Repost: The oiling of America Part 3 (Cholesterol)

[Guest guest]

Gettingwell , " califpacific "

<califpacific> wrote:

http://www.westonaprice.org/know_your_fats/oiling3.html

 

 

 

Part 3

Cholesterol screening for everyone

In November of 1986, the Journal of the American Medical Association

published a series on the Lipid Research Clinics trials,

including " Cholesterol and Coronary Heart Disease: A New Era " by

longtime American Heart Association member Scott Grundy, MD, PhD.35

The article is a disturbing combination of euphoria and agony—

euphoria at the forward movement of the lipid hypothesis juggernaut,

and agony over the elusive nature of real proof. " The recent

consensus conference on cholesterol. . . implied that levels between

200 and 240. . carry at least a mild increase in risk, which they

obviously do. . . " said Grundy, directly contradicting an earlier

statement that " Evidence relating plasma cholesterol levels to

atherosclerosis and CHD has become so strong as to leave little doubt

of the etiologic connection. " Grundy called for " . . . the simple

step of measuring the plasma cholesterol level in all adults. . .

those found to have elevated cholesterol levels can be designated as

at high risk and thereby can enter the medical care system. . . an

enormous number of patients will be included. " Who benefits from " the

simple step of measuring the plasma cholesterol level in all adults? "

Why, hospitals, laboratories, pharmaceutical companies, the vegetable

oil industry, margarine manufacturers, food processors and, of

course, medical doctors. " Many physicians will see the advantages of

using drugs for cholesterol lowering. . . " said Grundy, even

though " a positive benefit/risk ratio for cholesterol-lowering drugs

will be difficult to prove. " The cost in the US of cholesterol

screening and cholesterol-lowering drugs alone now stands at sixty

billion dollars per year, even though a positive risk/benefit ratio

for such treatment has never been established. Physicians, however,

have " seen the advantages of using drugs for cholesterol lowering " as

a way of creating patients out of healthy people.

 

Grundy was equally schizophrenic about the benefits of dietary

modification. " Whether diet has a long term effect on cholesterol

remains to be proved, " he stated, but " Public health advocates

furthermore can play an important role by urging the food industry to

provide palatable choices of foods that are low in cholesterol,

saturated fatty acids and total calories. " Such foods, almost by

definition, contain partially hydrogenated vegetable oils that

imitate the advantages of animal fats. Grundy knew that the trans

fats were a problem, that they raised serum cholesterol and

contributed to the etiology of many diseases—he knew because a year

earlier, at his request, Mary Enig had sent him a package of data

detailing numerous studies that gave reason for concern, which he

acknowledged in a signed letter as " an important contribution to the

ongoing debate. "

 

Other mouthpieces of the medical establishment fell in line after the

Consensus Conference. In 1987 the National Academy of Science (NAS)

published an overview in the form of a handout booklet containing a

whitewash of the trans problem and a pejorative description of palm

oil—a natural fat high in beneficial saturates and monounsaturates

that, like butter, has nourished healthy population groups for

thousands of years, and, also like butter, competes with hydrogenated

fats because it can be used as a shortening. The following year the

Surgeon General's Report on Nutrition and Health emphasized the

importance of making low-fat foods more widely available. Project

LEAN (Low-Fat Eating for America Now) sponsored by the J. Kaiser

Family Foundation and a host of establishment groups such as the

America Heart Association, the American Dietetic Association, the

American Medical Association, the USDA, the National Cancer

Institute, Centers for Disease Control and the National Heart, Lung

and Blood Institute announced a publicity campaign to " aggressively

promote foods low in saturated fat and cholesterol in order to reduce

the risk of heart disease and cancer. "

 

National Food Processors Association Conference

The following year, Enig joined Frank McLaughlin, Director of the

Center for Business and Public Policy at the University of Maryland,

in testimony before the National Food Processors Association. It was

a closed conference, for NFPA members only. Enig and McLaughlin had

been invited to give " a view from academia. " Enig presented a number

of slides and warned against singling out classes of fats and oils

for special pejorative labeling. A representative from Frito-Lay took

umbrage at Enig's slides, which listed amounts of trans fats in Frito-

Lay products. Enig offered to redo the analyses if Frito-Lay would to

fund the research. " If you'd talk different, you'd get money, " he

said.

 

Enig urged the association to endorse accurate labeling of trans fats

in all food items but conference participants—including

representatives from most of the major food processing giants—

preferred a policy of " voluntary labeling " that did not unnecessarily

alert the public to the presence of trans fats in their foods. To

date they have prevailed in preventing the inclusion of trans fats on

nutrition labels.

 

Enig's cat and mouse game with Hunter and Applewhite of the Institute

of Shortening and Edible Oils continued throughout the later years of

the 1980's. Their modus operandi was to pepper the literature with

articles that downplayed the dangers of trans fats, to use their

influence to prevent opposing points of view from appearing in print

and to follow-up the few alarmist articles that did squeak through

with " definitive rebuttals. " In 1987 Enig submitted a paper on trans

fatty acids in the US diet to the American Journal of Clinical

Nutrition, as a reply to the erroneous 1985 FASEB report as well as

to Hunter and Applewhite's influential 1986 article, which by even

the most conservative analysis underestimated the average American

consumption of partially hydrogenated fats. Editor-in-chief Albert

Mendeloff, MD rejected Enig's rebuttal as " inappropriate for the

journal's readership. " His rejection letter invited her to resubmit

her paper if she could come up with " new evidence. " In 1991, the

article finally came out in a less prestigious publication, the

Journal of the American College of Nutrition,36 although Applewhite

did his best to coerce editor Mildred Seelig into removing it at the

last minute. Hunter and Applewhite submitted letters and then an

article of rebuttal to the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition,37

which were published shortly thereafter. In the article,

entitled " Reassessment of trans fatty acid availability in the US

diet, " Hunter and Applewhite argued that the amount of trans in the

American diet had actually declined since 1984, due to the

introduction of soft margarines and tub spreads. The media fell in

line with their pronouncements, with numerous articles by food

writers recommending low-trans tub spreads, made from polyunsaturated

vegetable oils, as the sensible alternative to saturated fat from

animal sources—not surprising as most newspapers rely on the

International Food Information Council, an arm of the food processing

industry, for their nutrition information.

 

Other research on trans fats

Enig and the University of Maryland group were not alone in their

efforts to bring their concerns about the effect of partially

hydrogenated fats before the public. Fred Kummerow at the University

of Illinois, blessed with independent funding and an abundance of

patience, carried out a number of studies that indicated that the

trans fats increased risk factors associated with heart disease, and

that vegetable-oil-based fabricated foods such as Egg Beaters cannot

support life.38 George Mann, formerly with the Framingham project,

possessed neither funding nor patience—he was, in fact, very angry

with what he called the Diet/Heart scam. His independent studies of

the Masai in Africa,39 whose diet is extremely rich in cholesterol

and saturated fat, and who are virtually free of heart disease, had

convinced him that the lipid hypothesis was " the public health

diversion of this century. . . the greatest scam in the history of

medicine. " 40 He resolved to bring the issue before the public by

organizing a conference in Washington DC in November of 1991.

 

" Hundreds of millions of tax dollars are wasted by the bureaucracy

and the self-interested Heart Association, " he wrote in his

invitation to participants. " Segments of the food industry play the

game for profits. Research on the true causes and prevention is

stifled by denying funding to the `unbelievers.' This meeting will

review the data and expose the rascals. "

 

The rascals did their best to prevent the meeting from taking place.

Funding promised by the Greenwall Foundation of New York City was

later withdrawn, so Mann paid most of the bills. A press release sent

as a dirty trick to speakers and participants wrongly announced that

the conference had been cancelled. Several speakers did in fact

renege at the last minute on their commitment to attend, including

the prestigious Dr. Roslyn Alfin-Slater and Dr. Peter Nixon of

London. Dr. Eliot Corday of Los Angeles cancelled after being told

that his attendance would jeopardize future funding.

 

The final pared-down roster included Dr. George Mann, Dr. Mary Enig,

Dr. Victor Herbert, Dr. Petr Skrabenek, William B. Parsons, Jr., Dr.

James McCormick, a physician from Dublin, Dr. William Stehbens from

New Zealand, who described the normal protective process of arterial

thickening at points of greatest stress and pressure, and Dr. Meyer

Texon an expert in the dynamics of blood flow. Mann, in his

presentation, blasted the system that had foisted the lipid

hypothesis on a gullible public. " You will see, " he said, " that many

of our contributors are senior scientists. They are so for a reason

that has become painfully conspicuous as we organized this meeting.

Scientists who must go before review panels for their research

funding know well that to speak out, to disagree with this false

dogma of Diet/Heart, is a fatal error. They must comply or go

unfunded. I could show a list of scientists who said to me, in

effect, when I invited them to participate: `I believe you are right,

that the Diet/Heart hypothesis is wrong, but I cannot join you

because that would jeopardize my perks and funding.' For me, that

kind of hypocritical response separates the scientists from the

operators—the men from the boys. "

 

90s see the nation well oiled

By the nineties the operators had succeeded, by slick manipulation of

the press and of scientific research, in transforming America into a

nation that was well and truly oiled. Consumption of butter had

bottomed out at about 5 grams per person per day, down from almost 18

at the turn of the century. Use of lard and tallow had been reduced

by two-thirds. Margarine consumption had jumped from less than 2

grams per person per day in 1909 to about 11 in 1960. Since then

consumption figures had changed little, remaining at about 11 grams

per person per day—perhaps because knowledge of margarine's dangers

had been slowly seeping out to the public. However, most of the trans

fats in the current American diet come not from margarine but from

shortening used in fried and fabricated foods. American shortening

consumption of 10 grams per person per day held steady until the

1960's, although the content of that shortening had changed from

mostly lard, tallow and coconut oil—all natural fats—to partially

hydrogenated soybean oil. Then shortening consumption shot up and by

1993 had tripled to over 30 grams per person per day.

 

But the most dramatic overall change in the American diet was the

huge increase in the consumption of liquid vegetable oils, from

slightly less than 2 grams per person per day in 1909 to over 30 in

1993—a fifteen fold increase.

 

Dangers of polyunsaturates

The irony is that these trends have persisted concurrently with

revelations about the dangers of polyunsaturates. Because

polyunsaturates are highly subject to rancidity, they increase the

body's need for vitamin E and other antioxidants. Excess consumption

of vegetable oils is especially damaging to the reproductive organs

and the lungs—both of which are sites for huge increases in cancer in

the US. In test animals, diets high in polyunsaturates from vegetable

oils inhibit the ability to learn, especially under conditions of

stress; they are toxic to the liver; they compromise the integrity of

the immune system; they depress the mental and physical growth of

infants; they increase levels of uric acid in the blood; they cause

abnormal fatty acid profiles in the adipose tissues; they have been

linked to mental decline and chromosomal damage; they accelerate

aging. Excess consumption of polyunsaturates is associated with

increasing rates of cancer, heart disease and weight gain; excess use

of commercial vegetable oils interferes with the production of

prostaglandins leading to an array of complaints ranging from

autoimmune disease to PMS. Disruption of prostaglandin production

leads to an increased tendency to form blood clots, and hence

myocardial infarction, which has reached epidemic levels in

America.41

 

Vegetable oils are more toxic when heated. One study reported that

polyunsaturates turn to varnish in the intestines. A study by a

plastic surgeon found that women who consumed mostly vegetable oils

had far more wrinkles than those who used traditional animal fats. A

1994 study appearing in the Lancet showed that almost three quarters

of the fat in artery clogs is unsaturated. The " artery clogging " fats

are not animal fats but vegetable oils.42

 

Those who have most actively promoted the use of polyunsaturated

vegetable oils as part of a Prudent Diet are well aware of their

dangers. In 1971, William B. Kannel, former director of the

Framingham study, warned against including too many polyunsaturates

in the diet. A year earlier, Dr. William Connor of the American Heart

Association issued a similar warning, and Frederick Stare reviewed an

article which reported that the use of polyunsaturated oils caused an

increase in breast tumors. And Kritchevsky, way back in 1969,

discovered that the use of corn oil caused an increase in

atherosclerosis.43

 

As for the trans fats, produced in vegetable oils when they are

partially hydrogenated, the results that are now in the literature

more than justify concerns of early investigators about the relation

between trans fats and both heart disease and cancer. The research

group at the University of Maryland found that trans fatty acids not

only alter enzymes that neutralize carcinogens, and increase enzymes

that potentiate carcinogens, but also depress milk fat production in

nursing mothers and decrease insulin binding.44 In other words, trans

fatty acids in the diet interfere with the ability of new mothers to

nurse successfully and increase the likelihood of developing

diabetes. Unpublished work indicates that trans fats contribute to

osteoporosis. Hanis, a Czechoslovakian researcher, found that trans

consumption decreased testosterone, caused the production of abnormal

sperm and altered gestation.45 Koletzko, a German pediatric

researcher found that excess trans consumption in pregnant mothers

predisposed them to low birth weight babies.46 Trans consumption

interferes with the body's use of omega-3 fatty acids found in fish

oils, grains and green vegetables, leading to impaired prostaglandin

production.47 George Mann confirmed that trans consumption increases

the incidence of heart disease.48 In 1995, European researchers found

a positive correlation between breast cancer rates and trans

consumption.49

 

Until the 1995 study, only the disturbing revelations of Dutch

researchers Mensink and Katan, in 1990, received front page coverage.

Mensink and Katan found that margarine consumption increased coronary

heart disease risk factors.50 The industry—and the press—responded by

promoting tub spreads, which contain reduced amounts of trans

compared to stick margarine. For the general population, these trans

reductions have been more than offset by changes in the types of fat

used by the fast food industry. In the early 1980's, Center for

Science in the Public Interest campaigned against the use of beef

tallow for frying potatoes. Before that they campaigned against the

use of tallow for frying chicken and fish. Most fast food concerns

switched to partially hydrogenated soybean oil for all fried foods.

Some deep fried foods have been tested at almost 50% trans.51

 

Epidemiologist Walter Willett at Harvard worked for many years with

flawed data bases which did not identify trans fats as a dietary

component. He found a correlation with dietary fat consumption and

both heart disease and cancer. After his researchers contacted Enig

about the trans data, they developed a more valid data base that was

used in the analysis of the massive Nurses Study. When Willett's

group separated out the trans component in their analyses, they were

able to confirm greater rates of cancer in those consuming margarine

and vegetable shortenings—not butter, eggs, cheese and meat.52 The

correlation of trans fat consumption and cancer was never published,

but was reported at the Baltimore Data Bank Conference in 1992.

 

In 1993 Willett's research group at Harvard found that trans

contributed to heart disease,53 and this study was not ignored, but

received much fanfare in the press. Willett's first reference in his

report was Enig's work on the trans content of common foods.

 

The industry continues to argue that American trans consumption is a

low six to eight grams per person per day, not enough to contribute

to today's epidemic of chronic disease. Total per capita consumption

of margarine and shortening hovers around 40 grams per person per

day. If these products contain 30% trans (many shortenings contain

more) then average consumption is about 12 grams per person per day.

In reality, consumption figures can be dramatically higher for some

individuals. A 1989 Washington Post article documented the diet of a

teenage girl who ate 12 donuts and 24 cookies over a three day

period. Total trans worked out to at least 30 grams per day, and

possibly much more. The fat in the chips that teenagers consume in

abundance may contain up to 48% trans which translates into 45.6

grams of trans fat in a small ten-ounce bag of snack chips—which a

hungry teenager can gobble up in a few minutes. High school sex

education classes do not teach American teenagers that the altered

fats in their snack foods may severely compromise their ability to

have normal sex, conceive, give birth to healthy babies and

successfully nurse their infants.

 

Part 4

 

References

--- End forwarded message ---