crphilipp

Since you are attacking me and not what I said, can I take there is no fault with my statement?

You need to remember that a lot of the people like Alice H. Lichtenstein are heavily invested in the current thoughts on nutrition. I can not stress enough that "The Big Fat Surprise" is very informative about the current state of our nutrition policies here in the United States (and this leaks out of our country into many others that follow it by default). Just watch that "The Real Food Politics" video (see above).

Here is another article that specifically addresses this study,

http://www.zoeharcombe.com/2018/08/low-moderate-or-high-carb...

Zoe Harcombe takes a hard look at this study, and there are so many problems with this study, I am amazed that it was published, but wait, I would take a look at this,

https://twitter.com/WGyogaSC/status/1031258976560852992

This was a "paid to publish" study.

I am just saying that when you make these kinds of statements to support your arguments, you are not doing yourself any favors. It is the sign of a weak argument. Am I supposed to assume that because Nina is a woman and journalist that she is a liar? I find these type of statements very sexist. As for who noticed, I did.

I am going to give you another video, you really should watch it.

https://youtu.be/Zc_e5ME_5Cg

Certainly, Olive Oil has been around for a very long time, it wasn't until the 20th century that it became a major food product. Olive Oil was more valued for cosmetics, medicine, and in lamps. Actually, the original Olympic torch burned olive oil. Also, note that Olives are actually a fruit, but I understand why you bring it up as an example.

I am talking about those other vegetable oils, like grapeseed oil, canola oil, sunflower oil, cottonseed oil. Do you remember Crisco short, this was a new product produced from cottonseed oil which had been hydrogenated though intensive industrial processes and sold as a cheaper alternative to the normal saturated fats used as the time.

I hope you actually look at the links and videos I put up in my previous comment. Your ad hominem attacks against Nina Teicholz, like "I wouldn't trust that lady to tell me what to eat" and "she's a journalist" don't go unnoticed.

I also want to point out her BMJ article was not retracted. The petition signed by 180 scientists was found to be without merit. I do find it telling you bring up the petition, yet you fail to say that article was not retracted.

I have read her book, and it is fascinating. Go ahead and make your assumptions about her motives, but I believe you are doing yourself a disservice. Before the 20th century, we ate a lot of saturated fats, and it wasn't until the creation of vegetable oils (which are made through extensive industrial processes), was there a move to start restricting saturated fat. The current low-fat diet is an experiment that has America has been on for forty some years. Please take a look at this.

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/hsph-in-the-news/low-fat-d...

And in general, the American population has been following this diet, and we are fatter than ever before, suffering from Type 2 Diabetes. And the "science" behind our current health policy is driven by organizations like the American Soybean Asociation who are more concerned with making money and less on science. And when you start talking about money, the science research will follow the money, because the scientists need to eat.

Please take a look at this videos,

https://youtu.be/Q2UnOryQiIY https://youtu.be/7Lww5WH7INI

I would read her book before you pass judgment.