Here's a taste of the issues.
An advocarte for the diet speaks above.
Below is a mainstream response to that.
good jobMichaelC wrote:I've been doing the keto diet for a couple of months and have significantly reduced body fat around the middle.
High protein, all the fat you want, low carbs,,,,supposedly forces the body to burn the stored belly fat.
Probably the same results with a carnovore diet: protein and fat.
Ummmm......Just0: But so many people turning to veganism, why?
Can't agree more, I try to get cow liver into my diet at least monthly.Diet = Fucked by Commercialism
Diet = Minefield of Bullshit and exploitation
Diet = Luctative for $ome and Disabling for Most.
http://www.kickas.org/londondiet.shtmlAnkylosing Spondylitis Research Clinic (Professor Alan Ebringer), Department of Rheumatology, The Middlesex Hospital UCH School of Medicine and Infection & Immunity Group, Division of Life Sciences, Kings College, London, UK
THE LONDON "AS" DIET
Low starch/high protein diet for ankylosing spondylitis patients.
It is thought that in some cases a diet low in starches found in flour products and potatoes, and high in proteins and vegetables is of benefit for AS patients.
Ankylosing spondylitis is considered to be a form of "reactive arthritis" following an infection of the terminal ileum and ascending colon by the bowel microbe Klebsiella. Specific anti- Klebsiella antibodies in AS patients have now been reported from 17 different countries: England, Finland, Germany, Sweden, Netherlands, Scotland, Spain, Belgium, Slovakia, Japan, China, Australia, Canada, USA, Mexico, Argentina, and Turkey.
Over 95% of AS patients possess the HLA-B27 antigen whilst it is present only in 8% of the general population. The Klebsiella microbe has molecules which resemble HLA-B27 and this is the reason why AS patients generally belong to the HLA-B27 group.
In addition, the pullulanase molecule of the Klebsiella microbe crossreacts with type I collagen found in tendons and bone and also with type IV collagen found in basement membranes of retina and uvea, thereby explaining the pathological sites of AS.
When one eats large amounts of starchy foods (bread, potatoes, cakes and pasta), the Klebsiella bacteria feed on it, multiply and then the immune system of the patient makes antibodies against the microbe and some of those antibodies will also have activity against HLA-B27 and against collagens in the spine and uvea, thereby acting as tissue damaging autoantibodies - hence the need to ABSTAIN from these foods.
"jarring dietary reversals"Eat Less Red Meat, Scientists Said.
Now Some Believe That Was Bad Advice.
The evidence is too weak to justify telling individuals to eat less beef and pork, according to new research. The findings “erode public trust,” critics said.
By Gina Kolata | Published Sept. 30, 2019
Public health officials for years have urged Americans to limit consumption of red meat and processed meats because of concerns that these foods are linked to heart disease, cancer and other ills.
But on Monday, in a remarkable turnabout, an international collaboration of researchers produced a series of analyses concluding that the advice, a bedrock of almost all dietary guidelines, is not backed by good scientific evidence.
If there are health benefits from eating less beef and pork, they are small, the researchers concluded. Indeed, the advantages are so faint that they can be discerned only when looking at large populations, the scientists said, and are not sufficient to tell individuals to change their meat-eating habits.
“The certainty of evidence for these risk reductions was low to very low,” said Bradley Johnston, an epidemiologist at Dalhousie University in Canada and leader of the group publishing the new research in the Annals of Internal Medicine.
The new analyses are among the largest such evaluations ever attempted and may influence future dietary recommendations. In many ways, they raise uncomfortable questions about dietary advice and nutritional research, and what sort of standards these studies should be held to.
Already they have been met with fierce criticism by public health researchers. The American Heart Association, the American Cancer Society, the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and other groups have savaged the findings and the journal that published them.
Some called for the journal’s editors to delay publication altogether. In a statement, scientists at Harvard warned that the conclusions “harm the credibility of nutrition science and erode public trust in scientific research.”
Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, a group advocating a plant-based diet, on Wednesday filed a petition against the journal with the Federal Trade Commission. Dr. Frank Sacks, past chair of the American Heart Association’s nutrition committee, called the research “fatally flawed.”
While the new findings are likely to please proponents of popular high-protein diets, they seem certain to add to public consternation over dietary advice that seems to change every few years.
The conclusions represent another in a series of jarring dietary reversals involving salt, fats, carbohydrates and more.
The new studies said screw risk factors and intermediate markers.Should we care about signals like blood pressure,
or only major events like heart attacks?
Because big outcomes are rare, research sometimes looks at intermediate measures. Those, like weight, blood pressure, cholesterol levels and more, can change in shorter periods. Some will point to studies in these domains and say that they prove that meat reduction has significant health effects. High blood pressure or cholesterol levels are widely believed to be major risk factors for adverse events. Others will disagree as to how much we should rely on intermediate measures.
These new studies focused only on those end-stage outcomes.
Having said that, current research is so pathetic that you cannot giveThe greenhouse gas production per serving of chicken or pork is about 20 percent that of a serving of beef. Cows also put out an enormous amount of methane. Meat and dairy are big contributors to climate change, with livestock production accounting for about 14.5 percent of the greenhouse gases that humans emit worldwide each year.