« The Weekly Transfusion 1.4The Weekly Transfusion 1.2 »

6 comments

Comment from: Chris S [Visitor] · http://freewebs.com/bohemianchris
I appreciate the biases involved with any medical research, but I was also wondering how the findings of the research described on the IfHI research page (http://www.dadamo.com/ifhi/research.htm) will be related to the public. Will any of these results be submitted for peer-reviewed journal publication?

-Chris
03/30/09 @ 11:52
Comment from: Square Peg Guy [Visitor] · http://square--peg.blogspot.com/
I tend to get some health news from a radio sound bite or the newspaper. When I come across something like your "Meat intake and mortality" example, I've always assumed that the media is responsible for the mis-information. I tell myself that they simply didn't take the time to understand the published results of a study.

But after reading this I wonder whether the fault really lies with the authors of the studies. I have seen some poor studies in engineering where the guy was clearly barking up the wrong tree. The same must be true in the medical profession. The difference is that the general public doesn't care about engineering.
03/30/09 @ 12:42
Comment from: Paula 0+ hunter [Visitor]
My first thought when hearing this on NPR, was that most meat eaten in the US is grain fed. I think this also has something to do with the whole situation. So I am not surprised at the findings. I am very interested in the colon cancer/vegetarian findings. I have a 26 year old vegan type O-son who I can't convince about these things. But he is also on the other side of the US. I also know many type A's within my extended family who love their red meat, despite suffering some chronic medical problems. It only proves to me the wisdom of the BTD approach even the more.
03/30/09 @ 13:34
Comment from: Lloyd [Visitor]
Some time back it was commented that the best way to repel attacks is to educate the attacker; failing that then education of the attacker's audience is the next step.

Congratulations on continued education.
03/30/09 @ 21:09
I am type O, experimented with the blood group diet within calorie restriction, and after 6 months my cholestrol goes from 5.6 to 7.8

So, O or A, the metabolism of saturated fat is probably still the same.

Well.. yes, no or even maybe. In twenty or so type O people we followed several years back, the average drop in cholesterol was 22 points. However in one or two people, the total cholesterol did rise. In these people it did not go down when they subsequently switched to a vegetarian, Mediterranean type diet. There are many aspects involved in our cholesterol pathways besides breakdown of dietary components in the small intestine (such as the metabolism of endogenous cholesterol into bile salts) which appear to have no relationship to ABO blood group. That you were also caloric restricting pretty much indicates that the elevation you saw may be related the breakdown of cholesterol more or less specific to your own case. -PD
04/01/09 @ 01:50
Dear P,

Thanks. That was also what I thought.
04/01/09 @ 20:38

Comments are not allowed from anonymous visitors.