headlines today "low fat diet kills"

[MikeyG]

Thanks, as well, for the discussion here, especially to bbq for all the resources, including the link to the full study.

The diet wars continue, it appears.

[Taggart]

The fat vs. carbs merry-go-round spins again

https://www.healthnewsreview.org/2017/0 ... -round-go/

Not a single reporter (and I’ll include myself here, since I missed this as well) brought up the fact that, although these results seem impressive at the population level, they are minuscule at the individual level. Larry Husten of the blog CardioBrief caught this and quoted one of the study authors — Andrew Mente PhD of McMaster University — as pointing out:

“The effects are modest effects, in the neighborhood of a 20% reduction in relative risk. So if the annual [absolute] risk of mortality is 1%, it would be reduced to 0.8%. At the individual level it is tiny. And nowhere near what you find for smoking and lung cancer — about 200 times smaller in fact.”

[colonyofcells]

Webinar of Dr Mcdougall posted on sep 8 about the pure study on fat vs carb:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Euoi7FFbG0k
or
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMq-YcoPY3U

[bbq]

Fatal flaw of the study was mentioned, they could only "afford to" (DUDE, they've got all the money in the world from Big Pharma) measure the dietary intakes of those people just ONCE and that's it:

http://youtu.be/gBnDftGy5ZE#t=480

The median follow-up could very well be 7.4 years, 17.4 years, or even 74 years. What's the difference when multiple sources of funding could "only" cough up the money for measuring ONCE?