Even though the Dansinger study was poorly designed, one can still see that when people half-heartedly follow a nutritional approach that lowers their carbohdyrate intake, whether they lose a ton of weight or not, their lipid parameters improve. So, it’s only logic to think of the magnitude of the benefits if they would committ to follow something really closely.

Back to that meta-analysis, in my opinion, although the statistical exercise was arduous and ‘seemed’ thorough enough (evidenced by the fact that from 166 potential studies, only five passed their rigorous test for eligibility), there’s a mega-flaw in the interpretation of studies like Dansinger’s. Since there was no significant decrease in either total cholesterol or LDL in all studies (even though there was a significant decrease in triglycerides and significant increase in HDL in the low-carb dieters), the meta-analysis concluded that low-carbohydrate diets should not be recommended because they didn’t improve the subjects’ cardiovascular disease. Hello?? Didn’t they hear about LDL-profiles being more important than a formular-derived LDL calculation? That would be enough to dismiss their conclusion because there’s no data showing LDL profiles in the studies they selected so there’s no watertight evidence that the seemingly high levels of LDL are in fact dangerous. Since triglycerides and HDL are recognized independent factors for cardiovascular risk, that alone also contradicts their conclusion. So, talk about not knowing much about what they’re ‘meta-analyzing’.

At best, the meta-analysis shows the flaws still plaguing diet comparison studies, which in my opinion is something that must be addressed should the field is to really establish itself as a strong one to make a higher impact in policy making regarding nutrition.

One thing struck me in the ‘facts’ bit about how much saturated fat Americans are consumming in their diets. As with Australians I would contend that the majority of the fat in their diets is not saturated or cholesterol containing. The fat they are actually consuming in extremely large amounts is either trans fat or polyunsatrated fat – just look at the ingredients in the food they eat.
High levels of hydrogenated vegetable oils & most of the fatty foods they consume have been fried in vegetable oils as well as containing hydrogenated versions of them as an ingredient in the bulk of the food.
The low fat message has so successfully been indoctrinated into people that we can’t even buy meat here that hasn’t had 99% of it’s fat trimmed off it by the butchers. People even peel off the chicken skins. In fact skinless chicken pieces are so prized they are sold at 2 or 3 dollars a kilo more than the ones with skin on. The margarine section in the supermarket is by far larger than the butter section which is usually hidden away at the end of the refrigerated bit.
So maybe Dr Ornish should start wondering why with all the low fat foods available & eaten in the main by FAT people trying to get thin & the fried foods are fried not in lard as in the past but in canola oil & advertised as ‘cholesterol free’ & that red meat consumption is down or stayed level over the last 40 years & where available especially in Australia has had almost all it’s fat trimmed off how are people consuming large amounts of saturated fat??? I mean even if you were to eat them, try finding even a sweet biscut or cake made with butter any more, it is always a variation on margarine as an ingredient.
So maybe the myth of a typical diet high in saturated fats should be examined & the real fats consumed by the over-weight masses should be exposed. In the rush to cash in on the low fat message the world has consumed more sugar & franken-fats & high carbohydrate foods than is good for us. The only part of Dr Ornish’s diet that I agree with is lots of healthy nutrient dense green veggies. I wonder at these low fat gurus getting all bent out of shape about low carb diets being a fad & spouting about how it is bad to cut out a whole food group etc & then they proceed to banish an entire nutrient dense food like real saturated fat. It is a puzzle isn’t it?

Funny old world eh ?
BTW if you know of anyone who has tried to study cell function and personality could you fwd me his/her name/s pleasum ?
“The spiritual teacher Swami Satchidananda was once asked, ‘What’s the difference between illness and wellness?’ He walked over to a blackboard [during Grand Rounds at the University of Virginia Medical Center] and wrote illness and circled the first letter, i. He then wrote wellness and circled the first two letters, we.”

—Dr. Dean Ornish in
The Oprah Magazine,
November 2002

Most people won’t stop to question and learn. I’d been raised believing that fat made you fat and therefore low fat foods were better. I never bothered to question that until I was obese and low-carb was popular. Then I started asking questions and reading and learned that the low-fat dogma I’d been raised to believe in was hogwash.