didn’t help me when my joints were going to hell. They do not have any curative help for diabetics or wisdom for cancer patients beyond more toxicity. They’re not curing autoimmune diseases, or even the mental plagues (alzheimers, depression, brain fog, anxiety and aggression) or any of the other ills of “inflammation run amok” (title of my e-book about this stuff). Inflammation causes all health problems. ALL! Mental and physical. You are a self-healing, self-regulating biological system but it has to have the right fuel. Just like a car. You simply cannot put crap in the gas tank of a fine auto and expect it to run well. Why would anyone think you could put crap into a fine biological system and expect it to function well???
If I can find that out by reading a bunch of books and researching on the internet, anyone can. But few want to hear that. It means that the lifestyle you’re living (mostly food you put in your mouth) is causing all your health problems and so you are not a victim but completely responsible for how you feel.
I just got a new book, written by Weston Price in 1939. (that’s 72 years ago—not new, folks!) Dr. Price, a dentist, covered the entire globe with his wife documenting indigenous populations before and after they were exposed to the diet of civilization. Now, Dr. Price is a dentist and his interest was mostly in things like teeth, dental arch crowding and facial deformities. Duh, again. And this was new to me but of course makes absolute sense. The diet of civilization doesn’t just make us sick and psychotic, it also makes us ugly with crowded teeth, cavities, and facial deformities. (Healthy bone formation of the head and jaw is also dependent on good fuel).
This is not new stuff! We do not need Stanford to tell us that diet causes osteoarthritis. What frustrates me is that so few want to hear they are responsible for their own problems. To me it was a huge aha moment to realize I can feel good, stop the progression of my arthritis, and prevent a lot of the other things I see around me by putting better fuel into my body. I can feel great—not just good, but absolutely great, even at this age. The jokes about aging and all the stuff people think aging brings—NOT! Aging does not have to be a time of decline. You don’t have to have disease or even aches and pains.
Is it easy? No. You are bombarded day in and day out with enticements to eat crap. Much of what’s available in grocery stores is grown on depleted soils with few nutrients and it’s fertilized with petroleum. It’s hard to eat the fuel that makes you feel good. But here’s the truth:
IT’S SO WORTH THE EFFORT!!!
Read my e-book. Do your own research. Find out what creates disease and aging. Do you want to have an old age that is vibrant and vigorous or do you want health problems and mental fog? I plan on the former! And at 67, I’ve demonstrated to my own satisfaction that it works!!!
Short answers below. For the reasons that this works, see e-books or do your own research.
Things to eliminate:
sugar
grains (grss seeds--wheat, oats, corn, rice, etc)
vegetable oils
as many toxins as you can
Things to add:
More animal protein
More vegetables
More fruit
More animal fats
Judicious supplements (big a topic)
Best wishes for a wonderful, feel-good life ahead!
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
What does an Anti-inflammatory Diet and Lifestyle do for you?
Tomorrow is my birthday. I will then be 67. Not that I am particularly excited about another birthday, but I think there are some things worth noting. I never felt better in my life. I am pain free. My blood pressure is normal. I take no prescription drugs. I have lots of energy, more than people half my age. I am alert and my memory is as good as it's every been. Next weekend I will teach a workshop in Michigan for 7 or 8 full hours. At home I spend much of my day gardening and I'm writing a new book about superfruits and what I'm learning about gardening with exotics. Not bad for 67.
This morning in the tire store as I waited for tire rotation, I overheard two older women visiting and commiserating about the pains and problems of age. They were my age or younger. My heart goes out to them. Life is not much fun when you hurt and feel crappy. I know. I used to be there. It's not easy, but it's so so worth it to feel this good (and still losing weight) and enjoying life and activity so much!
Is it easy? Well, a lot easier now than it was a year ago. The food cravings are gone. The cooking part is easier because I know what works. I don't miss junk food or grains or things that make me hurt. I'm woefully not in step with my culture and I prefer not to put myself in situations where I have to explain why I don't want bread with my steak or dessert. I'm more self contained. And a whole lot happier.
I'm reading a book, "The Biology of Belief" by Bruce Lipton. It's good for a number of reasons. But here's something he mentions in one of his chapters. In 2000 the Journal of the American Medical Association reported that doctors are the third leading cause of death in the US. I've reported that many times. Those deaths are called iatrogenic, caused by the actions of treatment. 120,000 are deaths from adverse drug effects.
But here's the new information I had not known. Just three years later, Null et all reported (based on 10 years of government statistics) that iatrogenic cause of death is the number one killer in the US with 300,000 deaths from prescription drugs. I'm appalled! I am more committed to staying off prescription drugs and staying healthy the way I know works--diet, exercise, judicious supplements, staying out of doctor's offices and hospitals.
If you want to know how to stay healthy, read my booklet, "Inflammation Run Amok" for the why and the how of it. http://www.mindingthemiddleagedmiddle.com/e-books.shtml and "How to Be a Smarter Health Care Consumer." Among others also at that site. Join me in healing and preventing the problems that most of your peers are dealing with!
This morning in the tire store as I waited for tire rotation, I overheard two older women visiting and commiserating about the pains and problems of age. They were my age or younger. My heart goes out to them. Life is not much fun when you hurt and feel crappy. I know. I used to be there. It's not easy, but it's so so worth it to feel this good (and still losing weight) and enjoying life and activity so much!
Is it easy? Well, a lot easier now than it was a year ago. The food cravings are gone. The cooking part is easier because I know what works. I don't miss junk food or grains or things that make me hurt. I'm woefully not in step with my culture and I prefer not to put myself in situations where I have to explain why I don't want bread with my steak or dessert. I'm more self contained. And a whole lot happier.
I'm reading a book, "The Biology of Belief" by Bruce Lipton. It's good for a number of reasons. But here's something he mentions in one of his chapters. In 2000 the Journal of the American Medical Association reported that doctors are the third leading cause of death in the US. I've reported that many times. Those deaths are called iatrogenic, caused by the actions of treatment. 120,000 are deaths from adverse drug effects.
But here's the new information I had not known. Just three years later, Null et all reported (based on 10 years of government statistics) that iatrogenic cause of death is the number one killer in the US with 300,000 deaths from prescription drugs. I'm appalled! I am more committed to staying off prescription drugs and staying healthy the way I know works--diet, exercise, judicious supplements, staying out of doctor's offices and hospitals.
If you want to know how to stay healthy, read my booklet, "Inflammation Run Amok" for the why and the how of it. http://www.mindingthemiddleagedmiddle.com/e-books.shtml and "How to Be a Smarter Health Care Consumer." Among others also at that site. Join me in healing and preventing the problems that most of your peers are dealing with!
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
Shame on AMA’s Archives of Internal Medicine
I'm borrowing today's post from the following website. http://www.anh-usa.org/shame-on-ama-archives-of-internal-medicine/
I saw the "news" blurb about how a new study says vitamins cause you to die sooner. Here's the bummer problem with media and with junk science. I was going to write something similar, but these folks have done it so well! Don't believe everything you read about health.
Did you hear the breaking news last night—that multivitamins may shorten your life? Here’s how junk science from the AMA set off the media frenzy.
Bloomberg phrased it this way: “Multivitamins and some dietary supplements, used regularly by an estimated 234 million US adults, may do more harm than good, according to a study that tied their use to higher death rates among older women.” The study’s authors outrageously concluded, “We see little justification for the general and widespread use of dietary supplements.”
The study, published in the American Medical Association’s (AMA’s) Archives of Internal Medicine, assessed the use of vitamin and mineral supplements in nearly 39,000 women whose average age was 62. The researchers asked the women to fill out three surveys, the first in 1986, the second in 1997, and the last in 2004, reporting what supplements they took and what foods they ate, and answering a few questions about their health.
That’s right, all the data was self-reported by the study subjects only three times over the course of the 19-year-long study. To say the data is “unreliable” would be a generous description. This kind of “data” has no place in a valid scientific study.
Then the researchers looked at how many of the women had died by 2008. They reported that the number of deaths were somewhat higher for women who took copper, a little bit lower for women who took calcium, but about average for most of the women.
In the study, all of the relative risks were so low as to be statistically insignificant, and none was backed up by any medical investigation or biological plausibility study. No analysis was done on what combinations of vitamins and minerals were actually consumed, and no analysis of the cause of death was done beyond grouping for “cancer,” “cardiovascular disease,” or “other”—there was certainly no causative analysis done. The interactions of potential compounding risk factors is always tremendously complex—and was ignored in this so-called study.
“Multivitamin” can mean many different things, and of course changed tremendously over the 19 years during which this “study” was conducted. Were they high quality? Were the ingredients synthetic or natural? How much of each nutrient was taken? Were they really taken at all? How good is anyone’s memory in describing what took place over many years? One would assume that that the women’s diets fluctuated greatly over the same period; when self-reporting only three times in 19 years, there is a great deal of information one would naturally leave out even if some of it was accurate. No analysis was done of the effect of supplements on the women’s overall health, nor of their effect on women of other ages.
In short, this study is less than useless: it is dangerous, because it is being used by the media and the mainstream medical establishment to blacken the eye of nutritional supplements using poor data, bad analysis, and specious conclusions—otherwise known as junk science.
I saw the "news" blurb about how a new study says vitamins cause you to die sooner. Here's the bummer problem with media and with junk science. I was going to write something similar, but these folks have done it so well! Don't believe everything you read about health.
Shame on AMA’s Archives of Internal Medicine
October 11, 2011Did you hear the breaking news last night—that multivitamins may shorten your life? Here’s how junk science from the AMA set off the media frenzy.
Bloomberg phrased it this way: “Multivitamins and some dietary supplements, used regularly by an estimated 234 million US adults, may do more harm than good, according to a study that tied their use to higher death rates among older women.” The study’s authors outrageously concluded, “We see little justification for the general and widespread use of dietary supplements.”
The study, published in the American Medical Association’s (AMA’s) Archives of Internal Medicine, assessed the use of vitamin and mineral supplements in nearly 39,000 women whose average age was 62. The researchers asked the women to fill out three surveys, the first in 1986, the second in 1997, and the last in 2004, reporting what supplements they took and what foods they ate, and answering a few questions about their health.
That’s right, all the data was self-reported by the study subjects only three times over the course of the 19-year-long study. To say the data is “unreliable” would be a generous description. This kind of “data” has no place in a valid scientific study.
Then the researchers looked at how many of the women had died by 2008. They reported that the number of deaths were somewhat higher for women who took copper, a little bit lower for women who took calcium, but about average for most of the women.
In the study, all of the relative risks were so low as to be statistically insignificant, and none was backed up by any medical investigation or biological plausibility study. No analysis was done on what combinations of vitamins and minerals were actually consumed, and no analysis of the cause of death was done beyond grouping for “cancer,” “cardiovascular disease,” or “other”—there was certainly no causative analysis done. The interactions of potential compounding risk factors is always tremendously complex—and was ignored in this so-called study.
“Multivitamin” can mean many different things, and of course changed tremendously over the 19 years during which this “study” was conducted. Were they high quality? Were the ingredients synthetic or natural? How much of each nutrient was taken? Were they really taken at all? How good is anyone’s memory in describing what took place over many years? One would assume that that the women’s diets fluctuated greatly over the same period; when self-reporting only three times in 19 years, there is a great deal of information one would naturally leave out even if some of it was accurate. No analysis was done of the effect of supplements on the women’s overall health, nor of their effect on women of other ages.
In short, this study is less than useless: it is dangerous, because it is being used by the media and the mainstream medical establishment to blacken the eye of nutritional supplements using poor data, bad analysis, and specious conclusions—otherwise known as junk science.
Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Why do Diabetics get heart disease?
Below are parts of other people's recent take of the diabetes/heart disease/alzheimer's link and the CRP (C-reactive Protein) test results. As you know, I've been saying for a while now...INFLAMMATION CAUSES ALL DISEASE!!! And CRP tells you how much inflammation is going on. I guess scientists need work, just like everyone else, but please don't wait for their future studies about why diabetics are getting heart disease and alzheimer's. Start now reducing your chronic inflammation. And if you have any pain, especially chronic, that's inflammation. Take a look at my website (http://mindingthemiddleagedmiddle.com/) for my booklet on inflammation is you want strategies for reducing your own!
People with diabetes are at increased risk of having a heart attack or stroke at an early age. But that’s not the only worry: Diabetes appears to dramatically increase a person’s risk of developing Alzheimer’s disease or other types of dementia later in life, according to a new study conducted in Japan.
In the study, which included more than 1,000 men and women over age 60, researchers found that people with diabetes were twice as likely as the other study participants to develop Alzheimer’s disease within 15 years. They were also 1.75 times more likely to develop dementia of any kind.
“It’s really important for the public health to understand that diabetes is a significant risk factor for all of these types of dementia,” says Rachel Whitmer, PhD, an epidemiologist in the research division of Kaiser Permanente Northern California, a nonprofit health-care organization based in Oakland, Calif.
Whitmer, who studies risk factors for Alzheimer’s but wasn’t involved in the new research, stresses that many questions remain about the link between diabetes and dementia. The new study was “well done” and provides “really good evidence that people with diabetes are at greater risk,” she says, “but we really need to look at other studies to find out why
There is more to the diabetic CRP story than heart disease. CRP correlates very highly with insulin resistance and measures of blood glucose control. A study at the Medical University of South Carolina published by ADA concluded that "the likelihood of elevated CRP concentrations increased with increasing HbA1c levels. (your long term blood sugar) These findings suggest an association between glycemic control and systemic inflammation in people with established diabetes." (and you and me, too!)
People with diabetes are at increased risk of having a heart attack or stroke at an early age. But that’s not the only worry: Diabetes appears to dramatically increase a person’s risk of developing Alzheimer’s disease or other types of dementia later in life, according to a new study conducted in Japan.
In the study, which included more than 1,000 men and women over age 60, researchers found that people with diabetes were twice as likely as the other study participants to develop Alzheimer’s disease within 15 years. They were also 1.75 times more likely to develop dementia of any kind.
“It’s really important for the public health to understand that diabetes is a significant risk factor for all of these types of dementia,” says Rachel Whitmer, PhD, an epidemiologist in the research division of Kaiser Permanente Northern California, a nonprofit health-care organization based in Oakland, Calif.
Whitmer, who studies risk factors for Alzheimer’s but wasn’t involved in the new research, stresses that many questions remain about the link between diabetes and dementia. The new study was “well done” and provides “really good evidence that people with diabetes are at greater risk,” she says, “but we really need to look at other studies to find out why
There is more to the diabetic CRP story than heart disease. CRP correlates very highly with insulin resistance and measures of blood glucose control. A study at the Medical University of South Carolina published by ADA concluded that "the likelihood of elevated CRP concentrations increased with increasing HbA1c levels. (your long term blood sugar) These findings suggest an association between glycemic control and systemic inflammation in people with established diabetes." (and you and me, too!)
Friday, September 9, 2011
Today's guest article: Social Proof
I teach marketing as well as issues of health and nutrition so this article by Bette Dowdell fits both bills and appeals to me. I think to be healthy in this day and age is a challenge and takes some willingness to be pretty different in diet and many typical social situations. Bette's contact info is at the end.
Social Proof
Social proof is a advertising concept based on the fact most people don’t like to be different. To get people to accept a new idea or product, you have to reassure them that anybody who’s anybody is climbing on board.
If would-be customers think you’re asking them to be different from others, they won’t buy.
For example, a few years ago I was asked to give the invocation at a Martin Luther King program. As the program went on, a group of Native Americans got up to introduce a tribal dance. To start the ball rolling, the leader asked me to join them. So up I got, joined the circle and started bobbing and weaving, proving right there in front of God and the whole world that I don’t have a drop of Native American blood in me. Fortunately, the whole point was about going beyond what separates us, so my lack of native dance skills worked well.
It obviously didn’t look like nearly as much fun as it was, though, because most people refused the leader’s invitation to join in. But he kept at it, and after a while another game soul accepted the invitation, then another, and another, until it became more a group thing than individual performances. The poor guy had to work almost the entire, very large room, but social proof finally arrived.
People who had previously refused to join our merry band realized they were being left out of the fun and all but ran to get into the quickly expanding circle. At that point, joining in became the popular thing to do, and they didn’t have to worry about getting funny looks for being different.
What in the world, you might be asking, does this have to do with health?
Right now, social proof aren’t us. Only a relatively small group of health-field natives talk about becoming our own health advocate. So most people, concerned about fitting in, still follow doctors, the media–any “authority figure” that makes them feel comfortable–and not responsible.
When things go south, and as one neighbor said to me, “It just gets to be patch, patch, patch,” they’re still part of the majority. The sick majority, but a majority none the less.
Those of us who take time to learn how to be healthy and do pretty much anything it takes (notice the allowance for an annual Snickers bar), are the oddballs.
And I salute you, fellow oddball. Yes, being different can get wearisome at times. And having people sneer at the decisions you make gets old really fast.
Well, I’ve been sick and heard people suggest I give in to “my lot in life.” Instead, I walked the road less traveled, made my health a priority and took responsibility for my decisions.
I may be an oddball, but now I’m a healthy oddball.
And here’s some good news. I talk to everybody, everywhere I go, usually about health, and people are more receptive than they used to be. Social proof is still a ways off, but we’re gaining ground.
Maybe we should start an “Odd Like Bette” club. We could wear buttons and figure out a secret handshake and stuff. Maybe that would take us over the top, into the land of social proof.
Or maybe not. No matter.
The important thing is that we take responsibility for our own health–no matter what others think. Living the best possible life is always better than following the crowd into the ditch.
Bette Dowdell
http://toopoopedtoparticipate.com/.
Social Proof
Social proof is a advertising concept based on the fact most people don’t like to be different. To get people to accept a new idea or product, you have to reassure them that anybody who’s anybody is climbing on board.
If would-be customers think you’re asking them to be different from others, they won’t buy.
For example, a few years ago I was asked to give the invocation at a Martin Luther King program. As the program went on, a group of Native Americans got up to introduce a tribal dance. To start the ball rolling, the leader asked me to join them. So up I got, joined the circle and started bobbing and weaving, proving right there in front of God and the whole world that I don’t have a drop of Native American blood in me. Fortunately, the whole point was about going beyond what separates us, so my lack of native dance skills worked well.
It obviously didn’t look like nearly as much fun as it was, though, because most people refused the leader’s invitation to join in. But he kept at it, and after a while another game soul accepted the invitation, then another, and another, until it became more a group thing than individual performances. The poor guy had to work almost the entire, very large room, but social proof finally arrived.
People who had previously refused to join our merry band realized they were being left out of the fun and all but ran to get into the quickly expanding circle. At that point, joining in became the popular thing to do, and they didn’t have to worry about getting funny looks for being different.
What in the world, you might be asking, does this have to do with health?
Right now, social proof aren’t us. Only a relatively small group of health-field natives talk about becoming our own health advocate. So most people, concerned about fitting in, still follow doctors, the media–any “authority figure” that makes them feel comfortable–and not responsible.
When things go south, and as one neighbor said to me, “It just gets to be patch, patch, patch,” they’re still part of the majority. The sick majority, but a majority none the less.
Those of us who take time to learn how to be healthy and do pretty much anything it takes (notice the allowance for an annual Snickers bar), are the oddballs.
And I salute you, fellow oddball. Yes, being different can get wearisome at times. And having people sneer at the decisions you make gets old really fast.
Well, I’ve been sick and heard people suggest I give in to “my lot in life.” Instead, I walked the road less traveled, made my health a priority and took responsibility for my decisions.
I may be an oddball, but now I’m a healthy oddball.
And here’s some good news. I talk to everybody, everywhere I go, usually about health, and people are more receptive than they used to be. Social proof is still a ways off, but we’re gaining ground.
Maybe we should start an “Odd Like Bette” club. We could wear buttons and figure out a secret handshake and stuff. Maybe that would take us over the top, into the land of social proof.
Or maybe not. No matter.
The important thing is that we take responsibility for our own health–no matter what others think. Living the best possible life is always better than following the crowd into the ditch.
Bette Dowdell
http://toopoopedtoparticipate.com/.
Wednesday, August 24, 2011
Have you gotten the "NEWS"--high fat diets cause Diabetes?
Apparently the media is in "hype" mode to get the results of a particular study out there. Here's where you can find the abstract of the study: http://www.nature.com/nm/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nm.2414.html
We ought to be careful whenever the mainstream media tells us about research. They have an agenda. It is to sell newspapers or magazines or whatever they're pushing. So when this study is actually dissected, it turns out that the high fat diet (IN MICE, not humans) was (fat at 58% of calories) 7% soy bean oil (ugh) and 93% was hydrogenated coconut oil (what????) Oh, and by the way, 25% of their calories was table sugar. This is not a diet that can tell us anything about health or wellness.
For the full dissection, Denise Minger covers it all here:
http://www.marksdailyapple.com/does-a-high-fat-diet-cause-type-2-diabetes/
Denise Minger is one of the scientists who dissected the data used in the China study, the book by that name claimed some junk that Denise showed was not in the data but the authors belief system.
Be careful believing what you read. Including even this.
We ought to be careful whenever the mainstream media tells us about research. They have an agenda. It is to sell newspapers or magazines or whatever they're pushing. So when this study is actually dissected, it turns out that the high fat diet (IN MICE, not humans) was (fat at 58% of calories) 7% soy bean oil (ugh) and 93% was hydrogenated coconut oil (what????) Oh, and by the way, 25% of their calories was table sugar. This is not a diet that can tell us anything about health or wellness.
For the full dissection, Denise Minger covers it all here:
http://www.marksdailyapple.com/does-a-high-fat-diet-cause-type-2-diabetes/
Denise Minger is one of the scientists who dissected the data used in the China study, the book by that name claimed some junk that Denise showed was not in the data but the authors belief system.
Be careful believing what you read. Including even this.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)