Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Another junk "study" page

  1. #1
    Lewis's Avatar
    Lewis is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    2,492

    Another junk "study"

    I saw the headline in huge bold type "Eat less meat to lose weight" on a copy of a tabloid newspaper a man was reading at the bus-stop.

    Sure enough here we are:

    Keen meat-eaters were found to gain far more weight than those who had less meat in their diet - even when they consumed the same number of calories.

    The findings suggest that people should eat less meat to stay healthy ...

    This contradicts the claims of many celebrity-endorsed diets ...
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti....html?ITO=1490

    Thank you, the gutter press, and Imperial College at the University of London, under whose name this obviously flawed study apparently comes out.

  2. #2
    breadsauce's Avatar
    breadsauce is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Sussex
    Posts
    2,194
    Yes, I saw this headline too. How can they propagate such nonsense??!!

  3. #3
    geekgrrl's Avatar
    geekgrrl is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    427
    what a load of bollocks. They created this pearl of wisdom from a couple of questionnaires! Even worse than your standard epidemiology.

  4. #4
    Chefgerry's Avatar
    Chefgerry is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    In the frozen North
    Posts
    340
    Any study, not just this one holds no credibility whatsoever when self reporting of food intake is their only way of knowing how many calories someone ate. There's a lot of dietary guru's out there that have relied on these type of studies to prove their own hypothesis, so I guess it's successful for selling books and obviously it makes for more sensational newspaper headlines.....hey if calories don't count, then anything is up for negotiation as far as weight gain and loss is concerned........

  5. #5
    Ernst's Avatar
    Ernst is offline Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    California
    Posts
    72
    Cmon guys, we all know the news is true and the guys with the coats always know what they are talking about!

    Or maybe its the people with the money

  6. #6
    Lewis's Avatar
    Lewis is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    2,492
    Quote Originally Posted by Ernst View Post
    Cmon guys, we all know the news is true and the guys with the coats always know what they are talking about!

    Or maybe its the people with the money
    Both cynical but accurate observations.

    As I read this the "Sorry Dr Atkins" line and the drivel about "celebrity-endorsed diets" - indeed, the sarcastic tone in general - is the newspaper's unique contribution to the debate. As if celebrities haven't endorsed every kind of diet! Gwyneth Paltrow is who is now in the early stages of osteoporosis in her thirties was reported recently to have put herself in that position by eating:

    ... a ... diet which concentrates on vegetables, pulses, soup and fish.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...eoporosis.html

    However, in my view the newspaper actually succeeded quite well in throwing question on the "study" by mentioning the Atkins Diet. IIRC, Mary Enig and Sally Fallon described Dr Atkins as the "grinning cheshire cat" that promoters of low-fat diets would like to forget. It's not that the Atkins Diets (apparently, there are several versions) are particularly good all things considered, but their very success - they have helped vast numbers of people to lose weight - casts so much doubt on the claims emanating from some dietary (and governmental) bodies as to be grossly uncomfortable for said bodies' claims.

    The talkback section of the newspaper is now full of Atkins Dieters saying, How can these claims by London University be true, since I know from personal experience how much weight I've lost on Atkins?

    I don't know what's behind this "study". I'd like to. It could be that the "researchers" simply failed to cross-check everything they should have. But I think one has to get suspicious of this kind of thing by now, and conclude that they may have "found" what they set out to "find". Why aren't "researchers" curious about the fact that the Atkins diet does work? You'd think a scientist working in the nutritional field would really want to get to the bottom of that. And why finger meat specifically? You might expect them to make claims about "high-fat products, such as meat". But specifically meat? ...

    The study seems to utilize data (good or bad) collected under a scheme called EPIC:

    http://epic.iarc.fr/

    It appears to be funded by the EU. I guess it's possible the EU wants results favourable to European agribusiness to emerge from the study.

    Alternatively, one wonders, Is someone in a senior position at Imperial College a vegetarian? We know now how Ancel Keys fudged his data in order to advance what appears to be a vegetarian agenda. Maybe he wouldn't be the only one.

    I think squeamishness - which is basically what vegetarianism comes down to - is a kind of unfortunate fixture of some modern somewhat decadent societies that are divorced from nature. Propaganda about what people should eat that's based covertly but at bottom on the recommender's squeamishness could - already is - having a disastrous effect on the health both of adults and even more disturbingly on the health of the next generation.

  7. #7
    nocturnalmama's Avatar
    nocturnalmama is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    180
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewis View Post
    I think squeamishness - which is basically what vegetarianism comes down to - is a kind of unfortunate fixture of some modern somewhat decadent societies that are divorced from nature. Propaganda about what people should eat that's based covertly but at bottom on the recommender's squeamishness could - already is - having a disastrous effect on the health both of adults and even more disturbingly on the health of the next generation.
    awesome.

    true. I agree that in order for a study like this to be published by a major news outlet- there has to be a motive (there's always a motive). I'd agree its in defense of grain/agriculture.
    Robin
    ~primal mama to 3~

  8. #8
    chasbuddy's Avatar
    chasbuddy is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    956
    Primal Blueprint Expert Certification
    In any series of scribblings like this one has to follow the money. The money in this case is in the food industry which survives and flourishes on huge "margins" by promoting high margin food over that of low margin food. Meat provides less margin hence "lets promote" the other choice-high margin or carbo's and their derivatives. The press is mearly complicit in the selling of this garbage.

    This is war. The press is shaping the battlefield.

    The use of the press is not restricted to food and industry. If you are not reading alternative press you are not informed.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •