John Yudkin Pure White and Deadly !

John Yudkin Pure White and Deadly.

John Yudkin (8 August 1910 - 12 July 1995) was a British physiologist and scientist. He became internationally famous with his book Pure, White and Deadly (published in 1972) This book foretold the damage that sugar does to health and in my opinion is a masterpiece. He forecasted the epidemics of type two diabetes, obesity and heart disease. The book has been out of print for some time. Penguin books have just reprinted this great book. If you do not wish to purchase or funds are tight, it can be read free of charge here.

Eddie 

The board meeting.

McDonald’s McRib another failed science experiment.!

Over the past couple of years, we’ve learned the unsavory truth about “pink slime,”reconstituted meat, and how the use of meat glue cheats you out of your hard-earned money at the grocery store and threatens your health.

We’ve also learned that fast food fare such as McDonald’s hamburgers contain so many chemicals and so few real food ingredients that a burger fails to show signs of decomposition after more than a decade...

The famous McDonald’s McRib also came under closer scrutiny, and turned out to be something less than mouthwatering. The McRib sandwich is a non-standard item on the fast food restaurant’s menu;¹ its annual return is always advertised with great fanfare — last year it even made the headlines on ABC News.²

The pork sandwich is described as a tasty fan favorite slathered in tangy barbecue sauce, slivered onions and tart pickles, served on a hoagie style bun. Sounds perfectly normal, but what’s it made of, really? In a November 2011 article, CBS Chicago news³ spilled the beans on this seasonal favorite:

“More than 70 ingredients make up the McRib and, yes, one of them is pork. But as CBS 2’s Vince Gerasole reports, there’s also an ingredient that can be found in shoes... [Registered dietician Cassie] Vanderwall gave the McRib a closer look and found the McRib has azodicarbonamide, which is used to bleach the flour in bread. It has other uses. 'It could be on your yoga mat, in your gym shoes, in your anything that’s rubbery,' Vanderwall said...

Then there’s the pork – which is really restructured meat product. In other words, it’s made from all the less expensive innards and castoffs from the pig... Vanderwall said the McRib ingredient list 'reminds me of a chemistry lab.'”

To see pictures of a ‘deconstructed’ McRib sandwich, check out foodfacts.info’s McRib page.⁴ It sure doesn’t look so appetizing anymore once the sauce is washed off and the meat sliced in half. In fact, it can barely pass meat, which was the point CBS news tried to make in the first place.

More here.

High dairy fat intake related to less central obesity: A male cohort study with 12 years’ follow-up !

Objective. To study associations between dairy fat intake and development of central obesity. Design. A prospective population-based cohort study with two surveys 12 years apart. Setting. Nine municipalities selected from different parts of Sweden representing the rural areas in the country. Subjects. 1782 men (farmers and non-farmers) aged 40–60 years at baseline participated in a baseline survey (participation rate 76%) and 1589 men participated at the follow-up. 116 men with central obesity at baseline were excluded from the analyses. Main outcome measures. Central obesity at follow-up defined as waist hip ratio ≥ 1. Results. 197 men (15%) developed central obesity during follow-up. A low intake of dairy fat at baseline (no butter and low fat milk and seldom/never whipping cream) was associated with a higher risk of developing central obesity (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.05–2.24) and a high intake of dairy fat (butter as spread and high fat milk and whipping cream) was associated with a lower risk of central obesity (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.33–0.83) as compared with medium intake (all other combinations of spread, milk, and cream) after adjustment for intake of fruit and vegetables, smoking, alcohol consumption, physical activity, age, education, and profession. The associations between dairy fat intake and central obesity were consistent across body mass index categories at baseline. Conclusion. A high intake of dairy fat was associated with a lower risk of central obesity and a low dairy fat intake was associated with a higher risk of central obesity.


http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.3109/02813432.2012.757070

Graham

What is actually in a value burger?

The presence of horsemeat in value beefburgers has caused a furore. But what is usually in the patties?

"It has been a sobering week for fans of the beefburger.

Tesco have used full-page adverts in national newspapers to apologise for selling burgers in the UK that were found to contain 29% horsemeat. Traces of horse DNA were also detected by the Food Standards Agency of Ireland in products sold by Iceland, Lidl, Aldi and Dunnes. But a beefburger rarely contains 100% beef.

The Food Standards Agency (FSA) has two classifications for burger products - standard and economy. A standard beefburger can only be classified as such if it comprises a minimum of 62% beef. Similarly, a chicken (or other poultry) or rabbit burger must contain a minimum of 55% meat, and a pork burger 67% minimum pig meat.

The percentages take a tumble when it comes to economy or "value" burger products."

As Tesco likes to say "Every little bit helps" but a horse ! What a way to treat poor old Dobbin.

Eddie

More on this scandal here.

Tubolard washes up on beach at Angus nature reserve !

Storms over the east coast have resulted in several unusual relics from World War II washing up on an Angus beach.

Staff at St Cyrus nature reserve said four large, barrel-shaped pieces of lard have appeared on the shore.

The fat is believed to have escaped from the wreck of a merchant vessel that was bombed in WW II.

Scottish Natural Heritage said the lard was still a brilliant white and smelled "good enough to have a fry up with."

The lard would have originally been stored in wooden barrels, which have long since rotted away.

More here.

Over 60 MPs Connected to Companies Involved in Private Healthcare !

In total 66 MPs have financial links to companies involved in private healthcare. Of them, 53 are Conservative MPs, 9 are Labour MPs, and 3 are Liberal Democrats, leaving 1 other from another party. This means, 79% of MPs with these links are Conservative.

These parliamentarians coupled with the 142 Lords with the same interests, make a total of parliamentarians 206 with financial links to companies involved in healthcare.

The interests range in influence from donations made by individuals, shares in a company, or advisor to a company, owner, overseas visits and hospitality, and directorships.

These parliamentarians coupled with the 142 Lords with the same interests, make a total of 206 parliamentarians with financial links to companies involved in healthcare.

All of these public servants were allowed to vote on the Health and Social Care bill, helping it pass into Act.

Recent released research by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism has revealed 124 members of the House of Lords ‘benefit’ from the financial industry.

Several of these Peers are linked to the Healthcare companies and many of these companies will be funding the private healthcare companies that are threatening the very existence of the NHS.

The House of Lords is an open house for companies to attach themselves to key public servants, lobbying and influencing policy that affects our lives.

Information source.

Cutting down on sugar has a small but significant effect on body weight !

And should be part of strategy to reduce high levels of overweight and obesity

Reducing sugar intake has a small but significant effect on body weight in adults, finds a paper published on bmj.com today.

Although the effect is relatively small (an average reduction of 0.8 kg), the findings provide some support for international guidelines to cut sugar intake to less than 10% of total energy to help reduce the global obesity epidemic.

Excessive sugar in the diet has been linked to obesity, and a higher risk of chronic diseases. The most consistent association has been between a high intake of sugar sweetened beverages and the development of obesity, but not all studies have reported a statistically significant link.

The World Health Organization has suggested that intake of “free sugars” should be less than 10% of total energy intake, but no upper safe limit has been agreed. So a team of researchers at the University of Otago and the Riddet Institute in New Zealand analysed the results of 71 studies (30 randomised controlled trials and 41 cohort studies) of sugar intake and body fatness to summarise evidence on the association between intake of dietary sugars and body weight in both adults and children.

Free sugars were defined as sugars that are added to foods by the manufacturer, cook, or consumer; plus those naturally present in honey, syrups, and fruit juices. Differences in study design and quality were taken into account to minimise bias.

They found that advice to reduce free sugars was associated with an average 0.8 kg reduction in weight (in studies that ran for up to 8 months), while advice to increase intake was associated with a corresponding 0.75 kg increase.

This parallel effect, they suggest, seems be due to an altered energy intake, since replacing sugars with other carbohydrates did not result in any change in body weight.

The evidence was also less consistent in children, mainly due to poor compliance to dietary advice. However, for sugar sweetened beverages, the risk of being overweight or obese increased among children with the highest intake compared with those with the lowest intake.

The authors say that, given the many causes of obesity, it is unsurprising that the effect of reducing intake is relatively small, and they point out that some other unmeasured (confounding) factors may explain some or all of this effect. But they add “the overall consistency of the findings, regardless of study type, is reassuring.”

They also acknowledge that the extent to which population based advice to reduce sugars might reduce risk of obesity “cannot be extrapolated from the present findings, because few data from the studies lasted longer than ten weeks.” But conclude that “when considering the rapid weight gain that occurs after an increased intake of sugars, it seems reasonable to conclude that advice relating to sugars intake is a relevant component of a strategy to reduce the high risk of overweight and obesity in most countries.”

In an accompanying editorial, US experts say the association between sugar and poor health has remained contentious over the past few decades, but that accumulating evidence “points towards a role for sugar and other refined carbohydrates in the development of overweight.”

They say reducing the intake of sugar sweetened drinks “is a high priority” and point to policies such as taxes on sugar laden drinks, restrictions on advertising to children, and limits on serving sizes. They also call for action at many levels, including educational programs, improvements in foods and drinks in schools and worksites, and nutrition programs for people with low incomes.

Finally, a feature comments on the 40th anniversary of the publication of the popular book – Pure, White and Deadly – written by the British physiologist John Yudkin, which claimed that high sugar consumption was associated with heart disease.

It considers new evidence linking fructose (found in nearly all added sugars) with insulin resistance - a pre-cursor of heart disease – and suggests that Yudkin’s warnings are finally being recognised, despite ongoing opposition from the sugar industry.

http://www.bmj.com/press-releases/2013/01/14/cutting-down-sugar-has-small-significant-effect-body-weight

Graham

WTF is going on at ETYM.

I see the minutes of the second board meeting at ETYM have been published. The originator has bumped the post (within a few hours). What is he trying to achieve. It is a locked topic, the members cannot comment. I.E. the only way the post is going to stay up, is bumping by the board members. As can be seen, only four of the board members showed up at the second board meeting. Two apologies for non attendance, no mention of my friend Dillinger. Has he copied me, and done a Captain Oates ? Time will tell, it always does.

ETYM board meeting here.

Eddie

What Blood Sugar Levels Are Healthy?

This is an area of some debate. The long-term studies show that the risk of complications drop off dramatically when an HbA1c  is lower than 7%, an estimated average blood glucose of 154 mg/dL or 8.6 mmol.  It continues to drop until it’s below 6%, an average blood sugar of 126 mg/dL or 7 mmol. There are some people who strive for lower targets, but there is not a lot of research outlining the benefits of that approach.

But that just looks at averages. In reality, there seems to be a huge difference in risk of complications based on genetics. There are many people who have lived thirty or forty years with type 1 diabetes running high blood sugars almost continuously and have no complications. There are others who have had nearly perfect blood sugars that still get complications. But for most people, it’s safe to say that striving for an HbA1c of below 7% and probably below 6.5% is a realistic goal for staying healthy.

More here.

Results for England. The National Diabetes Audit 2010-2011
Percentage of registered Type 1patients in England
HbA1c >= 6.5% (48 mmol/mol) = 92.6%
HbA1c >   7.5% (58 mmol/mol) = 71.3%
HbA1c > 10.0% (86 mmol/mol) = 18.1%

Percentage of registered Type 2 patients in England
HbA1c >= 6.5% (48 mmol/mol = 72.5%
HbA1c > 7.5% (58 mmol/mol) = 32.6%
HbA1c >10.0% (86 mmol/mol) = 6.8%

Year in and year out, the depressing NHS published audits, confirm no progress is being made, in the grim outcomes for many diabetics. So many diabetics never get to a safe HbA1c. There will be no improvement, until dietary recommendations from the NHS and DUK, are drastically changed, and diabetics are told to not base meals on starchy carbohydrates. The great tragedy, is the fact when checking diabetes forums and blogs, many find it comparatively easy, to get to safe blood glucose levels by changing diet and lifestyle. Drop the carbs, drop the HbA1c. Meanwhile the carnage continues.

Eddie

Patients Association concerned over negative effects from GP contract changes.

The Patients Association has criticised the Government for failing to consider ‘first and foremost’ the impact the GP contract changes, set to be implemented in April, would have on patient care.

Chief executive Kate Murphy claimed that the Patients Association helpline had already received record numbers of calls concerning GP services and she was worried the Government’s proposed changed would make matters worse.

Pulse revealed that a fifth of GPs will consider cutting the number of routine appointments available when the proposed contract changes are implemented from April.

READ THE FULL INVESTIGATION HERE

Commenting on the figures in the Express, Mrs Murphy said: ‘Less GPs, fewer receptionists and a cut in appointments can only risk reducing further the quality of services for patients.

‘The Government must consider the impact on patients first and foremost as part of any discussions on changes to GP contracts.’

Dr. Jay Wortman has hope !

Jay is one of the good guys. He is a medical Doctor, a type two diabetic and a lowcarber. Jay is a very modest man and works very hard for the lowcarb cause. Check out his latest post on his blog. When you get on Jays blog, see what other healthcare professionals thought of his latest presentation. As Jay says it gives him hope. That should give us all hope that common sense is beginning to prevail. More drugs are not the answer in the control of type two diabetes.

Words of Jay Wortman.

“There is an annual diabetes update course, primarily for physicians, that has included me in the program over the past few years. I am encouraged by the interest that my lecture generates. I have presented four times and, each time, I have received the highest evaluation from the attendees. My perception is that both the organizers of the conference and the audience are growing more receptive to the idea of using a ketogenic diet for the management of diabetes. I attach FYI the evaluation report from my most recent lecture. It gives me hope.”

Eddie

More here.

Patients with low grade obesity 'have lower risk of death'

The study

This Canadian review collated data from 97 observational cohort studies looking at all-cause mortality in with adults with a normal BMI - defined as 18.5 to 25 – compared with overweight and obese individuals.

The findings

Overweight (BMI between 25 to 30) patients were 6% less likely to die, compared with those that had a normal BMI. Those rated with grade one (BMI of 30 to 35) or two (BMI of 35 or above)obesity were 29% more likely to die from all causes, compared with normal BMI participants. However, there was no significant increase in the risk of death for patients with grade one obesity. This trend continued when the results were limited solely to studies adjusted for age, sex and smoking status.

What does it mean for GPs?

The researchers concluded that these findings were consistent with prior research, showing that overweight patients and those with moderate obesity have no significantly greater risk of death than normal BMI patients. They said the estimates of risks associated with normal weight, overweight and obesity may help to inform clinical decision making.

Expert comment

Dr David Haslam, a GPSI in obesity and cardiometabolic disease in London, said: ‘This study shows comprehensively that we are, as a profession, confused about obesity.

‘There is a definite entity known as the obesity paradox, which suggests that although obesity may be a causative factor in ischaemic heart disease, renal disease and heart failure, once the condition has occurred, a degree of overweight is protective, and that outcomes are improved. Although this piece adds to the confusion, it might ultimately help clarify this paradox.’

Information source here.

Ignorance is bliss !

If you have been around diabetes forums and blogs for a while you can pick up some great information, you can also pick up a huge amount of misinformation. We all have much to learn, and if you are half awake, one thing you pick up on pretty quickly is the massive corruption and criminal activity perpetrated by big pharma. The internet is awash with articles documenting the massive fines being levied against many of the largest pharma companies in the world. I mentioned this on a diabetes forum yesterday, to be challenged with this comment amongst others.

“At some point you have to just accept that big pharma is out to make money and push its products. Yes it does occasionally screw up with things like thalidomide but normally the strict scientific method that is used to test out drugs is pretty successful in my mind.”

Now, from a person very new to the diabetes scene that would be understandable, before my diabetes diagnosis I had close to zero interest in medication and big pharma drugs and the skulduggery which I now know to be endemic. Unfortunately this comment was made by a diabetes forum owner and moderator. The debate went from the ridiculous to the surreal, when he asked me. If I was taken to hospital with a broken leg, and needed antibiotics would I refuse them. Now, at this stage I realised I was arguing with someone who was not interested in fair or intelligent debate, and appears to be extremely naive. I was tempted to reply to the broken leg question with, no way would I go to hospital, I always carry some splints, 30lb of plaster of paris and some dock leaves in my back pack, but I answered in the positive. Of course I would accept and use antibiotics. As stated at length, drugs have saved countless millions, but have also killed or maimed millions. 

The argument went from the surreal to barking mad when the mod asked  “Don't you think governments around the world might start to notice if millions of their people were being killed?” I replied. Don't you agree millions around the world including the UK are being given terrible dietary advice which leads to an early death for diabetics ? What is the Government doing about it, nothing ! Governments are brought and paid for by big pharma and giant international food companies. Big money dictates how it is, not our local MPs many of which are putting their money into private healthcare as fast as they can. Which leads me to the item below. Even our MPs, many who are propagandists and lobbyists for  big pharma and junk food companies, or are Directors and share holders in the same, realise an inquiry needs to be held. My money is on a white wash job and nothing will change. I hope I am proved to be wrong, and much needed changes takes place. One thing is for sure, unless the forum makes some drastic changes, it is heading for Palookaville as we have seen with other forums, that wanted to run a cakes and commiserations outfit, and stifle real debate and intelligent argument, and perpetuate misinformation.

Eddie

Clinical trials in the UK are regulated by the Clinical Trials Directive which was transposed into UK law by the Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) Regulations 2004. In December 2011, the Health Research Authority was created to protect and promote the interests of patients and the public in health research. In July 2012, the European Commission produced proposals to revise the Clinical Trials Directive.

Transparency and disclosure of clinical trial data have been topical recently, in part due to the recently published book Bad Pharma, by Dr Ben Goldacre. It highlighted that pharmaceutical companies are entitled to conduct numerous clinical trials on a new drug but publish selectively, thus skewing the evidence base available for doctors and patients seeking to make informed decisions. 

Terms of Reference

The Committee seeks written submissions on the following matters:
1. Do the European Commission’s proposed revisions to the Clinical Trials Directive address the main barriers to conducting clinical trials in the UK and EU?
2. What is the role of the Health Research Authority (HRA) in relation to clinical trials and how effective has it been to date?
3. What evidence is there that pharmaceutical companies withhold clinical trial data and what impact does this have on public health?
4. How could the occurrence and results of clinical trials be made more open to scrutiny? Who should be responsible?
5. Can lessons about transparency and disclosure of clinical data be learned from other countries? 

More here.

Am I Cured of Diabetes?

When it comes to type 2 diabetes, these three words are everywhere: reversal, remission and cure. There are so many people who claim to have the answer to type 2 diabetes either through a diet plan or supplement. They claim to have a cure or that they can reverse your type 2. The argument that ensues takes offense at the idea that type 2 can be cured or reversed or even put into remission. I think that the evolution around these arguments stems from the irritation we feel when people tell us, “All you have to do is this…and you’re cured.” Sometimes, we get hypersensitive, and I’m as much to blame as anyone else. So let’s take a look at these three words. Here are the definitions taken from a medical dictionary:

Reversal: a change to an opposite condition, direction, or position.
Remission: a temporary or permanent decrease or subsidence of manifestations of a disease. 
Cure: a restoration of health; recovery from disease.

Based on the definitions above, have I reversed my diabetes or put it into remission? Am I cured? Well, I could say that it’s reversed because I have changed the direction of my disease. My blood glucose was going up and now it’s going down: reversal. I could also say that my diabetes is in remission because I have a decrease in the manifestations of the disease. As for cured, I may have restored my health but I have not recovered from the disease. In all three cases, diabetes is still there lurking, ready to return should I change my habits again. What I’ve done, actually, is manage my diabetes through healthy habits that have made my diabetes appear as though it’s not there.

It’s just semantics, people. It’s up to you to search out a food plan that works for you. Ignore the naysayers and do what’s right for you. Don’t be duped into thinking that you will be cured or that your D will go away. Maybe you can reverse it or see your complications go into remission, but it is up to you to stay vigilant and follow your path to better health.

Full story here.

A new blood pressure measuring device which can also detect a dangerous heart condition.

A new blood pressure measuring device which can also detect a dangerous heart condition has been backed by the NHS watchdog.

The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence says GPs could use it routinely to spot more patients with atrial fibrillation (AF).

AF is an erratic and often fast heartbeat affecting 800,000 people in the UK and is a major cause of stroke.

The device NICE is recommending in England is called WatchBP Home A.

It looks like a normal blood pressure monitor, with an inflatable cuff that goes around the patient's arm.

At the same time as measuring blood pressure, it can check a patient's pulse.

If people over 65 were to be checked with the WatchBP Home A device, it could save the NHS about £26m and benefit about 400,000 people, says NICE.

Prof Carole Longson from NICE said: "The guidance is not about screening for atrial fibrillation, but about the benefits that the device offers in helping to pick up atrial fibrillation by chance in people with suspected high blood pressure or those being screened for high blood pressure, in primary care."

More here.

Don't fear saturated fats !

“Before 1920 coronary heart disease was rare in America; so rare that when a young internist named Paul Dudley White introduced the German electrocardiograph to his colleagues at Harvard University, they advised him to concentrate on a more profitable branch of medicine. The new machine revealed the presence of arterial blockages, thus permitting early diagnosis of coronary heart disease. But in those days clogged arteries were a medical rarity, and White had to search for patients who could benefit from his new technology. During the next forty years, however, the incidence of coronary heart disease rose dramatically, so much so that by the mid fifties heart disease was the leading cause of death among Americans. Today heart disease causes at least 40% of all US deaths. If, as we have been told, heart disease results from the consumption of saturated fats, one would expect to find a corresponding increase in animal fat in the American diet. Actually, the reverse is true. During the sixty-year period from 1910 to 1970, the proportion of traditional animal fat in the American diet declined from 83% to 62%, and butter consumption plummeted from eighteen pounds per person per year to four. During the past eighty years, dietary cholesterol intake has increased only 1%. During the same period the percentage of dietary vegetable oils in the form of margarine, shortening and refined oils increased about 400% while the consumption of sugar and processed foods increased about 60%.

The Framingham Heart Study is often cited as proof of the lipid hypothesis. This study began in 1948 and involved some 6,000 people from the town of Framingham, Massachusetts. Two groups were compared at five-year intervals—those who consumed little cholesterol and saturated fat and those who consumed large amounts. After 40 years, the director of this study had to admit: "In Framingham, Mass, the more saturated fat one ate, the more cholesterol one ate, the more calories one ate, the lower the person’s serum cholesterol. . . we found that the people who ate the most cholesterol, ate the most saturated fat, ate the most calories, weighed the least and were the most physically active." The study did show that those who weighed more and had abnormally high blood cholesterol levels were slightly more at risk for future heart disease; but weight gain and cholesterol levels had an inverse correlation with fat and cholesterol intake in the diet.”

This is a great item well worth reading more here.

Insulin therapy may boost death risk in Type 2 diabetes mellitus patients !

The aim was to investigate the association between human insulin and cancer incidence and mortality in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes.

Methods

We recruited 8,774 insulin-naïve diabetes patients from the Shanghai Diabetes Registry (SDR). The follow-up rate was 85.4%. All subjects were divided into the insulin use cohort (n = 3,639) and the non-insulin use cohort (n = 5,135). The primary outcome was the first diagnosis of any cancer. The secondary outcome was all-cause mortality. Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate the relative risk (RR) of cancer and mortality.

Results

We observed 98 cancer events in the insulin use cohort and 170 in the non-insulin use cohort. Cancer incidence rates were 78.6 and 74.3 per 10,000 patients per year in the insulin users and the non-insulin users, respectively. No significant difference in cancer risk was observed between the two cohorts (adjusted RR = 1.20, 95% CI 0.89–1.62, P = 0.228). Regarding site-specific cancers, only the risk of liver cancer was significantly higher in the insulin users compared to that in the non-insulin users (adjusted RR = 2.84, 95% CI 1.12–7.17, P = 0.028). The risks of overall mortality (adjusted RR = 1.89, 95% CI 1.47–2.43, P<0.0001) and death from cancer (adjusted RR = 2.16, 95% CI 1.39–3.35, P = 0.001) were all significantly higher in the insulin users than in the non-insulin users.

Conclusion

There was no excess risk of overall cancer in patients with type 2 diabetes who were treated with human insulin. However, a significantly higher risk of liver cancer was found in these patients. Moreover, insulin users showed higher risks of overall and cancer mortality. Considering that individuals treated with insulin were more likely to be advanced diabetic patients, caution should be used in interpreting these results.

Source here.

Thousands of clinical trials have not reported their results; some have not even been registered.

Thousands of clinical trials have not reported their results; some have not even been registered.

Information on what was done and what was found in these trials could be lost forever to doctors and researchers, leading to bad treatment decisions, missed opportunities for good medicine, and trials being repeated unnecessarily on people and animals.

All trials past and present should be registered, and the full methods and the results reported.

We call on governments, regulators and research bodies to implement measures to achieve this.

Data will be held by Sense About Science. Read our privacy policy here.

An initiative of Bad Science, Sense About Science, BMJ, James Lind Initiative and Centre for Evidence-based Medicine.

More here.

Merck begins overseas recall of HDL cholesterol drug !

Merck & Co said it is recalling Tredaptive, its medicine to raise "good" HDL cholesterol levels, in overseas markets where it is sold, after it failed to prevent heart problems in a large study and raised safety concerns.

The medicine is not approved in the United States but the U.S. drugmaker sells it in about 40 countries.

Merck said it would recall stocks of Tredaptive now held by wholesalers, but that pharmacies can continue to dispense their remaining supplies. Even so, the company said it plans to discourage doctors from prescribing the pill based on negative findings from the trial which were announced last month. The study followed more than 25,000 patients in Europe and China for almost four years.

Merck in December said Tredaptive did no better in the study at preventing heart attacks, deaths or strokes than traditional statin drugs that lower "bad" LDL cholesterol.

Moreover, Merck said the medicine significantly raised the incidence of some types of nonfatal but serious side effects in the study. They included blood, lymph and gastrointestinal problems, as well as respiratory and skin issues.

Tredaptive was approved in the European Union in 2008, but the U.S. Food and Drug Administration was unwilling to approve the pill until Merck conducted the costly long-term study to better assess its safety and effectiveness.

More here.

Coca-Cola to address obesity in advert !

Fizzy-drink giant Coca-Cola is set to launch a new advert addressing obesity for the first time on television.

The two-minute commercial highlights the firm's record of making low-calorie drinks and reminds viewers all foods contain calories.

The ad, which airs on US cable networks on Monday, follows mounting pressure on the soft drinks industry.

New York City is preparing to ban large sugary drinks in restaurants, cinemas and stadiums.

Coca-Cola has said the video was not made in response to criticism of the soft drink industry, but is an effort to raise awareness.

It is not the first time the Atlanta-based firm has used advertising to address this issue, but it is a first for television.

More here.

Simvastatin Effects on Skeletal Muscle

Relation to Decreased Mitochondrial Function and Glucose Intolerance

Abstract

Objectives  Glucose tolerance and skeletal muscle coenzyme Q10 (Q10) content, mitochondrial density, and mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS) capacity were measured in simvastatin-treated patients (n = 10) and in well-matched control subjects (n = 9).

Background  A prevalent side effect of statin therapy is muscle pain, and yet the basic mechanism behind it remains unknown. We hypothesize that a statin-induced reduction in muscle Q10 may attenuate mitochondrial OXPHOS capacity, which may be an underlying mechanism.

Methods  Plasma glucose and insulin concentrations were measured during an oral glucose tolerance test. Mitochondrial OXPHOS capacity was measured in permeabilized muscle fibers by high-resolution respirometry in a cross-sectional design. Mitochondrial content (estimated by citrate synthase [CS] activity, cardiolipin content, and voltage-dependent anion channel [VDAC] content) as well as Q10 content was determined.

Results  Simvastatin-treated patients had an impaired glucose tolerance and displayed a decreased insulin sensitivity index. Regarding mitochondrial studies, Q10 content was reduced (p = 0.05), whereas mitochondrial content was similar between the groups. OXPHOS capacity was comparable between groups when complex I– and complex II–linked substrates were used alone, but when complex I + II–linked substrates were used (eliciting convergent electron input into the Q intersection [maximal ex vivo OXPHOS capacity]), a decreased (p < 0.01) capacity was observed in the patients compared with the control subjects.

Conclusions  These simvastatin-treated patients were glucose intolerant. A decreased Q10 content was accompanied by a decreased maximal OXPHOS capacity in the simvastatin-treated patients. It is plausible that this finding partly explains the muscle pain and exercise intolerance that many patients experience with their statin treatment.

Full article: http://content.onlinejacc.org/article.aspx?articleid=1555209

Graham

The xyzzy debate.

Rather than turn this into a comment, that gets lost within a thread, I thought we could debate the subjects in an open type forum setting. You know my email address, so you can send your responses to me, and I will place them on this thread, unedited of course.

Stop changing the subject mate.

Yes I did not answer your last comments fully, I wanted to keep it between me and you. Regarding your comment, you are pushing for an answer, so I will give it to you.

 “Certainly didn't help Lucy did it?” 

This is lucylocket who stated yesterday. “I think, looking at recent postings, that Eddie is trying to stir up trouble on this site, He was the one who mentioned Sal, he is the one who keeps talking about using controversy to increasing our rate of being read by others. He is the one talking about karma and stuff.”

You do realise Lucylocket is also known as fibreclaireUK, and was a regular poster on this blog, and was certainly up for some winding people up, at other forums, when it suited her. Posting on the "fight club" blog, not the shrinking violet she appears to be eh.

Like I said you seem to be more into karma, thanks you's, ratings etc rather than actually helping people at the moment which is a shame. A bit up yourself to be frank.

It is true the karma and thank you’s did mean something to me, I accepted them in good faith, and to me it was a marker people liked my posts, and felt I had something positive to offer.

Sounds a bit like what I was ACTUALLY writing about on my thread doesn't it? You know the difference between the true helpful LC message and a bastardized celebrity cultist crazy version of it.

Sorry was you referring to me or Jimmy Moore ?

The bottom line in this is that you object to us discussing those GTT experiments because they show that people who are diabetic can quite happily get good levels across a wide range of regimes. That is a message you do not want heard for some reason or another. 

I don’t object to people talking about anything. That is why I started  a separate thread, so I did not derail or take other threads off topic.

You then tried to disrupt the discussions that were going on in an identical manner as the low carb antis did on DCUK. The difference is we have a karma system and our members told you what they thought of your tactics. The words pot and kettle come to mind.

The words pot and kettle come to mind, don’t they just. I remember when you and other board members were staunch lowcarb activists. Taking on lowcarb antis and causing disruption got four board members banned including you.You and I have taken on people that pushed a diet useless for many, and then you use a carb number to newbies that the NHS and DUK would applaud. Let's not forget you guys fought anti lowcarbers 24/7 until you got banned. You then start your own forum and run it as a carbon copy of DCUK.

Grow up and start doing some real good like my mate Fergie does. He does a stricter carb regime than you and wouldn't dream of telling someone else that his is the only way.

Start doing some real good, what something like paying for the hosting of a diabetes website and helping the newly diagnosed for almost five years. Working with people that contact me via the website via emails, telephone and face to face meetings. Maybe working over the years offering my services as a photographer free of charge to charities. Working on three blogs spreading the word re lowcarbing and it’s many benefits and setting up a lowcarb recipe blog to help get newbie’s on their way. 6000 posts on diabetes forums etc etc.

I am fully aware of Stephens charity work, and I know he is your mate, you keeping telling us. Let’s leave Stephen out of this debate, this is between me and you. When have I said my way was the only way . The fact is if you remember at DCUK almost all the success stories featured lowcarb. That fact has remained constant for nearly five years, and it will probably remain constant for the next five years. The list of people using 150 grams of carb a day and holding good numbers is short. Some of the best controlled diabetics I have heard of or know are Dr.Jay Wortman, Fergus Craig, Richard Bernstein MD, Pneu, Stephen and Wiflib, how many more do you want ? all on around 30 carbs per day. These guys are fully aware that BG numbers over 7.8 causes damage. They also know lowcarbing is the best way to control diabetes, for the majority of diabetics, type one and two, but not all.

Eddie

Post update xyzzy aprox 8pm on the ETYM forum.

"I'm not your puppet to demand I do some debate with so don't expect an answer on nyour blog anytime soon. I posted on your blog what I thought and that's an end of it so just deal with it. By the looks of the blog post you seem to have learnt very little and your menacing tone towards Lucy who is one of the nicest people I know is really most unpleasant. If you come on this forum and behave as "a low carb anti" and attempt to de-rail threads then expect to be treated as one. It's really that simple."

So if you post on the forum you can get edited, deleted or thread locked. Banning will come soon I expect. This is Kenny/Cugila MK 2 and no mistake. 

Eddie

Are diabetics Nutters ?

Over 500 fold difference in type one diabetes rates in children !

When you have an interest in diabetes, and have read articles over the years, it’s rare to find  really stunning information. There are 88 countries that collect information regarding type one diabetes in children. I find the difference between countries staggering. For instance, Venezuela ranked at number 88 has 0.1 cases per 100,000 of population. Finland ranked at number 1 has 57.6 per 100,000 of population. The UK ranked at number 5 at 24.5 per 100,000. 

I think you will agree, an amazing difference between countries.

Eddie

Full list by country here.