QuotePublished in the online journal Open Heart, the paper concluded: "Dietary advice not merely needs review; it should not have been introduced."
https://uk.lifestyle.yahoo.com/dietary-advice-we-ve-followed-for-20-years--should-not-have-been-introduced-095758373.html?vp=1
This doesn't surprise me, I have been reading this stuff for well over a decade, so why doesn't the government do something?
Perhaps because they have a vested interest in the corporates that produce our food?
The advice were ok at the time when less sugar were consumed but all advices should be evaluated every 5 years or so I think as advice given often are the best known at the time but the good thing about science is that it revaluates it self as new evidences and research give new clues.
advice?
eat what you want, drink what you want.
whats the point in living old if you've not enjoyed yourself.
Quote from: bear on February 10, 2015, 17:53:03 PM
The advice were ok at the time when less sugar were consumed but all advices should be evaluated every 5 years or so I think as advice given often are the best known at the time but the good thing about science is that it revaluates it self as new evidences and research give new clues.
Problem being, as with the lead in petrol and active/passive tobacco smoking issues, there was incredibly big money involved. The evidence at the time indicated that sugars and carbohydrates were to blame for obesity and many disease issues tagged onto fat. the companies involved with most to lose, along with the UK and US governments, blanketed the issue with false propaganda. Those companies included breakfast cereal manufacturers and sugar producers.
The original warnings that would have been put out by the UK government were as much about sugar and carbohydrates, during a discussion between government and manufacturers this got removed and only the fats were publicised.
As usual big money behind all bad things.