The 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans is supposed to be released some time this month. From start to finish, the revision process has taken over two and one half years. One wonders if it isn't becoming increasingly difficult to maintain the illusion that the Guidelines are based on reliable scientific evidence. Barring a miracle, it's doubtful the four mistakes mentioned in earlier blog posts will get corrected this time around.
For what it's worth. here is my latest message to Montana lawmakers. Actually, I wrote two versions. This one was sent to lawmakers who have already served at least one term in the House or Senate.
Dear Senator ________,
In January of 2010 I had big plans to send you lawmakers a series of monthly messages pertaining to the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. Shortly after I sent the second message, a February snowstorm in Washington, DC forced the 2010 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee to postpone its 5th meeting for two months. Additionally, several lawmakers noted that they would not be returning to the legislature. So, I put the project on hold until after the election. As I resume sending messages, it seems wise to review my reasons for being concerned about the Guidelines. [1]
On the whole, both academia and government have failed to warn the public about the major nutritional hazards responsible for the increase in the incidence of obesity, chronic inflammatory diseases, and mental disorders, a direct consequence of the industrialization of the food supply. In the Preface to Food For Nought: The decline in nutrition Canadian biochemist Ross Hume Hall, PhD noted, "Nourishment of the American populace has undergone a startling transformation since World War II. A highly individual system of growing and marketing food has been transformed into a gigantic, highly integrated service system in which the object is not to nourish or even to feed, but to force an ever-increasing consumption of fabricated products."[2]
Food for Nought was published in 1973. The first Dietary Guidelines for Americans was issued in 1980. The latest edition, the 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans, is scheduled for release sometime this month. Normally, it takes about a year to revise the Guidelines. This time, the process has dragged on for more than two years. [3]
Tragically, the Dietary Guidelines document is regarded as authoritative by virtually all of academia, the public health sector, and government agencies [4,5]. In fact, many nations throughout the world pattern their own public health nutrition education programs after the American model. I say this is tragic because, from the earliest version, the Guidelines contained four major mistakes. And it's doubtful they'll be corrected this time around [6].
In my next message, I'll review those mistakes and suggest a course of action for Montana lawmakers. Meanwhile, it's important to know that the most egregious error has been the failure to warn the public about the omega-6 seed oil hazard. You can familiarize yourself with some of the particulars by watching this 37 minute video presentation - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgU3cNppzO0 or by visiting this web page - http://www.omega3sealoil.com/Chapter3_1.html .
Regards,
David Brown
1925 Belmar Dr
Kalispell, MT 59901
Ph/406-257-5123
Nutrition Education Project
References
1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7Byb6upXzU&feature=related
2. Excerpt: from the Preface to Food For Nought by Ross Hume Hall, PhD, 1973
Nourishment of the American populace has undergone a startling transformation since World War II. A highly individual system of growing and marketing food has been transformed into a gigantic, highly integrated service system in which the object is not to nourish or even to feed, but to force an ever-increasing consumption of fabricated products. This phenomenon is not peculiar to the American scene and occurs in every industrialized country. The United States, however, has progressed furthest in the transformation. Man can never be more than what he eats, and one would expect that a phenomenon with such profound effects on health and wellbeing as a radically changed system of supplying nourishment would be thoroughly documented and assessed by the scientific community. Such is not the case. The transformation has gone unmarked by government agencies and learned bodies. Government agencies, recipients of the public trust, charged with protecting and improving the public's food, operate as if the technology of food fabrication rested in pre-World War II days. Scientific bodies, supported by public funds and charged with assessing and improving the public's health, ignore completely the results of contemporary methods of marketing food...Failure to monitor and to appreciate the results of rapidly moving technology produces a brutal effect that forms the central theme of this book. Technology founded on mechanistic laws clashes head on with the processes of a natural world which adheres to very different laws. Modern industry, ignoring these biologic laws, molds and manipulates natural processes to suit and to promote its own mechanistic and economic goals.
3. The Long Road to the 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/nutrition-news/dietary-guidelines-for-americans-2010/
4. 1985. HHS and USDA jointly issued a second edition of the Dietary Guidelines. This revised edition was nearly identical to the first. Some changes were made for clarity while others reflected advances in scientific knowledge of the associations between diet and a range of chronic diseases. The second edition received wide acceptance and was used as a framework for consumer education messages. http://www.nutriwatch.org/05Guidelines/dgahistory.html
5. The Dietary Guidelines are the basis for the USDA Food Pyramid, and serve as the foundation for nutritional information for Americans. The Guidelines also strongly influence nutrition education, research funding, governmental meal programs including school lunches, as well as providing direction for the food industry, regulatory agencies, consumer advocates, and the media. They have been largely immune from criticism, perhaps a result of their wide application. http://thesilverclouddiet.com/2010/10/scientists-challenge-the-proposed-dietary-guidelines-known-as-the-food-pyramid/
6. Abstract
Concerns that were raised with the first dietary recommendations 30 y ago have yet to be adequately addressed. The initial Dietary Goals for Americans (1977) proposed increases in carbohydrate intake and decreases in fat, saturated fat, cholesterol, and salt consumption that are carried further in the 2010 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (DGAC) Report. Important aspects of these recommendations remain unproven, yet a dietary shift in this direction has already taken place even as overweight/obesity and diabetes have increased. Although appealing to an evidence-based methodology, the DGAC Report demonstrates several critical weaknesses, including use of an incomplete body of relevant science; inaccurately representing, interpreting, or summarizing the literature; and drawing conclusions and/or making recommendations that do not reflect the limitations or controversies in the science. An objective assessment of evidence in the DGAC Report does not suggest a conclusive proscription against low-carbohydrate diets. The DGAC Report does not provide sufficient evidence to conclude that increases in whole grain and fiber and decreases in dietary saturated fat, salt, and animal protein will lead to positive health outcomes. Lack of supporting evidence limits the value of the proposed recommendations as guidance for consumers or as the basis for public health policy. It is time to reexamine how US dietary guidelines are created and ask whether the current process is still appropriate for our needs.
www.spfldcol.edu/homepage/dept.nsf/.../$File/Hite_Nutrition_2010.pdf
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Omega-6: The Fat That Ruins Your Health
Letter #2 to Montana Lawmakers sent January, 31, 2010
However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the result.
Winston Churchill
Dear Senator _________:
In mid October, 2009 the Samueli Institute, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, and the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism jointly sponsored a two day workshop entitled Nutritional Armor for the Warfighter: Can Omega-3 Fatty Acids Enhance Stress Resilience, Wellness, and Military Performance?
On day two, Biochemist Bill Lands, PhD spoke on Why Omega-6 Fats Matter for Your Health. In his opening remarks he said "Pragmatically, I really want primary prevention. I mean, treatment is all well and good. But if you never had to treat something, wouldn't that be a wonderful world? So, how would a pragmatist create a wonderful world? Well, if you know biochemistry, you can trace the molecular events that caused the disease or the undesired consequence and prevent the underlying cause of the problem. That means you have to trace back - and we can do that - the context of this molecular event. And the context is competition between omega-3 and omega-6 for storage and for action".
These past four decades Americans been relentlessly bombarded with messages to consume less butter, choose low fat dairy products, eat less red meat, eat fewer eggs, etc. At the same time we've been told to replace animal fats with margarine and polyunsaturated vegetable oil products. But foods manufactured from seed oils are high in omega-6 fats. It's estimated that Americans consume 10 to 30 times more omega-6 fats than omega-3s. Both omega-3s and omega-6s are essential fatty acids. That means we have to eat them to be healthy. However, they need to be consumed in roughly equal amounts because the body does not have the ability to sort nutrients to balance their concentration in tissues.
Dr. Lands continues, "I heard several times yesterday about these chronic diseases that are preventable. If that's true, how come nobody's preventing them, for crying out loud?... These data have been out for a long time. Everyone knows that. Ancel Keys sort of knew this but he never really talked about omega-3 and omega-6. And it was a tragedy because we have had 40 some years when we could have really been preventing something and we didn't. We got off and we got on to distractions that were not mediators. But these are mediators of disease. People who have more than half of their HUFA (highly unsaturated fatty acids) as omega-6 HUFA, they really have a high incidence of cardiovascular death."
Elsewhere in his presentation Dr. Lands explained why it is wise to limit combined total intake of omega-3 and omega-6 fats to less than 1 percent of total caloric intake. These polyunsaturates are highly reactive, chemically. At the higher levels of consumption Americans normally ingest, the body's biochemical capacity to control the action of these chemically unstable molecules is compromised. The consequence for human health is the broad spectrum of chronic inflammatory diseases that are so costly to treat and impossible to prevent unless omega-6 consumption is reduced.
The omega-6 story began almost 200 years ago in France with the 1813 discovery of margaric acid by Michel Chevreul. Forty years later, the German structural Chemist Wilhelm Heintz analyzed margaric acid and found it to be a combination of stearic acid and the previously unknown palmitic acid. In 1869, Emperor Louis Napoleon III of France offered a prize to anyone who could make a satisfactory substitute for butter, suitable for use by the armed forces and the lower classes. Responding to the challenge, French chemist Hippolyte Mège-Mouriés invented a substance he called oleomargarine. The name became shortened to the trade name "margarine." Mège-Mouriés patented the concept but was unable make money manufacturing the product so in 1871 he sold the patent to the Dutch company Jurgens, now part of Unilever. In 1897, French chemist Paul Sabatier perfected a process called hydrogenation. In 1902, German chemist Wilhelm Normann was awarded a patent for the hydrogenation of liquid oils. In 1911, an American company founded by two immigrants, William Proctor, a candle maker from England and James Gamble, a soap maker from Ireland, began marketing a product called Crisco; the name being derived from the initial sounds of the expression "crystallized cottonseed oil."
So, around a hundred years ago, food technologists began manufacturing substitutes for butter (margarine) and lard (Crisco) from seed oils and about a decade later, the death rate from heart disease began to climb precipitously.
By the 1950s, heart disease was so prevalent and people were dying from it at such a young age that finding the cause became a major priority for medical researchers. The science of epidemiology was born and studies were carried out in many countries to determine if there was a connection between food intake and clogged arteries. Leading the charge was University of Minnesota physiologist Ancel Keys, PhD who enthusiastically promoted the idea that consuming too much saturated fat caused arteries to clog. The idea took hold and was vigorously promoted by vegetarian activists, sugar interests, the edible oils industry, and certain prominent scientists. In the late 1970s the federal government got involved and began issuing dietary advice to lower fat intake to control weight and restrict saturated fat intake to prevent heart disease.
But heart disease is just one of many health impacts resulting from excessive omega-6 intake. I think it's fair to say that anything that omega-3 treats can be more effectively treated or even prevented by reducing omega-6. Thus, the omega-6 problem fans out into many areas of concern including alcoholism, drug abuse, domestic violence, divorce rates, mental illness, birth defects, the quality of life for seniors, academic performance, work place safety, the cost of doing business in the USA, and ultimately, the cost of health care. My point: if we can prevent these chronic conditions and problems by removing omega-6 seed oil products from the food supply and restoring healthy fats, what are we waiting for?
We're waiting for grass roots efforts by people like myself to take hold and reduce demand for fabricated foods. At present, corporate agriculture and the food manufacturing industry are extremely powerful, politically. In addition, they have a close, enduring relationship with academia because of the research funding they supply. I'm hoping these are not insurmountable obstacles. I'm hoping my efforts to help you lawmakers understand what has taken place will bare fruit in the form of legislation aimed at encouraging the production of more high quality animal products, the correction of mistakes in the dietary advice furnished by the the state, and the legalization of personal sales of raw milk dairy products in Montana.
I urge you to watch the 37 minute presentation by Dr. Lands that I quoted from above. http://videocast.nih.gov/summary.asp?live=8108 Dr. Lands begins speaking at about 12 minutes 45 seconds into the webcast. Just drag the time control button on the line at the bottom slightly to the right to skip the preliminary remarks and dead time. There's also this 4 minute 10 second excerpt: http://video.aol.co.uk/video-detail/learn-why-omega-6-fat-matters-for-your-health-by-bill-lands-phd/2370016394
Finally, I encourage you to share information I send you with your spouse, relatives, friends, and political contacts. Thanks for your time.
Regards,
David Brown
1925 Belmar Dr
Kalispell, MT 59901
davebnep@yahoo.com
Ph/406-257-5123
Nutrition Education Project
However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the result.
Winston Churchill
Dear Senator _________:
In mid October, 2009 the Samueli Institute, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, and the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism jointly sponsored a two day workshop entitled Nutritional Armor for the Warfighter: Can Omega-3 Fatty Acids Enhance Stress Resilience, Wellness, and Military Performance?
On day two, Biochemist Bill Lands, PhD spoke on Why Omega-6 Fats Matter for Your Health. In his opening remarks he said "Pragmatically, I really want primary prevention. I mean, treatment is all well and good. But if you never had to treat something, wouldn't that be a wonderful world? So, how would a pragmatist create a wonderful world? Well, if you know biochemistry, you can trace the molecular events that caused the disease or the undesired consequence and prevent the underlying cause of the problem. That means you have to trace back - and we can do that - the context of this molecular event. And the context is competition between omega-3 and omega-6 for storage and for action".
These past four decades Americans been relentlessly bombarded with messages to consume less butter, choose low fat dairy products, eat less red meat, eat fewer eggs, etc. At the same time we've been told to replace animal fats with margarine and polyunsaturated vegetable oil products. But foods manufactured from seed oils are high in omega-6 fats. It's estimated that Americans consume 10 to 30 times more omega-6 fats than omega-3s. Both omega-3s and omega-6s are essential fatty acids. That means we have to eat them to be healthy. However, they need to be consumed in roughly equal amounts because the body does not have the ability to sort nutrients to balance their concentration in tissues.
Dr. Lands continues, "I heard several times yesterday about these chronic diseases that are preventable. If that's true, how come nobody's preventing them, for crying out loud?... These data have been out for a long time. Everyone knows that. Ancel Keys sort of knew this but he never really talked about omega-3 and omega-6. And it was a tragedy because we have had 40 some years when we could have really been preventing something and we didn't. We got off and we got on to distractions that were not mediators. But these are mediators of disease. People who have more than half of their HUFA (highly unsaturated fatty acids) as omega-6 HUFA, they really have a high incidence of cardiovascular death."
Elsewhere in his presentation Dr. Lands explained why it is wise to limit combined total intake of omega-3 and omega-6 fats to less than 1 percent of total caloric intake. These polyunsaturates are highly reactive, chemically. At the higher levels of consumption Americans normally ingest, the body's biochemical capacity to control the action of these chemically unstable molecules is compromised. The consequence for human health is the broad spectrum of chronic inflammatory diseases that are so costly to treat and impossible to prevent unless omega-6 consumption is reduced.
The omega-6 story began almost 200 years ago in France with the 1813 discovery of margaric acid by Michel Chevreul. Forty years later, the German structural Chemist Wilhelm Heintz analyzed margaric acid and found it to be a combination of stearic acid and the previously unknown palmitic acid. In 1869, Emperor Louis Napoleon III of France offered a prize to anyone who could make a satisfactory substitute for butter, suitable for use by the armed forces and the lower classes. Responding to the challenge, French chemist Hippolyte Mège-Mouriés invented a substance he called oleomargarine. The name became shortened to the trade name "margarine." Mège-Mouriés patented the concept but was unable make money manufacturing the product so in 1871 he sold the patent to the Dutch company Jurgens, now part of Unilever. In 1897, French chemist Paul Sabatier perfected a process called hydrogenation. In 1902, German chemist Wilhelm Normann was awarded a patent for the hydrogenation of liquid oils. In 1911, an American company founded by two immigrants, William Proctor, a candle maker from England and James Gamble, a soap maker from Ireland, began marketing a product called Crisco; the name being derived from the initial sounds of the expression "crystallized cottonseed oil."
So, around a hundred years ago, food technologists began manufacturing substitutes for butter (margarine) and lard (Crisco) from seed oils and about a decade later, the death rate from heart disease began to climb precipitously.
By the 1950s, heart disease was so prevalent and people were dying from it at such a young age that finding the cause became a major priority for medical researchers. The science of epidemiology was born and studies were carried out in many countries to determine if there was a connection between food intake and clogged arteries. Leading the charge was University of Minnesota physiologist Ancel Keys, PhD who enthusiastically promoted the idea that consuming too much saturated fat caused arteries to clog. The idea took hold and was vigorously promoted by vegetarian activists, sugar interests, the edible oils industry, and certain prominent scientists. In the late 1970s the federal government got involved and began issuing dietary advice to lower fat intake to control weight and restrict saturated fat intake to prevent heart disease.
But heart disease is just one of many health impacts resulting from excessive omega-6 intake. I think it's fair to say that anything that omega-3 treats can be more effectively treated or even prevented by reducing omega-6. Thus, the omega-6 problem fans out into many areas of concern including alcoholism, drug abuse, domestic violence, divorce rates, mental illness, birth defects, the quality of life for seniors, academic performance, work place safety, the cost of doing business in the USA, and ultimately, the cost of health care. My point: if we can prevent these chronic conditions and problems by removing omega-6 seed oil products from the food supply and restoring healthy fats, what are we waiting for?
We're waiting for grass roots efforts by people like myself to take hold and reduce demand for fabricated foods. At present, corporate agriculture and the food manufacturing industry are extremely powerful, politically. In addition, they have a close, enduring relationship with academia because of the research funding they supply. I'm hoping these are not insurmountable obstacles. I'm hoping my efforts to help you lawmakers understand what has taken place will bare fruit in the form of legislation aimed at encouraging the production of more high quality animal products, the correction of mistakes in the dietary advice furnished by the the state, and the legalization of personal sales of raw milk dairy products in Montana.
I urge you to watch the 37 minute presentation by Dr. Lands that I quoted from above. http://videocast.nih.gov/summary.asp?live=8108 Dr. Lands begins speaking at about 12 minutes 45 seconds into the webcast. Just drag the time control button on the line at the bottom slightly to the right to skip the preliminary remarks and dead time. There's also this 4 minute 10 second excerpt: http://video.aol.co.uk/video-detail/learn-why-omega-6-fat-matters-for-your-health-by-bill-lands-phd/2370016394
Finally, I encourage you to share information I send you with your spouse, relatives, friends, and political contacts. Thanks for your time.
Regards,
David Brown
1925 Belmar Dr
Kalispell, MT 59901
davebnep@yahoo.com
Ph/406-257-5123
Nutrition Education Project
Friday, February 12, 2010
Email to First Lady Michelle Obama
February 4, 2010
Michelle Obama firstladypolicy@who.eop.gov
Dear Mrs. Obama,
By way of introduction, I am a carpenter residing in Kalispell, Montana. I study and write about nutritional issues and controversies.
I've been meaning to write you ever since your husband mentioned your Anti-Obesity Campaign during his State of Union Address. I understand you met recently with Secretary Vilsack, Secretary Sebelius Secretary Duncan, Senator Blanche Lincoln, Congressman George Miller, Senator Tom Harken, Congressman Collin Peterson, Senator Saxby Chambliss, and Senator Mike Enzi to discuss possible changes in child nutrition programs. If you think this message has merit, please forward it to the above cabinet members, senators, and congressmen.
Regarding the obesity problem, I have some good news and some sad news. The good news is that at least a few scientists have identified the dietary factors responsible for the current epidemic of obesity and chronic disease. The sad news is that their voices are not being heard. In fact, the scientific evidence that supports their views has been ignored for at least four decades. What evidence? It's the data that demonstrates that excessive omega-6 fat consumption is responsible for the sort of metabolic impairment that promotes fat storage [1] and that excessive sugar consumption is responsible for the sort of appetite derangement that leads to overeating [2]. In other words, it's a big mistake to replace saturated fats with polyunsaturates and added sugars which is generally what happens when people try to eat according to the Dietary Guidelines for Americans.
The added sugars problem has been in the limelight of late so there's no point discussing it here [3]. In contrast, the omega-6 problem continues to be ignored. So allow me to introduce you to Dr. Bill Lands, a respected biochemist who must be terribly frustrated by the continued lack of interest in omega-6 research. Here are a few paragraphs from a 37 minute presentation he gave on day two of a recent Defense Department workshop on omega-3 fats [4,5].
In his opening remarks he said, Pragmatically, I really want primary prevention. I mean, treatment is all well and good. But if you never had to treat something, wouldn't that be a wonderful world? So, how would a pragmatist create a wonderful world? Well, if you know biochemistry, you can trace the molecular events that caused the disease or the undesired consequence and prevent the underlying cause of the problem. That means you have to trace back - and we can do that - the context of this molecular event. And the context is competition between omega-3 and omega-6 for storage and for action...
I heard several times yesterday about these chronic diseases that are preventable. If that's true, how come nobody's preventing them, for crying out loud?... These data have been out for a long time. Everyone knows that. Ancel Keys sort of knew this but he never really talked about omega-3 and omega-6. And it was a tragedy because we have had 40 some years when we could have really been preventing something and we didn't. We got off and we got on to distractions that were not mediators. But these are mediators of disease. People who have more than half of their HUFA (highly unsaturated fatty acids) as omega-6 HUFA, they really have a high incidence of cardiovascular death.
For half a century Americans have been relentlessly bombarded with messages about how bad saturated fats are for heart health. Of course, the purpose of this campaign has been to persuade everyone to consume supposedly heart healthy omega-6 seed oil products in place of artery clogging animal fats. It worked. When I began reading nutrition literature more than three decades ago we were consuming margarine and low-fat dairy products. After a few years of casual investigation we switched to butter and full fat dairy [6]. I'll have a student guest blogger featured on the American Society for Nutrition web site explain why [7].
Over the past decade the use of low fat milk has become more prominent than the use of whole milk...According to a cohort study of 12,829 US children aged 9 to 14 years, weight gain is associated with excess calorie intake and consumption of low fat or skim milk, but is not associated with drinking whole milk products. This finding although surprising is consistent with some animal findings. Pigs fed reduced-fat milk gain weight easily while pigs fed whole milk stay lean. Male rats fed whole milk had significantly lower concentrations of plasma triglycerides...than rats fed low fat milk. The effects of whole milk on lipid profile and body composition are not well understood, but the process of removing fat from milk may in part be responsible for some of the observed effects. Milk is an emulsion of butterfat globules and water-based fluid. Butterfat contains unique nutrients that support thyroid function and help the body develop muscle rather than fat…
So public health messages to consume low fat dairy do not produce the desired effect. What else is wrong with the government's dietary advice? I'll tell you. There's no warning to reduce omega-6 fat intake. None. Rather, we're told to restrict saturated fat consumption. This is a huge mistake because there is no scientific evidence that high saturated fat consumption poses a health hazard [8,9].
A few days from now, on February 9-10, the 2010 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee will convene for the fifth time to review the current Guidelines. Judging from past deliberations, it seems unlikely the Committee will alter its stance on omega-6 fats, saturated fats, or total fat intake. Consequently, if you intend to propose a truly effective strategy for juvenile weight control, you will need to issue advice substantially not in agreement with current nutritional wisdom. While this may embarrass the 13 distinguished scientists serving on the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee, it would surely be an encouragement to those of us who want to see significant progress in the war on obesity and chronic disease.
David Brown
1925 Belmar Dr
Kalispell, MT 59901
Ph/406-257-5123
Nutrition Education Project
1. http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2008/12/omega-6-linoleic-acid-suppresses.html
2. http://news.ufl.edu/2008/10/16/fructose-leptin/
3. http://www.uctv.tv/search-details.aspx?showID=16717
4. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJ9i-9JcTF4
5. http://videocast.nih.gov/summary.asp?live=8108
6. http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2009/10/butter-vs-margarine-showdown.html
7. http://www.nutrition.org/asn-blog/2009/08/the-milk-debate/
8. http://metabolismsociety.org/App_Themes/Images/AboutFat/Siri-Tarino%20SAFA%20CVD%20Risk.pdf
9. http://www.sciscoop.com/controversial-saturated-fat.html
Michelle Obama firstladypolicy@who.eop.gov
Dear Mrs. Obama,
By way of introduction, I am a carpenter residing in Kalispell, Montana. I study and write about nutritional issues and controversies.
I've been meaning to write you ever since your husband mentioned your Anti-Obesity Campaign during his State of Union Address. I understand you met recently with Secretary Vilsack, Secretary Sebelius Secretary Duncan, Senator Blanche Lincoln, Congressman George Miller, Senator Tom Harken, Congressman Collin Peterson, Senator Saxby Chambliss, and Senator Mike Enzi to discuss possible changes in child nutrition programs. If you think this message has merit, please forward it to the above cabinet members, senators, and congressmen.
Regarding the obesity problem, I have some good news and some sad news. The good news is that at least a few scientists have identified the dietary factors responsible for the current epidemic of obesity and chronic disease. The sad news is that their voices are not being heard. In fact, the scientific evidence that supports their views has been ignored for at least four decades. What evidence? It's the data that demonstrates that excessive omega-6 fat consumption is responsible for the sort of metabolic impairment that promotes fat storage [1] and that excessive sugar consumption is responsible for the sort of appetite derangement that leads to overeating [2]. In other words, it's a big mistake to replace saturated fats with polyunsaturates and added sugars which is generally what happens when people try to eat according to the Dietary Guidelines for Americans.
The added sugars problem has been in the limelight of late so there's no point discussing it here [3]. In contrast, the omega-6 problem continues to be ignored. So allow me to introduce you to Dr. Bill Lands, a respected biochemist who must be terribly frustrated by the continued lack of interest in omega-6 research. Here are a few paragraphs from a 37 minute presentation he gave on day two of a recent Defense Department workshop on omega-3 fats [4,5].
In his opening remarks he said, Pragmatically, I really want primary prevention. I mean, treatment is all well and good. But if you never had to treat something, wouldn't that be a wonderful world? So, how would a pragmatist create a wonderful world? Well, if you know biochemistry, you can trace the molecular events that caused the disease or the undesired consequence and prevent the underlying cause of the problem. That means you have to trace back - and we can do that - the context of this molecular event. And the context is competition between omega-3 and omega-6 for storage and for action...
I heard several times yesterday about these chronic diseases that are preventable. If that's true, how come nobody's preventing them, for crying out loud?... These data have been out for a long time. Everyone knows that. Ancel Keys sort of knew this but he never really talked about omega-3 and omega-6. And it was a tragedy because we have had 40 some years when we could have really been preventing something and we didn't. We got off and we got on to distractions that were not mediators. But these are mediators of disease. People who have more than half of their HUFA (highly unsaturated fatty acids) as omega-6 HUFA, they really have a high incidence of cardiovascular death.
For half a century Americans have been relentlessly bombarded with messages about how bad saturated fats are for heart health. Of course, the purpose of this campaign has been to persuade everyone to consume supposedly heart healthy omega-6 seed oil products in place of artery clogging animal fats. It worked. When I began reading nutrition literature more than three decades ago we were consuming margarine and low-fat dairy products. After a few years of casual investigation we switched to butter and full fat dairy [6]. I'll have a student guest blogger featured on the American Society for Nutrition web site explain why [7].
Over the past decade the use of low fat milk has become more prominent than the use of whole milk...According to a cohort study of 12,829 US children aged 9 to 14 years, weight gain is associated with excess calorie intake and consumption of low fat or skim milk, but is not associated with drinking whole milk products. This finding although surprising is consistent with some animal findings. Pigs fed reduced-fat milk gain weight easily while pigs fed whole milk stay lean. Male rats fed whole milk had significantly lower concentrations of plasma triglycerides...than rats fed low fat milk. The effects of whole milk on lipid profile and body composition are not well understood, but the process of removing fat from milk may in part be responsible for some of the observed effects. Milk is an emulsion of butterfat globules and water-based fluid. Butterfat contains unique nutrients that support thyroid function and help the body develop muscle rather than fat…
So public health messages to consume low fat dairy do not produce the desired effect. What else is wrong with the government's dietary advice? I'll tell you. There's no warning to reduce omega-6 fat intake. None. Rather, we're told to restrict saturated fat consumption. This is a huge mistake because there is no scientific evidence that high saturated fat consumption poses a health hazard [8,9].
A few days from now, on February 9-10, the 2010 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee will convene for the fifth time to review the current Guidelines. Judging from past deliberations, it seems unlikely the Committee will alter its stance on omega-6 fats, saturated fats, or total fat intake. Consequently, if you intend to propose a truly effective strategy for juvenile weight control, you will need to issue advice substantially not in agreement with current nutritional wisdom. While this may embarrass the 13 distinguished scientists serving on the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee, it would surely be an encouragement to those of us who want to see significant progress in the war on obesity and chronic disease.
David Brown
1925 Belmar Dr
Kalispell, MT 59901
Ph/406-257-5123
Nutrition Education Project
1. http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2008/12/omega-6-linoleic-acid-suppresses.html
2. http://news.ufl.edu/2008/10/16/fructose-leptin/
3. http://www.uctv.tv/search-details.aspx?showID=16717
4. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJ9i-9JcTF4
5. http://videocast.nih.gov/summary.asp?live=8108
6. http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2009/10/butter-vs-margarine-showdown.html
7. http://www.nutrition.org/asn-blog/2009/08/the-milk-debate/
8. http://metabolismsociety.org/App_Themes/Images/AboutFat/Siri-Tarino%20SAFA%20CVD%20Risk.pdf
9. http://www.sciscoop.com/controversial-saturated-fat.html
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
November 7, 2009
President Barack Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President:
This is my second letter to you. The first elicited two form letter responses dealing with health care reform and immigration. Apparently, the White House does not receive sufficient correspondence regarding the quality of the food supply and the Dietary Guidelines for Americans debacle to warrant developing form letters for those issues. At any rate, in this letter I focus on the government's terrible dietary advice.
The Dietary Guidelines for Americans document is extremely important because the Guidelines are viewed as the final word as to what constitutes healthy eating in both the United States and in many other countries as well. Unfortunately, the Guidelines contain four major mistakes that need to be corrected.
The most important error is the doctrine that saturated fat is a health hazard because it raises cholesterol levels and supposedly clogs arteries. For more than three decades the public has been relentlessly bombarded with messages to that effect. The problem is, there is no hard scientific evidence behind this allegation; only the backing of the edible oils industry, sugar interests, vegetarian activists, the food manufacturing industry, and almost two generations of public health professionals trained to regard saturated fats as evil.
Soon after I began studying nutritional controversies more than three decades ago, I concluded that excessive sugar intake is a major dietary factor in heart disease. About 18 years later, after developing a leg ulcer, I learned that excessive omega-6 vegetable oil consumption promotes the inflammation associated with heart disease and other chronic conditions as well. Yet the Dietary Guidelines have never contained a strongly worded warning against excessive consumption of either food ingredient. Well, things are changing. Dr. Robert Lustig has an excellent 89 minute presentation entitled "Sugar: The Bitter Truth" and Dr. Bill Lands has a 37 minute presentation entitled "Why Omega-6 Fats Matter to Your Health." Both presentations are easily accessed by web search.
So far I've covered three of the Dietary Guidelines mistakes, demonizing saturated fat, failure to warn the public about added sugars, and the recommendation to replace healthy saturated fats with omega-6 vegetable oils. The fourth mistake is the standard advice to reduce percentage of total fat intake to control weight and prevent heart disease. Again, Dr. Christopher Gardener has an excellent presentation entitled "Battle of the diets: is anyone winning at losing?"
Thanks to a handful of astute researchers and health care professionals, and some grass roots educational activity, there is growing awareness that the findings of science are not being properly utilized. For example, a student guest blogger on the American Society for Nutrition web site recently noted, "Truly, I am neither an obesity researcher nor a public health policy expert. But I do read material on this issue every now and then, and recently, I asked myself, why? United States is blessed with enormous research resources, facilities, and funding, but still, why can’t we address the issue of obesity?"
Another student in an earlier blog post provided at least a partial answer when she observed, "Over the past decade the use of low fat milk has become more prominent than the use of whole milk because there is substantial scientific evidence that consumption of foods high in fat causes weight gain and increases the risk of heart disease and cancer. However, there is some controversy over whether processed low-fat pasteurized milk can meet the needs of developing offspring and whether it should be consumed during pregnancy and development....According to a cohort study of 12,829 US children aged 9 to 14 years, weight gain is associated with excess calorie intake and consumption of low fat or skim milk, but is not associated with drinking whole milk products. This finding although surprising is consistent with some animal findings. Pigs fed reduced-fat milk gain weight easily while pigs fed whole milk stay lean. Male rats fed whole milk had significantly lower concentrations of plasma triglycerides...than rats fed low fat milk. The effects of whole milk on lipid profile and body composition are not well understood, but the process of removing fat from milk may in part be responsible for some of the observed effects. Milk is an emulsion of butterfat globules and water-based fluid. Butterfat contains unique nutrients that support thyroid function and help the body develop muscle rather than fat…"
Sadly, negative publicity about saturated fat and heart disease has whipped up so much hysteria about the fat in animal products that a New Zealand researcher (Professor Rod Jackson) was prompted to say, "We have a health tax on alcohol and cigarettes and there should be a health tax on butter. It’s the most poisonous commonly consumed food in New Zealand . It’s about the purest form of saturated fat you can eat and it has no protein and no calcium. Butter has had all the good things taken out and just left the poison.
So here we are with an ever-increasing demand for medical services, an excessive national debt, and government dietary recommendations that make people fatter and sicker. You could do something about this, Mr. President. At various times you've said , "The American people understand that it is my job to get it right...our agriculture sector is...partly responsible for the explosion in our health care costs...junk food...is fueling an epidemic of obesity, putting far too many Americans, young and old, at greater risk of costly, chronic conditions."
As mentioned earlier, we at the grass roots level are doing our best to educate the public and improve the quality of the food supply. Unfortunately, we have to battle against government policies that promote wrong-headed notions about nutrition and discourage the production of high quality food. Some presidential action on these matters would be greatly appreciated by us and extremely beneficial for the country.
Regards,
David Brown
1925 Belmar Dr
Kalispell, MT 59901
Ph/406-257-5123
Nutrition Education Project
President Barack Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President:
This is my second letter to you. The first elicited two form letter responses dealing with health care reform and immigration. Apparently, the White House does not receive sufficient correspondence regarding the quality of the food supply and the Dietary Guidelines for Americans debacle to warrant developing form letters for those issues. At any rate, in this letter I focus on the government's terrible dietary advice.
The Dietary Guidelines for Americans document is extremely important because the Guidelines are viewed as the final word as to what constitutes healthy eating in both the United States and in many other countries as well. Unfortunately, the Guidelines contain four major mistakes that need to be corrected.
The most important error is the doctrine that saturated fat is a health hazard because it raises cholesterol levels and supposedly clogs arteries. For more than three decades the public has been relentlessly bombarded with messages to that effect. The problem is, there is no hard scientific evidence behind this allegation; only the backing of the edible oils industry, sugar interests, vegetarian activists, the food manufacturing industry, and almost two generations of public health professionals trained to regard saturated fats as evil.
Soon after I began studying nutritional controversies more than three decades ago, I concluded that excessive sugar intake is a major dietary factor in heart disease. About 18 years later, after developing a leg ulcer, I learned that excessive omega-6 vegetable oil consumption promotes the inflammation associated with heart disease and other chronic conditions as well. Yet the Dietary Guidelines have never contained a strongly worded warning against excessive consumption of either food ingredient. Well, things are changing. Dr. Robert Lustig has an excellent 89 minute presentation entitled "Sugar: The Bitter Truth" and Dr. Bill Lands has a 37 minute presentation entitled "Why Omega-6 Fats Matter to Your Health." Both presentations are easily accessed by web search.
So far I've covered three of the Dietary Guidelines mistakes, demonizing saturated fat, failure to warn the public about added sugars, and the recommendation to replace healthy saturated fats with omega-6 vegetable oils. The fourth mistake is the standard advice to reduce percentage of total fat intake to control weight and prevent heart disease. Again, Dr. Christopher Gardener has an excellent presentation entitled "Battle of the diets: is anyone winning at losing?"
Thanks to a handful of astute researchers and health care professionals, and some grass roots educational activity, there is growing awareness that the findings of science are not being properly utilized. For example, a student guest blogger on the American Society for Nutrition web site recently noted, "Truly, I am neither an obesity researcher nor a public health policy expert. But I do read material on this issue every now and then, and recently, I asked myself, why? United States is blessed with enormous research resources, facilities, and funding, but still, why can’t we address the issue of obesity?"
Another student in an earlier blog post provided at least a partial answer when she observed, "Over the past decade the use of low fat milk has become more prominent than the use of whole milk because there is substantial scientific evidence that consumption of foods high in fat causes weight gain and increases the risk of heart disease and cancer. However, there is some controversy over whether processed low-fat pasteurized milk can meet the needs of developing offspring and whether it should be consumed during pregnancy and development....According to a cohort study of 12,829 US children aged 9 to 14 years, weight gain is associated with excess calorie intake and consumption of low fat or skim milk, but is not associated with drinking whole milk products. This finding although surprising is consistent with some animal findings. Pigs fed reduced-fat milk gain weight easily while pigs fed whole milk stay lean. Male rats fed whole milk had significantly lower concentrations of plasma triglycerides...than rats fed low fat milk. The effects of whole milk on lipid profile and body composition are not well understood, but the process of removing fat from milk may in part be responsible for some of the observed effects. Milk is an emulsion of butterfat globules and water-based fluid. Butterfat contains unique nutrients that support thyroid function and help the body develop muscle rather than fat…"
Sadly, negative publicity about saturated fat and heart disease has whipped up so much hysteria about the fat in animal products that a New Zealand researcher (Professor Rod Jackson) was prompted to say, "We have a health tax on alcohol and cigarettes and there should be a health tax on butter. It’s the most poisonous commonly consumed food in New Zealand . It’s about the purest form of saturated fat you can eat and it has no protein and no calcium. Butter has had all the good things taken out and just left the poison.
So here we are with an ever-increasing demand for medical services, an excessive national debt, and government dietary recommendations that make people fatter and sicker. You could do something about this, Mr. President. At various times you've said , "The American people understand that it is my job to get it right...our agriculture sector is...partly responsible for the explosion in our health care costs...junk food...is fueling an epidemic of obesity, putting far too many Americans, young and old, at greater risk of costly, chronic conditions."
As mentioned earlier, we at the grass roots level are doing our best to educate the public and improve the quality of the food supply. Unfortunately, we have to battle against government policies that promote wrong-headed notions about nutrition and discourage the production of high quality food. Some presidential action on these matters would be greatly appreciated by us and extremely beneficial for the country.
Regards,
David Brown
1925 Belmar Dr
Kalispell, MT 59901
Ph/406-257-5123
Nutrition Education Project
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
