It's no coincidence that the vast influence of the multi-national corporations that produce and manufacture food products in this country have exercised their wealth and influence to pay for scientific studies, research, lobbying and extensive marketing to influence We the Sheeple into adopting dietary advice that is just as toxic to our bodies as is their propaganda regarding gender relations is to our families.
Blogger "agnostic" from Dusk in Autumn, has blogged as of late on the topics I've referenced before here regarding the low-fat/high-carb paradigm vs. the high fat, high protein/low carb diet that I believe is the optimal one for our human physiology. He recently started a new blog that dedicated solely to the topic of diet and nutrition, called Low Carb Art & Science.
His first posting "Did following the experts' diet advice make us any healthier?," offers a great timeline in seeing how the traditional American diet has been deliberately changed in the last half century, via the influence of the Agri-business, or BIG FOOD, industry and it's pernicious influence.
It all starts with shaping We the Sheeple's "Conventional Wisdom" about diet and nutrition...which makes us fooled into buying their products, mistakenly thinking their processed, manufactured junk is "healthy." This "conventional wisdom" gets propagated by "scientific studies" that get reported as proven facts...but when one reads the study itself, rather than the journalistic piece reporting on the study, one can see how the reporters conclusions don't really add up to the actual study...yet it's the reporters reported conclusions that in reality become the conventional wisdom.
First, the "News Report"
Animal fats linked to pancreatic cancer: Study
Researchers have linked high intake of fat from red meat and dairy products with increased risk of pancreatic cancer, in a study published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute.
Sounds like the conventional wisdom we hear all the time in our media, and based on the advertising of all the various food products in all of our stores, eh?
But re-read that opening statement a little more carefully...that word "linked."
What does that really mean?
Is it not the scientists first mission to determine whether or not we have correlation by coincidence, or directly attributable causation? Either it's proven, or it's not. "Linked" is just a way of making you THINK it's been proven.
However, if one reads the rest of the article with a critical, skeptical eye...
Pancreatic cancer is fatal in 95 per cent of cases, and smoking and obesity are among the known risk factors, but scientists at the National Cancer Institute in Bethesda, Maryland said that previous studies into the impact of fat intake on pancreatic cancer had proved inconclusive.
The authors used data collected by the National Institutes of Health-AARP Health Study to analyze the diets of 500,000 people who had completed food frequency questionnaires in 1995 and 1996.
Participants were then followed for an average of six years to track a number of health issues, including pancreatic cancer. Of those sampled, 1,337 were diagnosed with the cancer – 865 men and 472 women.
The authors wrote: “We observed positive associations between pancreatic cancer and intakes of total, saturated, and monounsaturated fat overall, particularly from red meat and dairy food sources.”
Food frequency questionnaires? That's IT?!?!? A research company tries to determine whether or not a widely consumed food (animal fat) causes cancer by using computer models to calculate probabilities based on people's self-reported questionnaires?
This is what we call "science?" I call it statistical manipulation to reach a pre-determined conclusion!
What happened to double-blind studies, using a control group and carefully observing the results to come to a reasonable scientific conclusion?
This is utter garbage! You're average person doesn't actually understand the difference between natural animal fats, hydrogenated animal fats, monosaturated, polyunsaturated and fully saturated fats.
Furthermore, many manufactured foods and fast food products will contain a variety of animal fats and vegetable fats. How the hell can they differentiate between them when the source of info is a QUESTIONNAIRE?!?!
Go look at typical brands of bread products in your grocery store...a good percentage of them will have paritally-hydrogenated (soybean) vegetable oil as an ingredient in your hamburger bun/hot dog bun/bread.
So if someone fills out their questionnaire that they ate hamburgers every single day for years...and they develop pancreatic cancer...how is the "scientists" supposed to ascertain whether or not the "animal fat" or the hydrogenated fats in the bread are the cause of the cancer?
Furthermore, studies on pubmed find that pancreatic problems associated with Diabetes are implicating daily refined sugar consumption as the primary culprit (Which is my belief probably the much more common denominator of pancreatic cancer than animal fats). Everytime you eat fast food, restaurant food, or convenience food, you are not just simply getting "animal fats." You are also eating polyunsaturated vegetable oils (usually rancid to boot), partially hydrogenated oils, as well as a host of laboratory created additives, preservatives and sweeteners.
Take your typical value meal at a hamburger fast food joint. It will contain saturated fats from the hamburger, partially-hydrogenated soy bean vegetable oil in the bun, rancid, poly-unsaturated vegetable oil for the deep fried french fries, not to mention copious quantities of corn syrup sweeteners and additives in the soda and condiments. If you are eating fast food, restaurant's meals, convenience food, etc., your meal will contain a variety of both animal and vegetable fats in it.
How the hell is a self-answer supplied questionnaire supposed to be able to adequately account for that?
It can't. Which is why the rest of the article is loaded with caveats and weasel-ly language.
They added: “We did not observe any consistent association with polyunsaturated or fat from plant food sources. Altogether, these results suggest a role for animal fat in pancreatic carcinogenesis.”
The reason for this could be connected to the role the pancreas plays in excreting enzymes that digest fat, they suggested. The authors also noted that studies have linked saturated fat consumption with insulin resistance, and that diabetes and insulin resistance are risk factors for pancreatic cancer.
However, an accompanying editorial questioned whether the increased incidence of the cancer could be reliably attributed to higher meat consumption, saying that “other dietary or lifestyle preferences associated with meat consumption” could also have a role.
No shit, Sherlock.
The editorial added that the study was “well-performed and a good addition to the understanding of pancreatic cancer.”
Source: Journal of the National Cancer Institute
This is how " dietary conventional wisdom" starts.
After bilge like this gets reported on the news, people everywhere get all concerned about that evil demon, ANIMAL FAT.
This infects We the Sheeple's subconscious, so that we walk through the grocery store and load up our carts with all of those highly manufactured and processed food products (not food, FOOD PRODUCTS...big difference!), all with the prominent marketing labels of NON-FAT...LOW-FAT...LITE...FAT FREE... and you think you're eating healthy!
After all, these manufactured products contain GRAINS, and grains are FIBER...and:
...everybody knows "A diets high in fruit, vegetables and fiber that also limit red meat consumption, such as the Mediterranean diet, have been linked with longer life and lower rates of heart disease."
This, folks, is the exact phrasing used by public service announcements on the radio and TV, by groups such as the AHA, ADA, USDA etc...and it's no accident that such a phrase was used almost verbatim in this "news report."
Who was it that said, "Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth..."
Fact of the matter is, if one looks at the source of this article, FOOD Navigator-USA.com, you will see an abundance of manufactured food product advertising and large, corporate agri-business companies logos and prominent products all over it.
It takes no stretch of the imagination to make the connection here:
The more BIG FOOD can make people think animal fats are bad for you, the more people will associate their NON FAT/LOW FAT/FAT FREE/LITE processed garbage as healthy food alternatives.