There has been more than usual advice from health “ experts “ about diet in recent weeks, some of it conflicting. If only the link between diet and disease was as clear cut as that for smoking.
What we do know for certain is that cardiovascular diseases ( especially heart attacks and strokes ) and cancers are leading causes of deaths worldwide. In the UK – where 9/10 diseases are non-communicable ( not infectious ) - they each account for over a quarter of deaths. Cancers of breast, lung, bowel and prostate are the commonest for the UK. Cardiovascular diseases are the most frequent killers in the Philippines, where 3/5 diseases are now non-communicable ; followed by cancers ; including liver in addition to those listed for the UK.
The risk of cancer ( remembering there are at least 200 types ) could be reduced in possibly 2/5 cases by not smoking ; keeping active with a healthy body weight ; eating a “ balanced “ diet ; and avoiding excess alcohol. Immunizing against hepatitis B would prevent most liver cancers ; and against human papilloma virus, most cervical cancers.
Much of the recent publicity, however, has been especially about reducing the risk of cardiovascular disease.
“ NICE “ ( National Institute for Health and Care Excellence ) has put out draft guidelines for use of statins ( the drugs which lower cholesterol ) (http://www.nhs.uk/news/2014/02Februa...atins-use.aspx ).
At present the guidance is to prescribe statins for those with a 20% ( + ) risk of cardiovascular disease in the next 10 years. They suggest reducing this to 10%. But statins have side-effects, and not everyone agrees with “ mass medication “ for people who haven’t already had a heart attack or stroke.
NICE bases its guidance on a “ risk calculator “ ( QRISK , see http://qrisk.org/ ), developed for UK use - but which can be used elsewhere in the world.
Benefits of a low-fat diet, replacing saturated fats with carbohydrates or polyunsaturated fats, have recently been questioned (http://openheart.bmj.com/content/1/1/e000032.full ) - only to be defended by several other “ experts “.
It has also recently been suggested that a high protein diet may be “ as bad for health as smoking “ (http://www.cell.com/cell-metabolism/...131(14)00062-X ). Previous studies had shown a link between red meat and cancer, but this may be the first published claim that protein ( especially animal ) might be harmful.
Now the World Health Organization has opened a public consultation, proposing that sugars should be less than 5% of total energy intake per day (http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/...-guideline/en/ ).
At the same time, England’s Chief Medical Officer has suggested that some form of sugar tax may be necessary (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-26442420 ). The problem is that a levy on consumption always hits the poorest hardest.
Sainsbury’s supermarket recently announced that it would join the Co-op and Waitrose, by including calories on the labels for “ own-brand “ wines. Other wine producers are also considering listing of calorie contents. “ Residual sugar “ in wine usually makes it taste richer, fruitier, and more palatable ( to some ). Indeed, a large glass of Shiraz may have as many calories as a packet of crisps ! Other alcoholic drinks have significant calorie contents, perhaps ignored by those who otherwise watch their diet.
It does seem that risk factors in diet need to be taken with a “ pinch of salt “ ! Moderation in all things is my advice for a happy and healthy long life.
Quote Reply
Originally Posted by gWaPito
... 
.
poor guy doesn't have a clue 
... had just been about to express 
better than having cakes and puddings for dessert 
thinking it had to be a bit better than cola, equivalent to 31 sugar cubes in a 1L bottle 
... time to change your 
