Three Whole-Grain Portions Daily May Lower Cardiovascular Risk

Yeah--Right!
    This one's a beaut.

" Daily consumption of 3 portions of whole-grain foods (WGF) is linked to lower cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk in healthy, middle-aged people mainly by lowering blood pressure (BP), according to the results of a randomized controlled dietary trial reported in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. (Am J Clin Nutr. 2010;92:733-740)


Given the role that fiber plays in slowing down the digestion of carbohydrates, everything these folk found can be explained by lowered blood glucose levels. Here's where it gets really entertaining:


"Although the mechanisms by which WGFs decrease BP remain unclear, our findings have important public health implications and provide a sound scientific basis for advising the daily consumption of 3 servings of WGF to combat CVD."


In fact, what they found was a statistical clue to do some science. They admit that the science eludes them and they can't figure out why WGF loading would lower BP.  Nor do they seem disposed to look for the science or consider the possibility that their assumptions are flawed.
    Another indicator of the shortage of three-digit IQs in the nutritional sciences.

The Amazing Dr. Tai

If this weren't so sad it would be funny. Check out this American Diabetes Association journal article:
http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/17/2/152.abstract.
    On the way to "a mathematical model for the determination of total areas under curves," Dr. Tai believes he's invented what is actually a centuries-old numerical integration technique--freshman mathematics material. What's sad is that none of the journal's reviewers or editors caught it.
    It says something about the education needed to get into medicine. The lack of fundamental math skills also explains why they're so bad at interpreting statistical data. It also helps explain why they don't get the simple math of (Glucose-in-blood ~ Carbohydrates-ingested).

Dr. Tai and "The Tai Model" get this month's Delusional award.

The Science of Persuasion

Want to learn about the tricks used by media and politicians to get you to do things you wouldn't otherwise consider? Want to learn enough to put them to work for you?
    There's a goldmine at Influence in an article by Robert Cialdini. You can also get the pdf here.

It may be that the greatest value is in being alert to manipulation when somebody's trying it on you, and being able to counter it. There may even be a game here: lead someone on, let them believe that you're responding to the tricks and then at the critical moment, when they think they've got you, say "No".

Sugar, Soft Drinks and Blood Pressure, Oh My!

Another study uncovering the obvious:

A study out of Louisiana State University finds that reducing consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages is independently associated with a reduction in blood pressure. The relationships persisted after controlling for weight-change and body-mass index.
     Dr. Liwei Chen et al. also found that caffeine and sugar-free drinks had no effect on blood pressure.
    "Our study has important public-health implications," observe Chen et al. "For example, it has been estimated that a 3-mm-Hg reduction in systolic BP should reduce stroke mortality by 8% and coronary heart disease mortality by 5%. Such reductions in systolic BP would be anticipated by reducing sugar-sweetened beverage consumption by an average of two servings per day."

Ref: Chen L, Caballero B, Mitchell DC, et al. Reducing consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages is associated with reduced blood pressure. A prospective study among United States adults. Circulation 2010; DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.109.911164. Available at: http://http://circ.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/121/22/2398

The Lower Limit of Dietary Carbohydrate

How do you speak the truth about the role of carbohydrates in nutrition and keep your grant money flowing? Bury it on page 275 of a 1300-page report sporting a large panel of well-credentialed scientists as the authors.
    Here's what you'll find if you have the patience or curiosity to get that far:

The lower limit of dietary carbohydrate compatible with life apparently is zero, provided that adequate amounts of protein and fat are consumed.

There's more:

There are traditional populations that ingested a high fat, high protein diet containing only a minimal amount of carbohydrate for extended periods of time (Masai), and in some cases for a lifetime after infancy (Alaska and Greenland Natives, Inuits, and Pampas indigenous people) (Du Bois, 1928; Heinbecker, 1928). There was no apparent effect on health or longevity. Caucasians eating an essentially carbohydrate-free diet, resembling that of Greenland natives, for a year tolerated the diet quite well (Du Bois, 1928). However, a detailed modern comparison with populations ingesting the majority of food energy as carbohydrate has never been done.

That last sentence is telling. No one wants to do the definitive study for fear of what it will say. They don't want to know. On the other hand, the experiment is ongoing in trailer parks across the U.S.

See:

http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10490&page=275

DIETARY REFERENCE INTAKES FOR Energy, Carbohydrate, Fiber, Fat, Fatty Acids, Cholesterol, Protein, and Amino Acids. The Food and Nutrition Board, Institute of Medicine of the National Academies.