Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 27

Thread: "Heart attack risk of low carb diets" - Daily Express (UK) page

  1. #1
    ajwhite's Avatar
    ajwhite is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Liverpool, UK
    Posts
    6

    "Heart attack risk of low carb diets" - Daily Express (UK)

    Primal Fuel
    Hi guys

    Thought you might be interested in the front page of one of the UK's main newspapers, the Daily Express, on Wednesday 27th June. The following was on the front page and it continued inside:

    "PEOPLE on extreme Atkins-style diets are putting themselves at risk of potentially fatal heart disease and strokes, experts warned yesterday.

    The controversial low carbohydrate-high protein eating plan is said to have dangerous long-term health effects.

    Cutting daily carbohydrate intake by just 20g, equivalent to a small bread roll, and increasing protein by 5g, or one boiled egg, increased the risk of cardiovascular disease by five per cent
    ."

    On page 4 it continued. To read the full article and the comments, check out this link.

    A friend who i was trying to sell the benefits of PB to, was intrigued but then read this article. She said i should read it because i "obviously don't understand the risks" i am taking.

    Although on closer reading, its about low carb / high protein (not just low carb, not PB) -taken to EXTREME - the headlines and the first page are alarmist and misleading. Thats enough to put off anyone who hears about PB, and has this article in mind - certainly the average Joe. People on first hearing about PB may well assume its an 'Atkins style' diet which is the target of the article - or at least a close relative diet... so articles like this could put them off looking into it deeper?

    My friend wouldn't listen to my protests that its nothing to do with PB. People absorb the headlines, subheaders, and 'shocker' opening statements, the rest gets lost or doesn't interest people. Like the 'extra egg = 5% more heart attack risk" - thats what they'll remember. Doh!

    The overall effect is misinformation.

    Anyway thought it was sad that CW articles like this, with the usual journalistic sensationalism / misrepresentation - would put someone off PB for good. So much so that she is genuinely worried about my health!!! (Like one study from the University of Athens should be taken as gospel.)

    Guess i better not tell her about the 2 eggs and 3 bacon i had for breakfast .
    Last edited by ajwhite; 06-28-2012 at 01:53 AM.

  2. #2
    peril's Avatar
    peril is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Sydney, NSW
    Posts
    2,679
    Article isn't even based on a study or research report. Just a bit of filler for the paper. Journalistic beatup
    Four years Primal with influences from Jaminet & Shanahan and a focus on being anti-inflammatory. Using Primal to treat CVD and prevent stents from blocking free of drugs.

    Eat creatures nose-to-tail (animal, fowl, fish, crustacea, molluscs), a large variety of vegetables (raw, cooked and fermented, including safe starches), dairy (cheese & yoghurt), occasional fruit, cocoa, turmeric & red wine

  3. #3
    chris meredith's Avatar
    chris meredith is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Stamford, UK
    Posts
    6
    Sorry to disagree, but the article is based on research published by two very well respected and independent German scientific institutions; however, what the journalist has done is read the abstract of the report, distort it and then sensationalise the distortion. This is pretty much standard practice in rags like the Express and the Daily Mail; there’s not a week goes by without a “eating chocolate gives you cancer” type scare-headline. The heavyweight papers like the Times, Guardian & Telegraph are nearly as bad. I guess journalists the world over are much the same.
    C.

  4. #4
    ajwhite's Avatar
    ajwhite is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Liverpool, UK
    Posts
    6
    Just noticed another thread which linked this report - here. Maybe better to go there if you want to comment as there is already a lot of comments about this article (and others).

  5. #5
    ToldUzo's Avatar
    ToldUzo is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    191
    Well, extremes are never healthy. Both physical and mental.
    What on earth?! Take a walk on the wild side.

  6. #6
    jimhensen's Avatar
    jimhensen is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    818
    I haven't read the study which inconveniently isn't linked (I HATE THAT) but this quote seems pretty interesting:

    “Low-carbohydrate, high-protein diets, used on a regular basis and without consideration of the nature of carbohydrates or the source of proteins, are associated with increased risk of cardiovascular disease.”

    So people that used a low carb high protein diet on a regular basis had this effect? Who goes on diets? Fat people and people that aren't in good shape. So I think this is the chicken or the egg argument...as in low carb doesn't cause you to have a heart attack, being more likely to have a heart attack causes you to go on a diet.

  7. #7
    Forgotmylastusername's Avatar
    Forgotmylastusername is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    947
    Cutting 20g of carbs off and replacing it with 5 grams of protein increases your risk of heart disease by 5% Lol, who seriously writes this stuff?

  8. #8
    jimhensen's Avatar
    jimhensen is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    818
    Quote Originally Posted by Forgotmylastusername View Post
    Cutting 20g of carbs off and replacing it with 5 grams of protein increases your risk of heart disease by 5% Lol, who seriously writes this stuff?
    The funniest part is a 5% increase CANNOT be statistically significant.

  9. #9
    Forgotmylastusername's Avatar
    Forgotmylastusername is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    947
    Quote Originally Posted by jimhensen View Post
    I haven't read the study which inconveniently isn't linked (I HATE THAT)
    That's the worst thing about these journalist articles. They don't even link their direct source of information which they base their articles on so that people can further investigate.

  10. #10
    Forgotmylastusername's Avatar
    Forgotmylastusername is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    947
    Quote Originally Posted by jimhensen View Post
    The funniest part is a 5% increase CANNOT be statistically significant.
    Lol. That's why I would like to read the actual study which led to her such intricate conclusions.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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