Bob Officer
2014-01-13 00:06:43 UTC
Remember When Carole/Chaussette de Deuxième was posting about the ABC
catalyst program on Statins?
From: Reg Griswold <***@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: misc.health.alternative
Subject: The cholesterol myth being the cause of heart disease hits
the dust
Message-ID: <***@4ax.com>
This was the link Reg/carole posted.
http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/3876219.htm
and here is ABC media watchdog site with a critique of the program.
http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s3888657.htm
<cite>
Both episodes of Catalyst struck us as sensationalist and grossly
unbalanced; and some of their so-called experts had questionable
qualifications.
</cite>
<cite>
If you make claims like that on an ABC Science program youd want be
sure theyre pretty well-sourced, especially when they contradict the
vast weight of mainstream medical opinion.
So who are these three experts that Dr Maryanne Demasi so relied
on?
Well, Dr Jonny Bowden and Dr Stephen Sinatra are co-authors of this
popular American potboiler.
"The Great Cholesterol Mythwhy lowering your cholesterol
wont prevent heart disease and the statin-free plan that
will
The Great Cholesterol Myth, Jonny Bowden and Stephen
Sinatra"
The foreword to this book was written by the other expert we saw in
the opening clip, Dr Michael Eades.
Three men with one mind, presented as three independent points of
view.
And what exactly is their expertise?
Well, Doctor Jonny Bowden isnt a medical doctor at all even though
Catalyst claimed he is.
And he also has a conflict of interest.
The self-styled Rogue Nutritionist who has written 14 books on
healing, weight loss and longevity, sells heart health pills, which
compete with statins, he also sell pills for brain power and
anti-aging.
And while he does have a PhD its not from a recognised university.
Its a Claytons PhD obtained by correspondence from the Clayton
College of Natural Health in Alabama, which offered degrees in
naturopathy, holistic nutrition, herbal studies and iridology before
it went out of business in 2010.
Damned by one critic at the time as
"The biggest quack school in natural medicine ...
The Huffington Post, 12th July, 2010"
<cite>
There is much more criticism of the uneven reporting and unethical
behavior on the shown by the reporter and staff of Catalyst Show.
Please read it for yourself.
and lastly one of the most misunderstood men of our time:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancel_Keys
<cite>
His interest in diet and cardio-vascular disease (CVD) was prompted,
in part, by seemingly counterintuitive data: American business
executives, presumably among the best-fed persons, had high rates of
heart disease, while in post-war Europe, CVD rates had decreased
sharply in the wake of reduced food supplies. Keys postulated a
correlation between cholesterol levels and CVD and initiated a study
of Minnesota businessmen (the first prospective study of CVD),[24]
culminating in what came to be known as the Seven Countries
Study.[25]
After observing the highest concentration of centenarians in the
world, (southern Italy) Keys hypothesized that a Mediterranean-style
diet low in animal fat protected against heart disease and that a
diet high in animal fats led to heart disease. The results of what
later became known as the Seven Countries Study appeared to show that
serum cholesterol was strongly related to coronary heart disease
mortality both at the population and at the individual level.[26][27]
As a result, in 1956, representatives of the American Heart
Association appeared on television to inform people that a diet which
included large amounts of butter, lard, eggs and beef would lead to
coronary heart disease. This resulted in the American government
recommending that people adopt a low-fat diet in order to prevent
heart disease.
Keys had concluded that saturated fats as found in milk and meat have
adverse effects opposite to the beneficial effects of the unsaturated
fats found in vegetable oils. This message was obscured for a 20-year
period starting around 1985, when all dietary fats were considered
unhealthy. This was driven largely by the hypothesis that all dietary
fats cause obesity and cancer.[28]
Keys was always considered an interventionist. He generally shunned
food fads and vigorously promoted the benefits of the "reasonably
low-fat diets"
[24] Keys A, Taylor HL, Blackburn H, Brozek J, Anderson JT, Simonson
E (1 September 1963). "Coronary heart disease among Minnesota
business and professional men followed 15 years". Circulation 28 (3):
38195. PMID 14059458
[25] Keys, Ancel (1980). Seven Countries: A Multivariate Analysis of
Death and Coronary Heart Disease. Harvard University Press. ISBN
0-674-80237-3.
[26]Kromhout D: Serum cholesterol in cross-cultural perspective. The
Seven-Countries Study. Acta Cardiol 1999;54:155158
[27] Katan MB, Beynen AC. Linoleic acid consumption and coronary
heart disease in U.S.A. and U.K. Lancet. 1981 Aug 15;2(8242):371
[28] Prentice RL, Sheppard L. Dietary fat and cancer: consistency of
the epidemiologic data, and disease prevention that may follow from a
practical reduction in fat consumption. Cancer Causes Control. 1990
Jul;1(1):81-97
</cite>
< Sigh>
Other opinions very across the board
http://genevieveyates.com/2013/11/03/listen-to-your-heart-my-response-to-abc-tvs-catalyst-program/
Nice web site, while not US based is still well presented with lots
of nice links:
http://foam4gp.com/2013/11/05/gp-foamed-map-to-statin-or-not-to-statin-that-is-the-question/
and his is another voice which is taking a different look at the
Catalyst program and looking for the money trail:
http://scepticalnutritionist.com.au/?p=1121
Wow! about 1/2 the way down the article!
<cite>
To understand who is driving it we need to ask a simple question: who
benefits from a challenge to the lipid hypothesis and from
questioning the role of saturated fat? The answer is easy enough
industries that generate a lot of saturated fat. There are only four
suspects the meat, dairy, coconut oil and palm oil industries. But
which of these would be prepared to trash public health in order to
sell more saturated fat in Australia?
The meat industrys response to concern about saturated fat has been
responsible producing leaner beasts and leaner cuts of meat so I
think they are off the hook. A quick check of Dairy Australias
website shows that this organisation has been doing its fair share to
rehabilitate the reputation of saturated fat. However, Dairy
Australias approach is at least subtle and the organisation states
categorically that it had nothing to do with the Catalyst programs,
so we have to take them at their word. Coconut oil marketing is
pretty wacky but it looks very unsophisticated. Its hard to imagine
that this industry could conceive and execute a major public
relations campaign of this ilk.
Which leaves us with the palm oil industry. Take a quick look at Palm
Oil Health. Lo and behold:
Jonny Bowden on the radio in Florida recommending Malaysian
palmoil to lower inflammation.
Jonny Bowden on Fox 9 News recommending Malaysian palm oil
to boost brain power.
Jonny Bowden on the Hallmark Channel discussing Malaysian
palm oil and cholesterol.
Jonny Bowden on One Life Radio in Dallas recommending
Malaysian palm oil.
Jonny Bowden on TV in San Diego recommending Malaysian
palm oil.
Jonny Bowden on the Catalyst program.
It would appear that Jonny Bowden has been employed by the Malaysian
palm oil industry to assist in the marketing of its product.
Australia may have been targeted because imports of palm oil have
fallen by over 20% in recent years as major fast food chains in
Australia such as McDonalds and KFC have adopted healthier
unsaturated fats for frying.
</cite>
It seems that the old saying 'follow the money' may be true after all
is said and done. The question is what part did Catalyst have in this
marketing ploy?
As alway it is interesting reading the comments, This one I used a
watchful eye on Bruce Tabor's comments especially in the detail
reading and tracking down of cited studies used on the catalyst
program in question. Paid special interest to his comments made on
November 8, 2013 at 1:06 pm, November 8, 2013 at 1:43 pm, November
8, 2013 at 1:55 pm, November 8, 2013 at 2:28 pm,
Then I ran across what I feel maybe one of the more balanced sites:
http://broomedocs.com/2013/11/letter-registrars-statins-stuff/
<cite>
So my fellows where does this leave us?
We are back in 2002. You need to go back to the classroom and
relearn educate yourself about cardiovascular risk, statins and the
like. Realise that we are talking about drugs that have a minor
effect if any on the long term health and well-being of your patient.
You need to understand the magnitudes of the benefit and risks
involved, not blindly follow guidelines.
Here is a starting point: check out theNNT.com - look at the numbers.
Read the papers that they use to generate the numbers, read the
editorial commentary in the big journals and then read some more.
Then you will be in a great place to have a real discussion with your
patients. Forget the hype, know your stuff and understand that you
are fiddling around the margins of risk.
</cite>
After about two days of reading, The last web site seems to be
balanced and fair to all. It is all about identifying risk and then
managing and mitigation the risk.
The author this blog leads one to think along these lines:
You visit the doc. So the Doc looks at your blood test result and
goes over the numbers. HE takes the time to explain what the numbers
means to him and how they effect you. He may say your lipid level
seems to be a bit off. A good Doctor might discuss your parents
health and ask question about their diet and lifestyle, and compare
it your own. A great Doctor may even compare your health at when they
were your age and how their lifestyle practices and diet effected
their health outcomes, the best of doctors might make specific
suggestions and discuss with you what he feels might be the best of
all health practices for you. Diet and exercise, reduction of certain
types of foods, even increasing certain types of food. He maybe even
suggest and prescribe certain medications while you are making the
changes to your lifestyle. HE may say lets see you in two or three
months and monitor how well the lifestyle changes/diet or medications
are working for you.
TV shows life the catalyst program was too alarmist, one sided and
uneven. Is there some concern? Maybe or maybe not. Like one of the
blogs I cited, It might be 2002 and HRT all over or not.
Sometimes the easy way isn't the best way in the long run
No doubt the health issues are complex, and there exist overt and
covert conflicts of interests on both sides. Someplace there is a
balanced middle ground were evidence based medicine will overcomes
hype, fears mongers, dogma and superstitions.
catalyst program on Statins?
From: Reg Griswold <***@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: misc.health.alternative
Subject: The cholesterol myth being the cause of heart disease hits
the dust
Message-ID: <***@4ax.com>
This was the link Reg/carole posted.
http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/3876219.htm
and here is ABC media watchdog site with a critique of the program.
http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s3888657.htm
<cite>
Both episodes of Catalyst struck us as sensationalist and grossly
unbalanced; and some of their so-called experts had questionable
qualifications.
</cite>
<cite>
If you make claims like that on an ABC Science program youd want be
sure theyre pretty well-sourced, especially when they contradict the
vast weight of mainstream medical opinion.
So who are these three experts that Dr Maryanne Demasi so relied
on?
Well, Dr Jonny Bowden and Dr Stephen Sinatra are co-authors of this
popular American potboiler.
"The Great Cholesterol Mythwhy lowering your cholesterol
wont prevent heart disease and the statin-free plan that
will
The Great Cholesterol Myth, Jonny Bowden and Stephen
Sinatra"
The foreword to this book was written by the other expert we saw in
the opening clip, Dr Michael Eades.
Three men with one mind, presented as three independent points of
view.
And what exactly is their expertise?
Well, Doctor Jonny Bowden isnt a medical doctor at all even though
Catalyst claimed he is.
And he also has a conflict of interest.
The self-styled Rogue Nutritionist who has written 14 books on
healing, weight loss and longevity, sells heart health pills, which
compete with statins, he also sell pills for brain power and
anti-aging.
And while he does have a PhD its not from a recognised university.
Its a Claytons PhD obtained by correspondence from the Clayton
College of Natural Health in Alabama, which offered degrees in
naturopathy, holistic nutrition, herbal studies and iridology before
it went out of business in 2010.
Damned by one critic at the time as
"The biggest quack school in natural medicine ...
The Huffington Post, 12th July, 2010"
<cite>
There is much more criticism of the uneven reporting and unethical
behavior on the shown by the reporter and staff of Catalyst Show.
Please read it for yourself.
and lastly one of the most misunderstood men of our time:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancel_Keys
<cite>
His interest in diet and cardio-vascular disease (CVD) was prompted,
in part, by seemingly counterintuitive data: American business
executives, presumably among the best-fed persons, had high rates of
heart disease, while in post-war Europe, CVD rates had decreased
sharply in the wake of reduced food supplies. Keys postulated a
correlation between cholesterol levels and CVD and initiated a study
of Minnesota businessmen (the first prospective study of CVD),[24]
culminating in what came to be known as the Seven Countries
Study.[25]
After observing the highest concentration of centenarians in the
world, (southern Italy) Keys hypothesized that a Mediterranean-style
diet low in animal fat protected against heart disease and that a
diet high in animal fats led to heart disease. The results of what
later became known as the Seven Countries Study appeared to show that
serum cholesterol was strongly related to coronary heart disease
mortality both at the population and at the individual level.[26][27]
As a result, in 1956, representatives of the American Heart
Association appeared on television to inform people that a diet which
included large amounts of butter, lard, eggs and beef would lead to
coronary heart disease. This resulted in the American government
recommending that people adopt a low-fat diet in order to prevent
heart disease.
Keys had concluded that saturated fats as found in milk and meat have
adverse effects opposite to the beneficial effects of the unsaturated
fats found in vegetable oils. This message was obscured for a 20-year
period starting around 1985, when all dietary fats were considered
unhealthy. This was driven largely by the hypothesis that all dietary
fats cause obesity and cancer.[28]
Keys was always considered an interventionist. He generally shunned
food fads and vigorously promoted the benefits of the "reasonably
low-fat diets"
[24] Keys A, Taylor HL, Blackburn H, Brozek J, Anderson JT, Simonson
E (1 September 1963). "Coronary heart disease among Minnesota
business and professional men followed 15 years". Circulation 28 (3):
38195. PMID 14059458
[25] Keys, Ancel (1980). Seven Countries: A Multivariate Analysis of
Death and Coronary Heart Disease. Harvard University Press. ISBN
0-674-80237-3.
[26]Kromhout D: Serum cholesterol in cross-cultural perspective. The
Seven-Countries Study. Acta Cardiol 1999;54:155158
[27] Katan MB, Beynen AC. Linoleic acid consumption and coronary
heart disease in U.S.A. and U.K. Lancet. 1981 Aug 15;2(8242):371
[28] Prentice RL, Sheppard L. Dietary fat and cancer: consistency of
the epidemiologic data, and disease prevention that may follow from a
practical reduction in fat consumption. Cancer Causes Control. 1990
Jul;1(1):81-97
</cite>
< Sigh>
Other opinions very across the board
http://genevieveyates.com/2013/11/03/listen-to-your-heart-my-response-to-abc-tvs-catalyst-program/
Nice web site, while not US based is still well presented with lots
of nice links:
http://foam4gp.com/2013/11/05/gp-foamed-map-to-statin-or-not-to-statin-that-is-the-question/
and his is another voice which is taking a different look at the
Catalyst program and looking for the money trail:
http://scepticalnutritionist.com.au/?p=1121
Wow! about 1/2 the way down the article!
<cite>
To understand who is driving it we need to ask a simple question: who
benefits from a challenge to the lipid hypothesis and from
questioning the role of saturated fat? The answer is easy enough
industries that generate a lot of saturated fat. There are only four
suspects the meat, dairy, coconut oil and palm oil industries. But
which of these would be prepared to trash public health in order to
sell more saturated fat in Australia?
The meat industrys response to concern about saturated fat has been
responsible producing leaner beasts and leaner cuts of meat so I
think they are off the hook. A quick check of Dairy Australias
website shows that this organisation has been doing its fair share to
rehabilitate the reputation of saturated fat. However, Dairy
Australias approach is at least subtle and the organisation states
categorically that it had nothing to do with the Catalyst programs,
so we have to take them at their word. Coconut oil marketing is
pretty wacky but it looks very unsophisticated. Its hard to imagine
that this industry could conceive and execute a major public
relations campaign of this ilk.
Which leaves us with the palm oil industry. Take a quick look at Palm
Oil Health. Lo and behold:
Jonny Bowden on the radio in Florida recommending Malaysian
palmoil to lower inflammation.
Jonny Bowden on Fox 9 News recommending Malaysian palm oil
to boost brain power.
Jonny Bowden on the Hallmark Channel discussing Malaysian
palm oil and cholesterol.
Jonny Bowden on One Life Radio in Dallas recommending
Malaysian palm oil.
Jonny Bowden on TV in San Diego recommending Malaysian
palm oil.
Jonny Bowden on the Catalyst program.
It would appear that Jonny Bowden has been employed by the Malaysian
palm oil industry to assist in the marketing of its product.
Australia may have been targeted because imports of palm oil have
fallen by over 20% in recent years as major fast food chains in
Australia such as McDonalds and KFC have adopted healthier
unsaturated fats for frying.
</cite>
It seems that the old saying 'follow the money' may be true after all
is said and done. The question is what part did Catalyst have in this
marketing ploy?
As alway it is interesting reading the comments, This one I used a
watchful eye on Bruce Tabor's comments especially in the detail
reading and tracking down of cited studies used on the catalyst
program in question. Paid special interest to his comments made on
November 8, 2013 at 1:06 pm, November 8, 2013 at 1:43 pm, November
8, 2013 at 1:55 pm, November 8, 2013 at 2:28 pm,
Then I ran across what I feel maybe one of the more balanced sites:
http://broomedocs.com/2013/11/letter-registrars-statins-stuff/
<cite>
So my fellows where does this leave us?
We are back in 2002. You need to go back to the classroom and
relearn educate yourself about cardiovascular risk, statins and the
like. Realise that we are talking about drugs that have a minor
effect if any on the long term health and well-being of your patient.
You need to understand the magnitudes of the benefit and risks
involved, not blindly follow guidelines.
Here is a starting point: check out theNNT.com - look at the numbers.
Read the papers that they use to generate the numbers, read the
editorial commentary in the big journals and then read some more.
Then you will be in a great place to have a real discussion with your
patients. Forget the hype, know your stuff and understand that you
are fiddling around the margins of risk.
</cite>
After about two days of reading, The last web site seems to be
balanced and fair to all. It is all about identifying risk and then
managing and mitigation the risk.
The author this blog leads one to think along these lines:
You visit the doc. So the Doc looks at your blood test result and
goes over the numbers. HE takes the time to explain what the numbers
means to him and how they effect you. He may say your lipid level
seems to be a bit off. A good Doctor might discuss your parents
health and ask question about their diet and lifestyle, and compare
it your own. A great Doctor may even compare your health at when they
were your age and how their lifestyle practices and diet effected
their health outcomes, the best of doctors might make specific
suggestions and discuss with you what he feels might be the best of
all health practices for you. Diet and exercise, reduction of certain
types of foods, even increasing certain types of food. He maybe even
suggest and prescribe certain medications while you are making the
changes to your lifestyle. HE may say lets see you in two or three
months and monitor how well the lifestyle changes/diet or medications
are working for you.
TV shows life the catalyst program was too alarmist, one sided and
uneven. Is there some concern? Maybe or maybe not. Like one of the
blogs I cited, It might be 2002 and HRT all over or not.
Sometimes the easy way isn't the best way in the long run
No doubt the health issues are complex, and there exist overt and
covert conflicts of interests on both sides. Someplace there is a
balanced middle ground were evidence based medicine will overcomes
hype, fears mongers, dogma and superstitions.
--
Bob Officer
Carole Hubbard stuns the world showing her belief that 2+2 = 3 or 5 says to me
"And one day they might find a cause for your lack of cognitive ability in
putting 2+2 together and coming up with 4 instead of 3 or 5."
in Message-ID:
<f61b82a3-85de-43b2-8ca3-***@p7g2000prb.googlegroups.com>
Bob Officer
Carole Hubbard stuns the world showing her belief that 2+2 = 3 or 5 says to me
"And one day they might find a cause for your lack of cognitive ability in
putting 2+2 together and coming up with 4 instead of 3 or 5."
in Message-ID:
<f61b82a3-85de-43b2-8ca3-***@p7g2000prb.googlegroups.com>
