T Nation

Is the Medical Community Wising Up?

This was recently published the August Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA):

excerpted…

“Nutritional science has advanced rapidly, and the evidence now demonstrates the major limitations of nutrient-based metrics for prevention of chronic disease. The proportion of total energy from fat appears largely unrelated to risk of cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes, or obesity. Saturated fatâ??targeted by nearly all nutrition-related professional organizations and governmental agenciesâ??has little relation to heart disease within most prevailing dietary patterns. Typical recommendations to consume at least half of total energy as carbohydrate, a nutrient for which humans have no absolute requirement, conflate foods with widely divergent physiologic effects (eg, brown rice, white bread, apples). Foods are grouped based on protein content (chicken, fish, beans, nuts) despite demonstrably different health effects. With few exceptions (eg, omega-3 fats, trans fat, salt), individual compounds in isolation have small effects on chronic diseases. Thus, little of the information found on food labelsâ?? â??nutrition factsâ?? panels provides useful guidance for selecting healthier foods to prevent chronic disease.”

Maybe the medical community will wise up, but it will take probably another 10 years.

This sounds like a good START.

Now there’s just that whole, “majority of the medical community accepting it” thing…

the FDA will have to start a 37-phase clinical trial lasting 25+ years for this to be credible. thus, this radical idea has been cancelled due to lack of funding.

do you have a link to the actual article?

Here’s the link:

oops! It does you no good unless you have a paid account with JAMA or buy the article, so you have to find excerpts on the web, like this:

Yes it is. “Cholesterol intake has no effect on plasma cholesterol levels” has made it into the textbooks. And the teachers are starting to accept truths that clash with old truths (nutrition wise at least). So in 25 years or so, the majority could know this.

There was an interesting article i read recently, and I wish I could remember where. The gist was that they were looking at all of the facets of cardiac rehab, which has been shown to reduce recurrent heart attacks, and trying to figure out which ones made a difference. Dietary changes did not. Exercise was the key.

[quote]kakno wrote:
Yes it is. “Cholesterol intake has no effect on plasma cholesterol levels” has made it into the textbooks. And the teachers are starting to accept truths that clash with old truths (nutrition wise at least). So in 25 years or so, the majority could know this.[/quote]

you have a cite for this? I’m going into my second year of medical school and the archaic shit that we were being taught angered me to no end and it just solidified the incorrect knowledge in the minds of my class mates.

[quote]mog16 wrote:

[quote]kakno wrote:
Yes it is. “Cholesterol intake has no effect on plasma cholesterol levels” has made it into the textbooks. And the teachers are starting to accept truths that clash with old truths (nutrition wise at least). So in 25 years or so, the majority could know this.[/quote]

you have a cite for this? I’m going into my second year of medical school and the archaic shit that we were being taught angered me to no end and it just solidified the incorrect knowledge in the minds of my class mates.[/quote]

Biochemistry, fourth edition, by Champe and Harvey. I guess not all books replace the archaic shit.

Still, I have been taught that creatine doesn’t work, since “only the stuff that is on the list of banned substances works”. And of course that protein is bad for the kidneys. I just hope it keeps getting better in small steps like those mentioned in this thread.

Subscrive to Dr. Julian Whitakeer’s “Health & Healing” newsletters and keep them forever. You will be so far ahead of the good health game tghat you will never be concerned with what the AMA says again.