The Carb-Sane Asylum

Hello World .. and anyone still reading this blog!! Yes, it's been forever.  I've been generally pretty well.  Knocking about on social media (Facebook and some Twitter) ... occasionally getting the urge to blog, write something, get to 80% then lose the mojo.   What has turned into a long hiatus wasn't planned, but it happened due to running out of steam and still seeing the same old, same old.  I may or may not discuss more at some point, but if I don't just jump back in and blog, I probably never will again! And so, with that said ... 𐩘𐩘𐩘𐩘𐩘𐩘𐩘𐩘𐩘𐩘𐩘 The following editorial in JAMA has been making the rounds on my Facebook feed, and I have a bit of a different take and reaction to it ... one that comes from roughly a decade now of delving into dietary recommendations wars from where I "stand". The Editorial:   Backlash Over Meat Dietary Recommendations Raises Questions About Corporate Ties to Nutrition Scienti...

Summary: In the Women's Health Initiative, a 2017 analysis of the energy density of baseline diets, stratified to quintiles, revealed several correlative components of an energy dense diet (comparing the top quintile (Q5) to the bottom (Q1).  The energy density, in kcal/gram of food, nearly doubled in Q5 vs. Q1 corresponding to a nearly 50% increase in caloric intake.  The dietary components correlating with this are: Fat:  Fat content is by far and away the greatest contributing factor to consuming an energy dense diet.   Absolute intake more than doubled (2.5X) from Q1 to Q5, and comprised roughly 90% of the increased caloric intake. Animal Protein:  As protein intake from plant sources remained relatively constant, animal protein intake increased by 40% resulting in an increase in total protein of 25%.  Therefore animal foods are a considerable contributor to increased energy density of the diet. Added Sugars:  Added sugar comprised 11...

I n our current times of rising obesity and chronic disease rates in the developed world (and spreading globally), I see a handful of "usual suspects" upon which the phenomenon is blamed: The food industries Governments and guidelines The entertainment industries  The general health and beauty industries The diet and fitness industries  By far and away, in no particular order, the two at the top of the list shoulder most of the blame.  You know the story by now.  Ancel Keys .... McGovern Committee ... Low fat dietary guidelines ... we got fat because CARBS and INSULIN!!!

Let me preface this post by saying I'm a bit time constrained, and computer issues have made my life miserable these past few days.   However a new article from the PURE study was recently published in Lancet, and I wish to add some limited commentary to the mix.   First things first, the links: Associations of fats and carbohydrate intake with cardiovascular disease and mortality in 18 countries from five continents (PURE): a prospective cohort study The first study:   The Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE) study: Examining the impact of societal influences on chronic noncommunicable diseases in low-, middle-, and high-income countries Secondly, I've tweeted these links out.  Commentary by others: Kevin Klatt:   On PURE Nutrition Wonk:   Research Review The 5 Continent (PURE) Study: A Prospective Cohort Study And now for my favorite headline!

I interrupt my usual stream of non-blogging for this general "off topic" post.   The Offending Tweet

BUMP! In working on a follow-up to  The Slimey Truth About Sugar Slammers ~ Links & Background , I've received a few tweets that reminded me of this post from almost exactly a year ago.   Eventually we got answers to the questions below, and those will be discussed in the follow-up.  People are going bonkers over a pittance split between three scientists 50 years ago who published an article in a *professional* *peer-review* journal.  This was done at a time when such journals would publish articles countering and debating the findings of previous articles.  So in the intervening years it is the sugar industry that is solely responsible for confusing people?  I am not carrying water for that or any industry here, but I don't think so! This article came before some answers were unearthed by yours truly in  Nina Teicholz, The BMJ, The Nutrition Coalition and nutrition science's George Soros: The Laura and John Arnold Foundation .  Spe...

This was initially going to be a monster post, but I'm still struggling to organize it all!  The things uncovered at every turn last week and continuing through this one are astounding, and the hypocrisy of those touting this as some "smoking gun" of great importance is seemingly boundless.  This was all still swirling in my head when I went on Angelo Coppola's Latest in Paleo podcast ... in retrospect not a good idea when I'm wound up! I decided to break this in two to publish something up.  This installment will be linking to background to get something that blogging rock rolling on this.  Unless you've been living under a rock, this happened in the JAMA Internal Medicine : Sugar Industry and Coronary Heart Disease Research A Historical Analysis of Internal Industry Documents Cristin E. Kearns, DDS, MBA 1,2 ; Laura A. Schmidt, PhD , MSW, MPH 1,3,4 ; Stanton A. Glantz, PhD 1,5,6,7,8

Last Friday (Sept. 16, 2016 for those who may stumble upon this in the future), I had the pleasure of being a guest on  Angelo Coppola's Latest in Paleo podcast .    I had/have a post on the main topic discussed -- the *SMOKING GUN* that the sugar industry funded a study 50 years ago, and *O*M*G* -- in the works, and was not even half done by the time recording came around.  I was also trying to get in the last bit of summer.   This link  will go live when that post is finally published (hopefully later today or tonight):   The Slimey Truth About Sugar Slammers I have not had a chance to listen yet, so hopefully this isn't even necessary.  But, due to my passion on the topic and being mid blogging swirl, I'm sure I was quite animated at times.  It was a new format for Angelo's podcast, and for me as a guest as well.   I may well have talked over the other guest, Meredith Rhodes (a.k.a The Forward Health Coach; Forward Health C...

Hey all!  Last week I had the pleasure of being a guest on two podcasts.  Will let you know about the second one when it comes out, but for now, I was on the Revolutionary You podcast with Jason Leenaarts.  We chatted about all things carbohydrates and a bit of other stuff.   I met Jason through the fitness peeps I hang out with on Facebook, and actually had a chance to meet him in person at his studio in the Cleveland area a few weeks back.   Just a heads up that the part about medium chain fatty acids was edited together nicely by Jason, but sounds a bit choppy because my headset cut out in the middle of the first response.  So I wasn't sure exactly where it happened, tried to repeat some of it, and got my words mixed up.  When you consume a fat like coconut oil, with a lot of medium chain fatty acids, those dietary fats are preferentially burned as they are not usually incorporated into chylomicrons   (12C lauric is somewhat of a...

A bit of a random thought post ... one I meant to make at the time, but got distracted.  I've talked a lot about the USDA Food Pyramid, and less so about My Plate, both of which are intended to "translate" dietary recommendations to a visual form.  In this regard, My Plate is a great improvement, but still lacking.   I don't wish to rehash the whole guidelines again in this post, but I believe if certain foods were "properly" classified -- e.g.  potatoes and corn grouped with the grains/starches -- the recommendations are hardly radical.  If Americans actually followed them as intended, we wouldn't be in this pickle, but we don't, and we are. Here is the original food pyramid

It seems crusading editor Fiona Godlee's BMJ is out front again with another sensationalism-over-science "study": Re-evaluation of the traditional diet-heart hypothesis: analysis of recovered data from Minnesota Coronary Experiment (1968-73) . This is spawning the predictable press coverage, such as   This study 40 years ago could have reshaped the American diet. But it was never fully published. Firstly, the idea that any single RCT would change history -- given that the likes of Nina Teicholz, Zoe Harcombe and others have drilled into us the fact that RCTs in this area were scarce (and will remain so) -- truly does border on the pathological at this point.    An appropriate RCT, of adequate size and duration, conducted with suitable compliance and verification, could conceivably turn any number of hypotheses on their heads.   But such a trial would be next-to-impossible.  Besides, even if this RCT-to-end-all-RCTs-&-nutritional-unknowns were t...

An interesting exchange including yours truly occurred on Twitter this past week.   It was between a writer at National Review Online, Julie Kelly, and myself.  Subject:   Down with Dissenters! Elite Food Activists Disinvite a Meat Advocate from a Food-Policy Conference  and Nina Teicholz, the disinvitee.

Politics swirled this week, and as a scientist I wept.    Much more to come here, check out recent posts if you missed them!   As billionaire pescatarians Laura and John Arnold   bankroll meat industry spokesperson  Nina Teicholz via their lobbying 501(c)s Action Now Initiative & Nutrition Coalition  it is easy to lose sight of the actual nutrition surveys and science we are talking about. The hand-wringing, panty bunching, and other various "ings" going on over the impending issue of the 2015 Dietary Guidelines is almost assuredly not about the scientific rigor of the process or the guidelines themselves.  Are they perfect?  No.  Are they really all that radical or far off from what would be healthful eating, on a population-wide basis, for the United States of America?  Again, no.   Setting aside the particular foods themselves for the time being, the main argument is that this grand low-fat experiment has been a g...

source:   Politico I have had several conversations since I wrote  Nina Teicholz Reports in the British Medical Journal ~ The Conflicts & Funding  and a petition to editors at The BMJ .  I have some of my answers, most of which were not provided to me in the interests of the same transparency demanded of others by the players themselves -- Nina Teicholz, The BMJ  and The Laura and John Arnold Foundation.  Details to follow.  First, some personal notes, an apology, and why the George Soros nod.  Then the goods insofar as I have them.

ORIGINAL PUBLISH DATE:  October 3, 2015  This post will probably repeat some things I've said before.  But in light of recent events, and with controversy over the US 2015 Dietary Guidelines reaching fever pitch, I wanted to collect them in a semi-coherent summarized fashion.   Mostly I want to discuss the role of governments and industries in the evolution of what we know today as a science.  In many ways, a look back at the early Twentieth Century demonstrates how the more things change the more they stay the same.   Are we doomed to repeat past mistakes in the Twenty-First?

IMPORTANT UPDATE 10/8/2015:   http://carbsanity.blogspot.com/2015/10/nina-teicholz-bmj-nutrition-coalition.html Dear Readers,  Won't you please join me in calling for The BMJ to retract The scientific report guiding the US dietary guidelines: it scientific? by Nina Teicholz. This petition is based heavily on concerns raised in my recent post:   Nina Teicholz Reports in the British Medical Journal ~ The Conflicts & Funding . Also, I would greatly appreciate your sharing this petition in any way you feel is appropriate.  Here is a short link: http://tinyurl.com/BMJTeicholzPetition If you have any reservations about signing yourself, consider contacting Editor in chief Fiona Godlee and/or Head of investigations and features Rebecca Coombes directly.  Thank You! Call for The BMJ to retract Teicholz article on Dietary Guidelines Committee and Science

Just a listing of all posts with significant content related directly to her writing or other statements.  It is my hope that I can add small descriptions of each post, but I wanted to put relevant links in one place so as to be able to link to it in the Change.org petition I am setting up for the recent BMJ article.   Ladies and Gentlemen I present .... The new Gary Taubes. Nina Teicholz  Book Review ~ Big Fat Surprise by Nina Teicholz No Big Surprise ... A Compendium of Errata Etc. from The Big Fat Surprise by Nina Teicholz Quotable Quotes: Tei¢holz and Taube$ Nina Tei¢holz, Shai'ster Series:   Posts discussing Teicholz's downplaying of other research while holding the 2008 Israeli DIRECT study led by Shai as a definitive work establishing the superiority of high fat diets. Part I: The Diets of Shai et.al. and Extrapolating from Weight Loss Studies Part II: Applicability of RCTs to the General Population Part III: Well Implemented Cl...

A quick post.  Sweden has released their latest version of their Dietary Guidelines .  I think Andreas Eenfeldt must be busting all manner of guts by now!!  This includes an activity/lifestyle component, but the recommendations are shocking!   There's no paleo, no low carb.  Two screenshots.

Blogstress Note:  This post has been in the draft bin for some time, most of it written very shortly after the JAMA article that sparked it.  As you'll see, it's more ranty than usual ;-)   I thought about toning it down or adding to it from the NYT editorial, but have just gotten too busy.  So I'm publishing it up -- as is -- before it exceeds its best-if-blogged-by date by too much!  There's probably some repetition with the Percentages post published up in the interim.  Please forgive typos, dropped sentences, incomplete thoughts, etc.  Dunno how many there may be, so here goes ... Let's Do Away With The Dietary Guidelines   The true cause of the obesity epidemic! ... if this is what it takes to save me from being bombarded with one more idiotic editorial in a peer review journal -- like the recent one in JAMA by Dariush Mozaffarian MD,DrPH and David S. Ludwig MD,PhD -- I'm jumping on board.  Oh!!  And this rank stupi...