Mar 4, 2013 at 22:55:47
“I'm not going to go into the details of Katz's analysis of this study, but I wanted to point out that he always tries to portray himself as the faithful scientist above the fray.
His research is supported by such 'disinterested' observers of the sugar debate as Hershey Foods and Quaker Oats (producer of Captain Crunch cereal, with its parent being the Pepsi Corporation.) These are the corporations funding his 'research'.
And his NuVal effort is funded by supermarkets more interested in selling processed foods than healthy vegetables, meat and fish, and dairy products. And as such he has such products as whole milk and chicken breast rated 'less healthy' than the processed foods that support his income.”
Rob1964 on Mar 5, 2013 at 13:20:35
“That is very very scary.”
eLucida on Mar 5, 2013 at 11:00:30
“I ran into NuVal on the produce at my local supermarket last night.
Potatoes are 93 ("Heart Healthy!"), never mind that they are simply payloads of glucose.”
Sep 23, 2012 at 20:05:14
“This is funny. After decades of proclaiming that high-fat diets make you fat and that only a high-carb diet can help you stay lean, Ornish has finally admitted defeat. Now he's saying that even though his high-carb diet will make you fatter than a low-carb diet, the low-carb diet is still unhealthy.
Then he runs through his typical list of flawed studies and reasoning
- One that compares a group of people on his diet who undergo exercise, stress-management, and other services to the typical public (perhaps its the exercise and yoga, rather than the bean sprouts)
- Flawed observational studies that compare heavy meat-eaters over the past 20 years with vegetarians - the typical vegan yoga instructor cares more about their health than the chain-smoking red meat eater, so you can't assume its the fat level which produces those modest differences in mortality.
- Silly reasoning like "fat is denser in calories than carbs" without talking about the metabolic issues with carbs
I think Dean knows that his most of his advice will be shown to be wrong in the next few years”
robroy777 on Sep 24, 2012 at 08:13:55
“I wish he would stop attacking whole-food animal products. Animal fats from properly-raised animals (pasture-raised, grass-fed cattle, for example) are likely a healthy part of the human diet (e.g. CLA and Vit. K2 from grass-fed butter probably very healthy).
His references are all observational studies that are likely full of confounding differences b/w meat consumers and non-consumers that explain the very slight increased risk of death in the red meat group. These associations are not seen in European observational studies (see recent dairy fat systematic review and finding that high cheese consumption prevents diabetes).
And the Atkin's group in the Ludwig study had greater insulin sensitivity, a huge predictor of better metabolic health, than the other diets (as insulin resistance is the likely cause of many chronic diseases in humans), and the Atkin's CRP and cortisol were still in very healthy ranges.
His interpretation of the CRP/cortisol in the Atkin's is as biased as they come. Just b/c there's a statistically significant elevated level in Atkin's vs. low-GI/low-fat, does not mean it is clinically significant or shows an increased risk of heart disease.
This is an indication of tremendous bias and shows him to be a poor scientist with an axe to grind.
I don't have time to dig up sources now but will if asked.”
Aug 8, 2012 at 20:36:54
“This CSPI group really has a vendetta against Taubes. They have been advocating for the low-fat, low-salt, anti-meat diet for over 30 years now, and Taubes has demonstrated that the more recent science is showing that it is complete bs.
A fair review of the science on salt is at best inconclusive. Taubes didn't put Stamler's comments out of context - he said that Stamler said that the science was inconclusive but Stamler was still recommending that people with hypertension lower their salt intake (note: he didn't say that healthy people should lower their salt intake, which is what CSPI is advocating for). He's pointing out that the establishment has been recommending restricting salt intake based on inconclusive science.
Jacobson's critique of the meta-studies is similarly suspect. He's saying that if you exclude the studies that show that low-salt diets don't increase hypertension/heart-disease, then a meta-analysis will prove that a low-salt diet is the way to go.
CSPI is trying to justify the faulty advice that they've put out their over the last 30+ years. And they are actively trying to get the government to restrict chefs and food producers from adding salt to make food more appealing. Any chef will agree that you need salt to make delicious meals. I don't eat fast food or processed food, but it is irresponsible for CSPI to say that adding salt to fresh cooked vegetables, fish, eggs, meat is bad for your health.”
Alvarask on Aug 10, 2012 at 00:14:57
“Salt is ESSENTIAL for life. Without it we die. MANY people are suffering from a sodium deficiency. Those who get too much sodium tend to get if from processed foods and the sodium is not a natural, high quality form. I love salt, as humans and animals do, and because I don't eat processed foods as a rule, I struggle to get anywhere neat 2 grams (2,000 mgs) of salt into me in a day. I loved your comment. Fanned and Faved!”
Feb 11, 2012 at 13:39:08
“I don't know how you could claim that your Nuval system is "independent from industry and politics" when you and your companies accept funding from candy companies (Hershey), cereal manufacturers (Nature’s Path, Quaker Oats), diet pill and supplement manufacturers (Natural Factors, Juice Plus+, Nutrition 21), soybean processors (Central Soya Company) and processed food distributors (Topco Inc.) . And with all of the government funding you receive, its unlikely that you would ever stray from the conventional wisdom spouted by the USDA (which is a shill for wheat/corn/soybean industries).
You brag in your bio about the $30million you received from these government and industry sources and then claim to be independent of industry and politics??? Ha!”
Feb 9, 2012 at 22:46:23
“Congrats Tyke - I'm 42 and went from 227->190 and waist 40->35 doing the same thing (would like to get down another 7-8 pounds though :)
Katz won't promote such an approach (lose the carbs and sugar) as long he's paid by the processed food industry and government to say that carbs/sugar aren't so bad as long as you consume them in moderation.”
Feb 9, 2012 at 22:26:25
“Well as long as Katz receives money from Quaker Oats and Nature's Path cereal, it's unlikely that he will mention that.
He would rather promote the Eli Lilly drugs that address these problems (guess what, he receives money from Eli Lilly too!)”
Canuck1950 on Feb 10, 2012 at 12:20:55
“Thank you so much for bringing this conflict of interest to light. It helps me understand why I often find myself butting heads with a colleague who should be capable of understanding the science supporting carbohydrate restricted diets.”
Feb 9, 2012 at 22:21:27
“Katz isn't going to stand up to anybody as long as Hershey Foods, cereal Manufacturers, and other processed food industries continue to pay him. Similarly, he knows that if he wants to continue to receive government money, he can't criticize too harshly the products of the corn/wheat/soybean industries as the government supports them (high fructose corn syrup, soybean oil, flour - did you ever wonder why a twinkee is so inexpensive compared to steak and salad?)”
Feb 9, 2012 at 22:09:08
“Thanks - not sure if 'formal' training would be helpful as it just might reinforce the traditional wisdom.
I agree that its a pity that HuffPost publishes opinion from an individual with so many links to industry interests. I wouldn't think they would publish articles on cancer prevention research from a doctor/scientist who takes his funding from Phillip Morris.
It's also interesting how he brags that he has secured $30million in funding in his bio - I have no idea how much of that money Katz got from these processed food industries - another aspect to think about is that the government money he receives (from CDC and the other government agencies that he brags about). As the government spends billions on supporting the corn, wheat, and soybean industries, they're unlikely to support someone who does research that may point out the dangers in the consumption of HFCS, corn/soybean oil, and grains. Instead, they give money to Katz to tell people that they are not so bad as long as you don't eat too much and hit the gym every day.”
Feb 8, 2012 at 20:46:39
“One has to question Dr. Katz’s motives. His “Turn The Tide” foundation’s lead sponsor is Hershey Foods. Is it a surprise that he doesn’t want any restrictions on sweets?
He supports the conventional wisdom regarding obesity. From his “Turn The Tide” website: “Obesity is fundamentally simple. We gain weight when too many calories in exceed too few calories out”. Without going into all of the reasons why this is wrong (read Taubes and Lustig, each of whom obliterate this false hypothesis), this message absolves Katz’s corporate benefactors, which is why they give him money to spout this nonsense.
What he is saying is that candy, soft drinks, fruit juice, refined grains, and other processed and carbo-loaded foods aren’t the problem – obese people are the problem because they eat too much of it and don’t exercise enough. Katz surely knows that if people ate fish, meat, eggs, olive oil and butter, cheese, leafy and non-starchy vegetables, they could eat as much as they want and maintain a healthy weight. But I guess its more lucrative to take money from candy companies (Hershey), cereal manufacturers (Nature’s Path, Quaker Oats), diet pill and supplement manufacturers (Natural Factors, Juice Plus+, Nutrition 21), soybean processors (Central Soya Company) and processed food distributors (Topco Inc.).
All of those companies listed above are sponsors for his research groups and various business activities – I found all of this information from the links that Dr. Katz himself provided in his article.”
DrP on Feb 9, 2012 at 22:21:22
“Thanks for sharing this. I figured there must be a monetary incentive for those who continue to ignore the science and promote low-fat diets.”
dukevanwillem on Feb 9, 2012 at 16:27:44
“TinaFxyz, you have hit the nail on the head. There seems to be no lack of people who are reasonably well-informed (here I include Katz, who as an MD presumably has received no formal training in nutrition) but use that knowledge to promote industry interests. Yet there are also independent voices, equally well-informed... it's a pity HuffPost chooses to publish the former. Hey, why don't you start your own blog.”
“Gazans aren't being frozen or starved by Israelis. I think that Hamas leadership just has no idea how to accomplish anything other than to send their children to be blown up as suicide bombers or to prompt Israelis to blow up civilians by placing their bomb factories next to nursery schools.
To address K9Bigdogs email more directly - I suggest the Palestinians go 6 months without bombing civilian's indiscrimantly, sending their children out as suicide bombers, and electing as their leaders those whose stated goal is the destruction of Israel. If they did that, I think they would be in much better shape.”
“If you think Hillary and Barack are going to do anything different in this situation to George/Condi, you are crazy.
At the end of the day, even most Arabs know that Hamas are a bunch of barbarians. Although they're all proclaiming their outrage, none of them care about the "Palestian's" suffering.
If in fact Barack/Hillary are going to take a vastly different approach to the Palestian situation, the most likely result will be a couple of million dead Arabs and Israelis (which I hope does not occur)”
bosunj on Jan 2, 2009 at 23:01:38
“Sad. More right wing silliness and Amerikan exceptionalism. Grow up!”