Tvivlet på kolesterolhypotesen ökar!

[HelgeK]

Tvivlet på att kolesterolhypotesen ökar efter utvecklingen

i USA.

                                           

Se diagrammet. Samtidigt som kolesterol nivåerna gått ner,

så har antalet hjärtinfarkter ökat. 

Tvärtemot vad kolesterol hypotesen säger.

           

 

Heart Disease: The forgotten pandemic

5 October 2021|Statins, drugs trials

Robert DuBroff MD, Maryanne Demasi PhD

 

 

Läs artikeln:        https://maryannedemasi.com/blog/f/heart-disease-the-forgotten-pandemic

 

 

 

[HelgeK]

Det är bra att komma ihåg från var kolesterolhypotesen kom. Se: https://sugarscience.ucsf.edu/sugar-papers-reveal-industry-role-in-shifting-focus.html#.YW1Kky1ypQI

SUGARSCIENCE BLOG

Sugar Papers Reveal Industry Role in Shifting Focus from Heart Disease to Saturated Fat 

 

By Sugar Editor

 

It all started with a secret PR campaign dating back to the 1970s. For forty years, the Sugar Association, key trade group for sugar producers, deflected all threats to its multi-billion dollar empire, while sweetening the world’s food supply. As obesity, diabetes, and heart disease rates skyrocket, doctors are now treating the first generation of children suffering from fatty liver disease.  The sugar industry is once again under siege.

When the doors closed at the Great Western Sugar Company in Colorado in 1976, someone forgot to sweep the floor. Gathering dust in the archives were 1500 pages of internal documents exposing how the Sugar Industry used Tobacco-style tactics to dismiss troubling health claims against their products. Denver dentist turned postdoctoral scholar at the UCSF School of Medicine, Cristin Kearns, knew she’d stumbled on something big: the industry’s secret playbook. Her story is vividly captured in the Canadian documentary, Sugarcoated, now available on Netflix.  

Along with her mentors, Stan Glantz and Laura Schmidt, Kearns has produced another powerful peer-reviewed paper on sugar industry tactics. 

It reveals that the sugar industry began working closely with nutrition scientists in the mid-1960s to single out fat and cholesterol as the dietary causes of coronary heart disease and to downplay evidence that sucrose consumption was also a risk factor.  This analysis appears September 12, 2016, in JAMA Internal Medicine. 

The internal industry documents showed that a sugar industry trade organization recognized as early as 1954 that if Americans adopted low-fat diets, then per-capita consumption of sucrose would increase by more than one-third. The trade organization represented 30 international members.

Meanwhile, evidence linking sugar consumption to high blood cholesterol and triglyceride levels – both thought to be risk factors for coronary heart disease – began to emerge in the scientific literature and popular press.

After a 1965 spike in media attention to the heart disease risks of sucrose, the sugar industry commissioned Project 226, a literature review written by researchers at the Harvard University School of Public Health Nutrition Department, which was published in the highly respected New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) in 1967. It concluded there was “no doubt” that the only dietary intervention required to prevent coronary heart disease was to reduce dietary cholesterol and substitute polyunsaturated fat for saturated fat in the American diet.
 
“The literature review helped shape not only public opinion on what causes heart problems but also the scientific community’s view of how to evaluate dietary risk factors for heart disease,” said lead author Cristin Kearns, DDS, MBA, who discovered the industry documents.
 
The UCSF researchers analyzed more than 340 documents, totaling 1,582 pages of text, between the sugar industry and two individuals: Roger Adams, then a professor of organic chemistry who served on scientific advisory boards for the sugar industry; and D. Mark Hegsted, one of the Harvard researchers who produced the literature review.
 
To conduct the literature review, the sugar industry paid the Harvard scientists the equivalent of $50,000 in 2016 dollars, then set the review’s objective, contributed articles to be included, and received drafts. Yet the industry’s funding and role were not disclosed in the final NEJM publication.
 
The literature review heavily criticized studies linking sucrose to heart disease, while ignoring limitations of studies investigating dietary fats. The review argued that blood cholesterol levels were the only significant risk factor for coronary heart disease, which made the high sucrose content of the American diet seem less hazardous than if blood triglycerides were also considered to be a risk factor.
 
The authors emphasized that this analysis demonstrates the importance of having scientific reviews written by people without conflicts of interest, as well as the need for financial disclosure in nutrition science.
 
“As the saying goes, he who pays the piper calls the tune,” said senior author Stanton A. Glantz, PhD, UCSF professor of medicine and director of the UCSF Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education. “There are all kinds of ways that you can subtly manipulate the outcome of a study, which industry is very well practiced at.”
 
Co-author Laura Schmidt, PhD, who is also principal investigator on the UCSF-led SugarScience initiative and Professor of Health Policy at the Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies, noted that after decades of focusing on saturated fat as the dietary culprit in heart disease, the science is building around sugar’s role, but health policy has only just begun to catch up.
 
“There is now a considerable body of evidence linking added sugars to hypertension and cardiovascular disease, which is the No. 1 cause of premature death in the developed world,” Schmidt said. “Yet, health policy documents are still inconsistent in citing heart disease risk as a health consequence of added sugars consumption.”  
 

Read more:

JAMA Internal Medicine: Author Interview

CNN Video: Sugar raises heart concerns

STAT: Sugar industry secretly paid for favorable Harvard research

VOX: How the sugar industry has distorted health science for more than 50 years

Bloomberg: How Big Sugar Enlisted Harvard Scientists to Influence How We Eat—in 1965

Business Insider: The sugar industry funded one of the biggest misconceptions in modern nutrition

TIME: How the Sugar Lobby Skewed Health Research

TIME: Interview with Dr. Cristin Kerns

Associated Press: Study details sugar industry attempt to shape science

Food Politics: Sugar industry funding of research, 1967 style (with many lessons for today)

The Guardian: Sugar lobby paid scientists to blur sugar's role in heart disease

STAT: Sugar industry secretly paid for favorable Harvard research

VOX: How the sugar industry has distorted health science for more than 50 years

Bloomberg: How Big Sugar Enlisted Harvard Scientists to Influence How We Eat—in 1965

Business Insider: The sugar industry funded one of the biggest misconceptions in modern nutrition

The Guardian: Sugar lobby paid scientists to blur sugar's role in heart disease

New York Times: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

San Francisco Chronicle: UCSF-led study details sugar industry’s attempt to shape science
CNN: How the sugar industry sweetened research in its favor

UPI: Research reveals role of sugar industry in heart disease studies

International Business Times: What Causes Heart Disease? Sugar Industry Funded Research To Prove It Didn't Contribute to Heart Disease

Live Science: Sugar Industry Tried to Bias Heart Research, Study Says

Daily Mail: Revealed: How the sugar industry paid prestigious Harvard researchers to say fat (NOT sugar) caused heart disease
Helio: Sugar industry sponsored research to downplay sugar's role in heart disease

 

 

 

 

 

Statiner sänker kolesterolet, men det minskar inte förekomsten av hjärt- och kärlsjukdom:

(DuBroff and de Lorgeril, 2021) Moreover, the only two dietary RCTs that reduced both mortality and CHD events did not lower serum cholesterol levels. These two trials were the Lyon Diet Heart Study where the intervention was a Mediterranean diet, and the Diet And Reinfarction Trial (DART) where the intervention was the addition of fish to the control diet (Lorgeril et al., 1999; Burr et al., 1989). 

[HelgeK]

En bra artikel, som förklarar mycket om kolesterol, och  även om statiner:

 

https://www.westonaprice.org/health-topics/modern-diseases/dangers-of-statin-drugs-what-you-havent-been-told-about-popular-cholesterol-lowering-medicines/#:~:text=The fact that some studies have shown that,but because they block the creation of mevalonate.

[HelgeK]

Högt intag av mejerifett gav inte sämre hjärt-kärlhälsa

13 oktober, 2021 av Annika Dahlqvist 38 kommentarer

Uppsala Universitet: Högt intag av mejerifett gav inte sämre hjärt-kärlhälsa .

En svensk studie. 4000 försökspersoner. De med högt intag av mejerifett – mätt med fettsyror i blodet, hade lägre risk för hjärtkärlsjukdom än de som hade intagit mindre av mejerifett.
Försökspersonerna följdes i 16 år för att se hur det gick med deras hjärtkärlhälsa.

Detta stämmer med många andra motsvarande studier. En amerikansk .

Do Not Expect Experts to Change Their Attitudes About Saturated Fat:

There have been lots of studies demonstrating that the old dietary dogma was flawed and yet the AHA has not changed its stand on cholesterol and saturated fat in foods. The Sydney Diet Heart Study ran between 1966 and 1973 in Australia. The results weren’t published for 40 years (BMJ, Feb. 5, 2013). 

The researchers in this experiment assigned high-risk men to use either margarine or butter during that time. Men using safflower oil margarine were 60 percent more likely to die over the years of the study. The absolute risk of death from heart disease went from 10 percent on the butter-rich diet to 16.3 percent on the margarine-based diet.

Another trial pitting butter against margarine ran about the same time. The Minnesota Coronary Experiment involved more than 9,000 patients in mental institutions and a nursing home. The researchers had total control over the subjects’ diets. The test diets included one high in saturated fat and the other high in polyunsaturated fats from corn oil.

Like the Sydney Diet Heart Study, the results were not what the investigators expected. Perhaps that explains why the data were not published until much later (Atherosclerosis, Jan-Feb. 1989). Patients on the corn oil diet had less cholesterol in their blood, but they were just as likely to die from heart disease.

But Wait…There’s More:

A study published in the medical journal, Annals of Internal Medicine (March 18, 2014), had nutrition experts and physicians shaking their heads in disbelief. The authors reviewed 72 studies involving over 600,000 volunteers. These studies represented the best research at that time. They examined the relationship between diet and heart disease. The conclusion: there is no convincing evidence that a diet containing saturated fat leads to heart disease. That seems like heresy of the highest order.

The researchers also noted that polyunsaturated fats low in cholesterol such as corn or safflower oil do not appear to protect people from heart attacks. This too contradicts the nutritional principles that have reigned in the U.S. for decades.

The only culprits that stood out in this mass of data were trans fats. The researchers found a clear link between consumption of foods high in trans fats and heart disease. Americans were once encouraged to consume margarine and shortening made of hydrogenated vegetable oil loaded with trans fats on the understanding that these low-cholesterol solid fats would be better for the heart than butter or lard. Such advice now seems to have been based more on belief than evidence.

What About Saturated Fat in Meat?

Here are more analyses published in the highly regarded Annals of Internal Medicine (Oct. 1, 2019). Get the straight and skinny on this research in our overview at this link. 

The French never bought the American prohibition on saturated fat. They were loathe to give up their Brie, Camembert, paté, boeuf bourguignon and chocolate soufflé. Cardiologists were puzzled by the “French paradox.” Despite such foods rich in saturated fat, French heart attack rates have been considerably lower than those in the U.S.

If there is a moral to this ongoing diet controversy, it is that high-fat dairy products do not appear to be as dangerous as doctors once thought. Despite the latest study and all the others that have gone before it, we do not expect the AHA or nutrition experts to change their thinking. 

In recent years we have seen the pillars of dietary dogma collapsing. Here is a list:

Eggs:

Before, cholesterol-laden yolks were thought to clog your arteries and lead to heart disease.

Now, eggs are considered an excellent source of high-quality protein.

Coconuts and avocados:

Before, these foods were off limits because of high saturated fat content.

Now, they are considered OK with potential health benefits.

Nuts:

Before, these were high fat treats, thought to raise cholesterol, heart attack risk and cause weight gain.

Now, nuts are known to contain good fats and data prove people who eat nuts lower their risk of heart attacks!

Shrimp:

Before, shrimp were believed to be sinful, high in cholesterol and dangerous for those at risk of heart disease.

Now, they are considered a good source of protein and raise good HDL cholesterol.

Butter:

Before, butter was a no-no because it is high in sat fat and cholesterol.

Now, butter is better than margarine made from trans fats.

Salt:

Before, salt was bad, raising blood pressure and causing heart disease.

Now, data indicate that there is a sweet spot. Going too low on sodium increases the risk of death!

Coffee:

Before, people were told to lay off the java because it raises blood pressure and harms the heart.

Now, coffee is a known source of dietary antioxidants. It helps prevent diabetes and may partially protect against neurological diseases like Parkinson’s and dementia.

Chocolate:

Before, chocolate was frowned upon as fattening and bad for the skin. It was also viewed as contributing to indigestion and reflux by relaxing the lower esophageal sphincter. Chocolate was featured on many lists of foods that people prone to migraine should avoid.

Now, chocolate with more cocoa flavanols than sugar is known to relax blood vessels and lower blood pressure. It may help maintain good cognitive function and reduce the risks of stroke and heart attack. While some individuals may find that chocolate triggers reflux or a migraine, most people handle it without difficulty.

Whole Milk, Cream & High-Fat Yogurt:

Before, high-fat dairy foods were believed to contribute to heart disease and obesity.

Now, studies show that both kids and adults who consume high-fat dairy are actually skinnier than those who consume skim milk and low-fat dairy products. The new research (above) shows that saturated fat found in high-fat dairy does not cause heart disease.

The Bottom Line on Saturated Fat:

What are we to make of all the food confusion? If there is a take-home message from all this, it is that evidence trumps belief. For decades “experts” have made assumptions about various foods. Because egg yolks contained cholesterol, they decided that eggs caused heart disease, without any data to support that hypothesis.

When research actually revealed that eggs do not cause heart disease, there has been a begrudging retreat from the hard line advice to shun eggs. But old ideas die hard. There are still many health professionals who caution against eating foods like avocados, nuts and shrimp, despite data to the contrary.

What About Dairy Products?

We suspect that the evidence that full-fat dairy products don’t raise cholesterol in high-risk patients will be challenging for most health professionals to accept. After all, it contradicts everything we have been told about a heart-healthy diet for more than 50 years.

Accepting the new data (American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Sept. 2021) and the analysis of 72 studies involving more than 600,000 people would mean that our thought leaders and policy makers got it wrong. In such scenarios, many people would prefer to shoot the messengers and pretend that the data do not exist. The research is likely to disappear without a trace and some nutrition experts will pretend it never saw the light of day. 

Real Food:

What should you do? We follow the advice of Robert Lustig, MD, author of the book Fat Chance: Beating the Odds Against Sugar, Processed Food, Obesity, and Disease and Michael Pollen, author of In Defense of Food, An Eater’s Manifesto. They make it very clear: “EAT REAL FOOD!”

If it comes in a package with a long list of unpronounceable chemical ingredients, think twice or three times! Grandmothers instinctively knew that food grown in the garden and prepared with love was better than anything produced in a factory. Joe’s mother always believed butter was better than margarine and it turns out she was right.

Your Opinion:

What do you think? We would love to get your response to this essay. How do you deal with the food flip-flops of the last several years regarding nuts, chocolate, coffee and coconut? What do you make of the saturated fat controversy? Share your comments below.

View Comments(90)

 

[HelgeK]

I Sverige har vi en av de mest kända Statin motståndarna Docent Uffe Ravnskov,och man kan läsa en av hans böcker gratis. Läs hans brev här:

 

http://www.ravnskov.nu/svcholesterol/

 

Se också: http://thincs.columbuspublishing.co.uk

[HelgeK]

Tim Noakes visar att kolesterolet INTE uppfyller kraven för att vara den verkliga orsaken till hjärt- och kärlsjukdom . 

            

                            

 

[Sniffe]

https://poddtoppen.se/podcast/1065616324/halsosnack-med-lotta-och-victoria/204-dr-aseem-malhotra-the-cardiologist-on-cholesterol-metabolic-health-and-how-to-prevent-heart-disease

[HelgeK]

Vad gäller effekten av statin behandling på Hjärt- och kärlsjukdom på dödligheten i Sverige , så har jag totalt missat att hitta någon rigorös forskning,       som visat skillnaden på  en grupp som delats upp i två lika stora grupper. Där hälften får statiner och hälften får placebo preparat. och det måste vara blindade vilka fått placebo och vilka som fått statiner. Även de som bedömer utfallet  får inte heller veta vilka som ingått i vilken grupp.

 

För det behövs en oberoende och vetenskapli. g  utvärdering av statinernas effekt på livslängden! 

PS. Sådana här artiklar visar värklingen ingenting viktigt om statinernas effekt på livslängden. Se: https://www.janusinfo.se/download/18.3daa1b3d160c00a26d21213d/1535626542703/Statiner-for-kardiovaskular-prevention-160504.pdf 

[HelgeK]

 

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17512433.2018.1519391

 

 

[Peter B]

Intressant genomgång på DietDoctor om höga LDL värden hos vissa LCHF:are

https://www.dietdoctor.com/cholesterol/hyper-responders

[HelgeK]

 

Dr James Dinicolantonio om Kolesterolhypotesen:

 

https://www.facebook.com/drjamesdinic/videos/1052758951935763