Author Topic: Diet conundrum  (Read 2593 times)

GrumpyOldFart

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 690
Re: Diet conundrum
« Reply #15 on: Aug 18, 2018, 08:42:11 PM »
Have you checked the links that I offered?

Yes, I have Mike. 


Aseem Malhotra is offering good advice to counter the media’s interpretation of the Lancet paper. I don’t think he disagrees with the methodology or the results and quite correctly has looked as to why the results were as they were.


He has written elsewhere that “…the low carbohydrate consumption association with premature death also found in this latest Lancet study is likely a reflection of this particular group not consuming enough vegetables which are abundant in antioxidants and polyphenols, an organic chemical, that exert a beneficial effect in reducing inflammation within the body”. Further research will determine if this is the case.


I read the first few paragraphs of Angela Stanton’s blog but gave up when it became clear she does not even understand the methodology.


To be clear, what the Lancet paper shows is that for a very specific cohort, both high and low intakes of carbohydrates increased risk, and the point on the curve where risk was lowest was just under 50% energy from carbohydrates.


Michael Rolls

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 72679
Re: Diet conundrum
« Reply #16 on: Aug 19, 2018, 07:03:48 AM »
So I think that we are agreed that the headline assumption is simply a misinterpretation.
Mike
Thank you for the days, the days you gave me.
The older I get, the better I was!