| |
|
| |
Skeptical about these ideas. Make your comments:
Please stick to facts, no name calling. If you believe a source is not reliable, please give an example of why.
Very interested in what the critics have to say to Ravnskov's paper:
Cholesterol lowering trials in coronary heart disease: frequency of citation and outcome.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1638188?dopt=Abstract
As this is the paper that is the core of cholesterol skepticism. |
|
2 Comments
|
|
Comment By: Gordon Rouse |
1:27PM 5/2/2008 |
Ravnskov's study should have put the issue to rest. He found that amongst all the studies there were many that found cholesterol reduction correlated to a small risk reduction in heart disease, but just as many that produced the opposite result.
Those which suggested a small correlation were quoted dis-proportionally more to those which found no correlation or reverse.
To continue justifying the lipid hypothesis, we must ignore the studies that failed to produce results. The critics of this paper suggest that the studies that failed are not as good as those that succeeded, or the methods of cholesterol reduction had serious side-effects.
The critics also suggested Ravnskov was biased by excluding some studies, yet he maintains that the studies he did not include would not change the results anyway.
Arguing over the actual meaning of the numbers becomes fruitless however. If the cholesterol theory had merit, then it would not require a high powered billion dollar study to prove it. Even if the studies that support it are better designed than those that failed, then it means very little, the effects of lowering cholesterol is so close to non existent, that we are better off looking elsewhere for causes and cures to heart-disease.
If cholesterol caused heart-disease, and saturated fat consumption caused cholesterol build up. Then I should expect a clear obvious relationship between saturated fat consumption and heart-disease risk. A low fat diet should prevent Heart-disease, as it is however, every doctor advises that low-fat diets are not enough, and statins are needed.
If diet alone could prevent heart-disease, why do we need statins?
|
|
|
Comment By: janette short |
3:02PM 14/10/2008 |
| i have many allergies, i.e.gluten,dairy,nut,barley,wheat, yeast /cows,sheep.goats milk/ egg , soya bean all dairy preservatives i believe this counts me outof purchasing your flora butters[altho today i have to receive the 10cents of the petrol |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current Poll Results
|
|
The milk I consume most is: |
Naturalea 4% unhomogenised (
13 %)
|
Farmhouse (4%) unhomogenised (
5 %)
|
Standard (3.3%) homogenised (
8 %)
|
Low Fat Milk Homogenised (
33 %)
|
Real Farm Milk - non pasteurised (
41 %)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Email To A Friend
 Print This Page
|
|
|
