Latest Medical Mea Culpa: Carbs Kill

Pseudoscience, Science

Scientists are reluctantly, if slowly, arriving at the following conclusion: Carbs kill. The evidence is hard to refute. (Karen De Coster was right, warning way back about “Frankenfoods and The Government’s Fraudulent Food Pyramid.” ) The latest medical mea culpa—from Cambridge University, no less—is summarized by Dr. Barbara H. Roberts at The Daily Beast:

… There are many other recognized risk factors the the American Heart Association ignored, including blood sugar level, low “good” (HDL) cholesterol, insulin levels, and body weight—all of these are influenced by diet.

In fact, most people who have heart attacks don’t have elevations in bad cholesterol. They are much more likely to have metabolic syndrome—a condition that puts you at high risk for diabetes and heart disease. Metabolic syndrome is defined when you have three of the following: high triglycerides (blood fats), high blood sugar, high blood pressure, low “good” cholesterol (HDL-C), and a large abdomen measurement (abdominal obesity).

Interestingly enough, blood triglycerides do not go up with eating fat—they go up if you eat a diet high in processed grains, starches, and sugar. Unfortunately for the proponents of high-carbohydrate diets, high blood triglycerides are a major risk factor for heart disease. In addition, low fat/high carb diets lower protective “good” cholesterol and raise insulin. These diets are implicated in the development of diabetes, which is a potent risk factor for developing heart disease.

The writers of the 2013 statin guidelines based their recommendations on studies that looked at the reduction in the risk of events like heart attacks in people treated with statins, compared to people on a placebo. The AHA dietary guidelines do not cite any diet studies that looked at whether following a specific diet lowered the risk of developing cardiac events—yet they are giving dietary advice. Why?

There might be two plausible reasons. One is the AHA’s moneymaking “Heart Check Program.” The second is the conflict of interest (and curious beliefs) of Robert Eckel—the co-chair of the panel that wrote the guidelines.

The AHA introduced the Heart Check Program in 1995 and it has been quite the moneymaker, as the AHA sells the Heart Check stamp-of-approval to food manufacturers. Food companies shell out between $1,000 and $7,500 to be certified by the Heart Check Program—and then there are yearly renewal fees. The program currently endorses 889 foods as “heart-healthy.”

And the Heart Check Program is not the only way the AHA benefits from Big Food companies. In their annual report for 2012-2013, the AHA lists among its lifetime donors of $1 million or more Conagra, Quaker Oats, and Campbell Soups, among others.

Forty-five percent of these “heart healthy” foods—over 400 of them—are meat; 92 are processed meats—which have been shown to have either neutral or negative effects on heart health.

Even more problematic are the foods containing added sugar. The AHA recommends that women consume less than 6 teaspoons (100 calories) of sugar a day and less than 9 teaspoons (150 calories) for men. Yet there are items that get the nod of approval from the Heart Check program despite being near or at the sugar limit, like Bruce’s Yams Candied Sweet Potatoes and Healthy Choice Salisbury Steak. Indeed, until 2010, the Heart Check imprimatur was stamped on a drink called Chocolate Moose Attack, which contained more sugar per ounce than regular Pepsi.

And until this year, Heart Check approved many foods with trans-fats, which raise bad cholesterol and lower good cholesterol, among other deleterious effects on health, like increasing inflammation and the laying down of calcium in arteries.

Like the dietary guidelines, the AHA Heart Check Program appears to address only the effect of foods on cholesterol level and blood pressure. Meanwhile, since the 1970s, our yearly sugar consumption has skyrocketed along with the incidence of diabetes and obesity. …”

MORE.

UPDATED: Play Cops and Robbers In The US & We’ll Kill Ya

Europe, GUNS, Individual Rights, Private Property

The German consulate is demanding justice for seventeen-year-old Diren Dede, an exchange student who was shot dead by an American homeowner while burglarizing the Montana man’s garage. The alarm went off and so did a shot gun. Celal Dede, the dead boy’s dad, seen here weeping over a coffin draped in Arabic-etched fabric, declared: “America cannot continue to play cowboy.”

Really? And what was Dede junior playing at? It’s different here in the U.S. In places like the “Big Sky Country,” a man can still defend his castle. If you want to play cops and robbers, go to D.C., where residents are more likely to enjoy playing dead.

Note how the reporters have criminalized the homeowner, Markus Kaarma, and are making an effort to portray him as a stoned dope-head.

It’s very sad. A boy died. However, it’s also quite clear who here committed trespass.

UPDATE (5/21): Myron Pauli on Facebook:

“Notice the prosecutor already poisoning the public [jury pool] but spreading unproven accusations about the homeowner in the media. This is the Nifongian Lynch Mob mentality of those who should be dedicated to serve the cause of justice and not just make notches in some sort of victory belt. Personally, I am loathe to make any definitive judgements based on leaked sound-bites but the general concept of the sovereignty of private property is a sacred value. …
As for Germany lecturing America on morals and private property, I found out just yesterday that while my granduncle Lt. Julius Pascheles died in 1917 fighting FOR Germany, his widow, her parents, and all her nieces and nephews were murdered BY Germany – – – of course, they all might have just taken a spaceship to Neptune as part of a Jewish plot to extort money from Germany if you happen to be an 8th grader in California doing an assignment on whether there was a Holocaust (a new low in “public education” in America).”

‘Disengaged’ Is The New Dumb

Barack Obama, English, Political Correctness

President Obama learns from the media what he should already know. Bill O’Reilly wanted to know “why come” (as they say in Idiocracy English, which approximates Bill’s English tutorials). So he asked bobble-head Kirstin Powers to help him understand. She replied: “Obama’s disengaged.”

Is “disengaged” the new dumb? I need a guide to PC.

Condemned For The Company He Keeps

Free Speech, Private Property, Race, Racism, South-Africa

You can read my interview with Dan Roodt now on Quarterly Review, to which I contribute.

At least 2 publications that carry this column chose not to publish the Roodt interview. That’s perfectly fine; it’s the prerogative of private property. The reason given by one fine outlet (and these are all fine people) was that Roodt, it seems, has written for American Renaissance and it has been alleged that he has given a talk to a Nazi organization in Sweden.

I have no idea about these associations. My reply echoes my position: I generally follow the veracity of what a person says, not who he hangs with. Policed political correctness often pushes desperate people into dubious company. And Roodt is a man desperate to save his people. (Or perhaps whites are not permitted to belong?)

This is not to say that Jared Taylor is “dubious”; only that he has been marginalized as such. If you read Mr. Taylor’s last book, it is straight-forward, good, shoe-leather journalism. Other than the title, there is not much that is radical about it. For this reason, Taylor’s teaser of a title was, in my opinion, a mistake.