Some of the information in this opinion piece has been based on articles from the Times, the Independent, the Telegraph and the Mail
The three stories involved:
- a paper from the National Obesity Forum (NOH) and the Public Health Collaboration (PHC) advising that a low-carb healthy-fat diet could cut weight gain and fight obesity
- an admission from the NHS that a 'computer glitch' led to patients being wrongly prescribed statins or taken off them
- a report published in the medical magazine Lancet concluding that too little salt is as bad for you as too much, and could cause heart attacks and strokes
 |
| Buttery Scones |
The 'natural fats are good for you' line of thinking has been around a long time. It explains why, even in the fat-is-bad era, many chose to eat (reduced levels of) butter instead of margarines made from trans-fats (oils never intended to be in solid form, now mostly banned.)
What was astonishing about the NOH/PHC paper paper was the howls of rage, the accusations and near-hysteria from public health officials.
It is true that the obesity paper is a campaigning document and not a paper in a scientific journal. NOH & PHC represent not nutritionists, but doctors, including specialists in cardiology and diabetes, and lifestyle entrepreneurs. Some of the doctors are linked to diabetes research and the anti-sugar movement; a few are known as 'mavericks' though whether that's a good or a bad thing is not clear.
It is also true that conventional obesity advice is not working. 25% of British adults are clinically obese -- up 15% in the past 20 years. Type 2 diabetes - directly linked to obesity - is rising steadily. Doctors admit only 5% of the obese follow recommended advice. Perhaps public health officials fear the other 95% will use the NOH recommendations to binge.
Even if a binging epidemic were likely, questioning official advice is still reasonable, especially if making fat a 'demon' drives people away from foods that are actually good for you. And that is possible.
The fat-is-the-enemy brigade is under pressure. The World Health Organisation (WHO)'s new position on fat is that there is no convincing evidence that the total amount of it in our diets can cause cancer or heart disease. In America, even cholesterol has been downgraded as a risk in official guidance for heart disease.
In England in the past year, both Dr Mark Porter of the British Medical Association and Dr Michael Mosley, Times Columnist and TV medical presenter, have undergone low-carb, let's-not-worry-too-much-about-fats eating programmes. Their reports indicate loss of weight and reduced cholesterol levels.
In any rational setting, the NOH document and similar medical theories would be taken as a starting point for more scientific research.
The theory of 'good fats' goes like this: naturally occurring fats
 |
| Good Fats courtesy Dreamstime.com stock photo |
The media has taken the howling backlash in its stride; it reports but does not sensationalise it.
Public health officials seem stubbornly resistant to new ideas and appear to reflect only entrenched attitudes. One might think the policy and not the patients was first priority.
Sadly, the news that 'a computer glitch' was responsible for prescribing statins to patients who didn't need them also reflects this mindset. Some patients who refuse statins are browbeaten, blackmailed or threatened; there is little comfort in knowing they were probably right to follow their instincts.
The research in the Lancet, meanwhile, is not the first to question the idea on which most public health advice is based: if high salt is bad for you, then little salt is good. Other large-scale research has concluded too little salt can be harmful.
This blog was set up to 'help the NHS'. It believes people can improve their own health and ease the ageing process without great cost, helping to reduce medical intervention.
After recent developments in the NHS and reactions from public health officials, one wonders whether the NHS and public health officials don't need to improve themselves.
The answer to the question, 'how much should we trust public health advice?'
Listen, be aware but keep an open mind. Doctors genuinely want to make you better but are required to work within national guidelines.
People need to take more than a passing interest in health matters. Yes, lives are hectic. But start slowly; as years pass, knowledge and understanding accumulate.
So. Experiment; learn as much as you can from the responses of your own body; read as much as you can; question as much as you can. And don't give up trying to make you and your family healthy.
Note:
In UK public health, so-called 'mavericks' are not forgiven. John Yudkin, founder of the nutrition department at the University of London in the 1970's, linked sugar, not fat, to rising rates of heart disease and diabetes. His work was totally discredited and his career virtually ended. Only recently has his reputation been rehabilitated.
Update 7 June 2016: Two weeks after the NOH report was released, it was reported that one of the report's authors advises the Atkins diet company, though it apparently had no input into the report or provided any funds. NOH Board members then said they had not seen the document before it was released and some did not agree with it. The NOH did not retract the report; four of the seven board members quit.
See Also: Report on research into High Fat Diets and Weight Gain. Sarah Bosely, Health Editor, Guardian
SOURCES:
The Times: Food Fight
Ignore Advice
The Independent
The Mail
National Obesity Forum
Public Health Collaboration
BBC News: Health
The Telegraph
DISCLAIMER: The author accepts no liability for the consequences of any actions taken on the basis of the information provided. Any information not sourced to a second party is the copyright of the blogger.
No comments:
Post a Comment