yes, you read that right. i have been in total rage for a few days after this news came out, so i looked into the backgrounds of this story:
who are these gods that make such decisions or suggestions?
2 names came up - a professor M. Uusitupa and a nutritionist U. Schwab who works directly under the said professor (pun intended? noooo way). i thought id look up their sponsors and heres the list :
Fazer Bakeries Oy, VAASAN bakeries Oy, Raisio Oyj (vegetable oil industry), Raisio Benecol Ltd (vegetable oil industry), Danisco Ltd (sugar industry), International Council of Olive Oil, Arla Foods (lowfat dairy products), Carlshamn Mejeri AB, Svenska Nestlé AB, Van den Bergh Foods AB, Eridania Beghin-Say, Meadow Lea Foods, F Hoffman-La Roche Ltd, Novo Nordisk Foundation.
the proffessor owns stock in the following:
Orion (pharmacology) and Foodfiles Ltd
What is this Foodfiles???
the company produces customised "research" articles for food- and pharmacology companies. the company openly says that the client can make the decision about publication. they have made a bit over 5 million in the past 4 years. the said professor owns 13% of stock. their clients include:
Arla Foods Ab, AstraZeneca Oy (pharmacology), Atria Oyj (processed tvdinners) , Camelina Oy (rapeseed oil), Danisco Sugar Oy, Oy Karl Fazer Ab (chocolate, desserts), Oy Marli Ltd (juices), Novartis Finland Oy, Oriola Oy, Pouttu Oy (processed meatproducts) ja Valio Oy (lowfat milkproducts).
Uusitupa in the chairman of the local AHA and has taken financial support from:
Boehringer Ingelheim Finland ky, HK Ruokatalo Oy, Medtronic Finland Oy, MSD Finland Oy, Normomedical Oy/Omron Healthcare, Oriola, Orion Corporation Orion Pharma, Oy Eli Lilly Finland Ab, Pfizer, Saarioinen Oy, Sanofi-aventis Oy, Unilever Finland Oy, Vaasan Oy, Valio Oy.
he has also sat on the boards of the Danisco researchorganization and the foundation of diabetesresearch at the same time as the foundation has designated him substantial researchallowances. he has also received lecturingfees from Unilever Oy ,a vegetablefat giant.
so you get the idea right?
the good professor spews such nonsense as the CWBS satfat cloggs arteries and cholesterol causes heartattacks that he seems stuck in the 60s. and thats exactly what he is doing - he has on several occasions quoted studies that were made in the 60s and one in particular that was already claimed a false study also in the 60s. - the Finnish Mental Hospital Study. he has also quoted the rabbit studie to prove that a diet of fat and protein causes labanimals cholesterol. i mean really???? feed a lion salad for a year and you have a dead lion - i will not go around and accuse the salad. i will accuse the dimwit "scientist".
he has also professed that wholegrains are slow carbs... i guesse he missed the part in the GItable (pointless on its own i know) where you have wholemeal bread at 69 and a snickers bar at 40....
at the same time the studies that he falls back on in his lectures and interviews dont back his views at all: some extracts from references used in his article defending the lowfat religion in Suomen Lääkärilehti 37/2011, vsk 66, 2659-2664>>>>
"Mediterranean and low-carbohydrate diets may be effective alternatives to low-fat diets. The more favorable effects on lipids (with the low-carbohydrate diet) and on glycemic control (with the Mediterranean diet) suggest that personal preferences and metabolic considerations might inform individualized tailoring of dietary interventions." source 1
"Successful weight loss can be achieved with either a low-fat or low-carbohydrate diet when coupled with behavioral treatment. A low-carbohydrate diet is associated with favorable changes in cardiovascular disease risk factors at 2 years." source 2
"Compared with the LF group, the LC group had greater decreases in triglycerides, increases in HDL cholesterol and LDL cholesterol" (LDL:n partikkelijakauma on siis parantunut) source 3
"During active weight loss, serum triglyceride levels decreased more and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol level increased more with the low-carbohydrate diet than with the low-fat diet." source 4
"For persons on the low-carbohydrate diet, triglyceride levels decreased more and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels decreased less. As seen in the small group of persons with diabetes and after adjustment for covariates, hemoglobin A1c levels improved more for persons on the low-carbohydrate diet. These more favorable metabolic responses to a low-carbohydrate diet remained significant after adjustment for weight loss differences." source5
"In this study, premenopausal overweight and obese women assigned to follow the Atkins diet, which had the lowest carbohydrate intake, lost more weight at 12 months than women assigned to follow the Zone diet, and had experienced comparable or more favorable metabolic effects than those assigned to the Zone, Ornish, or LEARN diets" source6
"Despite favourable effects of both diets on weight loss, the carbohydrate-reduced diet was more beneficial with respect to cardiovascular risk factors compared to the fat-reduced diet." source7
"The low-carbohydrate diet was associated with a greater improvement in some risk factors for coronary heart disease." source 8
"the low-carbohydrate diet produced a greater increase in HDL cholesterol" source 9
"There were significant differences between the groups for weight, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triacylglycerols and systolic blood pressure, favouring the low-carbohydrate diet." source10
"Severely obese subjects with a high prevalence of diabetes or the metabolic syndrome lost more weight during six months on a carbohydrate-restricted diet than on a calorie- and fat-restricted diet, with a relative improvement in insulin sensitivity and triglyceride levels, even after adjustment for the amount of weight lost." source11
(the extracted info here and some info about the professors interviews is quoted from http://vahahiilihydraattinen-ruokavalio-vhh.blogspot.com/2011/10/matti-uusitupa-ja-karppauksen.html)
so the professor is either simply dumb or he is so lazy that he cant be bothered to read the research that he uses. or he is simply so arrogant that he thinks his readers will not read the studies he links to??? Id say all the above.