Cancer: Seyfried on real cause, right diet to beat it

Dr Thomas Seyfried

Dr Thomas Seyfried

Come with me on a remarkable journey with US psychiatrist and psychopharmacologist Dr Georgia Ede as she delves into the mind of Dr Thomas Seyfried. Seyfried is a biology professor and brain cancer researcher at Illinois University, with over 25 years’ experience in the field.

In 2012, Ede attended a presentation Seyfried gave on cancer at the Ancestral Health Symposium at Harvard Law School. It challenged everything she thought she knew about the dread disease. It inspired her to read Seyfried’s brilliant book, Cancer as a Metabolic Disease: On the Origin, Management, and Prevention of Cancer. 

The secrets inside are so important, Ede has made them available to everyone in a fascinating four-part series on her blog, Diagnosis Diet – Nutrition Science Meets Common Sense. It covers what Seyfried says about the real causes of cancer, and the role of ketogenic diets. Here’s Ede’s first blog, with links to the rest. – Marika Sboros



Type 1 diabetes: when doctors’ good advice turns bad

doctor

By Marika Sboros

Here’s a fascinating blog that throws up an ethical dilemma for doctors, nurses and dietitians who dish out orthodox advice for type 1 diabetes.

The writer is Lemming Test-Pilot, the alter ego of a British GP who has type 1 diabetes. Last year, Lemming ditched “the almost impossible dark art of carbohydrate counting”, went on a low-carb, high-fat, ketogenic diet and survived. Actually, Lemming  hasn’t just survived but has thrived in body and mind. And has been running half marathons faster ever since, even after fasting.

Doctors and nurses told Lemming to go on the wrong diet for type 1 diabetes for 20 years. Lemming is understandably miffed about that but says with admirable restraint: “Any other condition managed with the wrong treatment for 20 years would rightly merit a lawsuit. The guideline advisers are getting knighthoods.” Here is Lemming’s remarkable, poignant, real-life story:



Noakes trial: experts flying in to support LCHF science

Picture: ROB TATE

Prof Tim Noakes at the February 2016 trial session. Picture: ROB TATE

By Marika Sboros

When the Kafka-esque trial of world-renowned South African scientist Prof Tim Noakes resumes in Cape Town in October 2016, there will be two heavyweight international expert witnesses sitting next to him.

Cambridge University graduate Dr Zoë Harcombe, a British public health nutritionist,  and US science writer Nina Teicholz will give evidence for the science behind Noakes’ views on eggs, bacon and broccoli. Those views have got him into much trouble with the country’s regulatory body, the Health Professions Council of SA and led to a charge of unprofessional conduct. Here’s what you can look forward to in this strange scientific saga that has garnered worldwide attention: 



Medicine’s dirty little secret: ‘drug whore’ doctors

doctors drugs moneyIt’s a very real sickness in medicine. It is doctors in the thrall of the drug industry. It creates what British cardiologist Dr Aseem Malhotra calls ‘an epidemic of misinformed doctors and misinformed patients’. It causes biased research funding  – research funded for profit, not patients’ benefit, says Malhotra. 

It leads to biased reporting in medical journals, commercial conflicts of interest and medical curricula that ‘fail to teach doctors how to understand and communicate health statistics’. This year, for the first time, the US Surgeon General has reprimanded doctors for promoting Big Pharma at patients’ expense.  

At heart, it’s about doctors who flout the Hippocratic oath for a quick buck.  Here, Canadian nephrologist Dr Jason Fung takes a scalpel to expose the scandal of ‘continuing medical education’. He eviscerates doctors who, by default or design, act as agents – pushers, really – for drug companies. He calls them ‘drug whores’. It’s a disturbing read. – Marika Sboros



Statins insanity: doctors hand over to drug companies

drugsWhat’s with all this wilful blindness in top doctors globally about the risks of statins? After all, evidence shows these blockbusters drugs are not effective for cardiovascular prevention. Claims about statins’ efficacy and safety are simply not evidence-based.

Oxford University’s statins researcher Prof Rory Collins appears oblivious to that. It’s as if he genuinely doesn’t know these drugs have done more for drug makers’ profits than patients’ wellbeing. British journalist Jerome Burne says Collins belongs to the‘never apologise, never explain’ school of argument. Here, Burne explains the ‘bizarre history’. of statins. And just why it took 30 years for the increased risk of diabetes with statin use to emerge. It’s a brilliant read about the antics of drug companies and doctors in their thrall. – Marika Sboros



Sugar and hearts: how food industry still buys scientists

By Marika Sboros

sugarHere it is, straight from the scientific horse’s mouth: Industry-sponsored nutrition research, like research the tobacco, chemical, and pharmaceutical industries have sponsored, “almost invariably produces results that confirm the benefits or lack of harm of the sponsor’s products”.

It happens “even when independently sponsored research comes to opposite conclusions”, says Dr Marion Nestle, professor of nutrition, food studies and public Health at New York University. It continues to this day.

Her remarks come in an invited commentary in the JAMA Internal Medicine on a study in the same issue. The study shows how the US sugar industry began deliberately initiating, paying for and influencing research to shift the blame from sugar to fat as a major risk factor for heart disease 50 years ago. Here’s more:



Statins study? 21st century medical censorship, says Kendrick

By Dasemarcalvarez (Own work) [CC BY-SA 3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

Scottish GP Dr Malcolm Kendrick starts off his post on the latest statins controversy with a great George Orwell quote: ‘If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.’ Kendrick is author of The Great Cholesterol Con. He is scathing about the latest research on statins published in The Lancet. Lead author is Sir Rory Collins, Professor of Medicine and Epidemiology at Oxford University’s Clinical Trial Service Unit.

Collins and co-authors claim their research is the definitive answer to controversy surrounding safety and efficacy of the blockbuster drugs. And not just for secondary prevention – to prevent a second heart attack or stroke. They say statins are the effective for primary prevention as well – to prevent one from happening in the first place – even in otherwise healthy people. They say the debate is over because the evidence is overwhelming. Should you swallow that whole? Probably not, and not just because this study is industry-funded as the extensive DOI (declaration of interests) at the end shows. Here’s what Kendrick has to say. It’s another riveting read. – Marika Sboros



Cancer: doctors have been looking in the wrong place

sherlock-holmesHere’s a book on cancer that really is a game changer. Or rather, it will be if the medical establishment were to allow it to be. It is The Cancer Revolution: integrative medicine – the future of cancer care by Patricia Peat.

This book  is ‘no eccentric view from a lone maverick’ , says British health writer Jerome Burne. It contains contributions from 38 doctors, clinicians, researchers and practitioners. It doesn’t suggest conventional treatment is irrelevant. It looks at why, despite billions spent on cancer research, improvement in survival rates has been ‘pitiful’: specialists have been looking in the wrong place for better survival outcomes. Here’ a shortened version of Burne’s brilliant review with a link to the full version. – Marika Sboros



Cookbook authors dish up scientific ‘cure’ for cancer!

Patricia Daly, left, and Domini Kemp, authors of The Ketogenic Kitchen

Patricia Daly, left, and Domini Kemp, authors of The Ketogenic Kitchen

Cancer is big business, a global industry that makes billions for drug companies and doctors. It’s so lucrative, cynics say it’s ‘too prosperous to allow for cure’. Sure, there have been advances, even cases of ‘cures’. Cancer treatment can be less harsh than in the past. Surgery is also less disfiguring. But cancer is now pandemic. Cancer Research UK says that’s because we’re ‘growing older’. It subscribes to the fatalistic, genetic model of cancer as the result of ‘random errors’ in DNA codes that ‘kick start a cell’s journey towards becoming cancerous’.

 A remarkable new cookbook, The Ketogenic Kitchen (Gill Books), dishes up a more positive message: the evidence-based ‘metabolic model of cancer’. It draws on an ancient premise: the power of food as medicine rather than ‘the slowest form of poison’ it often is these days. It gives ingredients for real cure by showing you how not to feed cancer cells. Here, US psychiatrist Dr Georgia Ede looks at why this is no ordinary cookbook, and why even if you don’t have cancer, it should be in your home – Marika Sboros



Noakes in his own words: ‘Why I choose to go on trial’ – Part 2

Tim NoakesUniversity of Cape Town emeritus professor Tim Noakes has a habit of challenging convention. In fact, he loves challenging and being challenged. ‘It’s when I learn,’ he says. Noakes has challenged conventional ‘wisdom’ seven times in his distinguished career. He has been proved right six times.

He expects the same to happen when he goes back on trial in October 2016 in his latest challenge: to conventional ‘wisdom’ on diet. In the second of a 2-part series,  he reveals what really drives him: exposing arguably the greatest error in the history of medicine. He says it’s one that has had serious consequences for national and global health.   – Marika Sboros



Noakes in his own words: ‘Why I choose to go on trial’ – Part 1

Prof Tim Noakes. Picture: ROB TATE

Prof Tim Noakes. Picture: ROB TATE

By Marika Sboros

World-renowned scientist  Prof Tim Noakes will be back on trial in Cape Town on October 17, 2016, for his views on eggs, bacon and broccoli. Expect more revelations in what is being called the “Nutrition Trial of the 21st Century” and the “Banting for Babies Trial”.

It has dragged on since February 2014 when  Johannesburg dietitian Claire Julsing Strydom first reported him to the Health Professions Council of SA (HPCSA). That was for two tweets telling a breastfeeding mother that good first foods are low-carb, high-fat (LCHF). In other words, meat, dairy and vegetables. What’s so bad about that? You might well ask since Strydom now routinely gives the same advice. Noakes could have made this strange saga disappear by deregistering as a medical doctor. Instead, here in Part 1 of a 2-part series, Noakes tells in his own words why he has chosen to go on trial:



Always hungry? Ludwig on feeling full without getting fat

HungerWhen it comes to nutrition, Harvard professor Dr David Ludwig restores flagging faith in that  formerly revered research institution. Ludwig’s latest book, Always Hungry? is a weight loss game-changer. Or should be, all things being equal. In nutrition science, all things are not equal. Food and drug companies still have undue influence on official dietary guidelines. They are one reason the influential US dietary guidelines survive despite little science to prop them up. Ditto for the dietary advice in the many countries that follow the US guidelines slavishly.

Ludwig is that rare species: a medical doctor who is also a nutrition expert. He is also not afraid to go up against conventional high-carb, low-fat ‘wisdom’. For weight loss and to beat hunger pangs, Ludwig is not on the extreme end of the low-carb, high-fat (LCHF) spectrum. Here, US physician and world-renowned LCHF pioneer Dr Michael Eades explains why Ludwig’s book is ‘the most comprehensive on low-carb dieting published to date’. And if you have a friend or family member struggling with weight, why it’s quite simply ‘the best book you could give them’. – Marika Sboros



Is this proof evidence-based medicine is terminally ill?

Doctors money

Doctors and dietitians love to say the advice they dish out on diet is ‘evidence-based’. The evidence for that leaves a very bad taste in some researchers’ mouths. They say that in its current state, evidence-based medicine props up official dietary guidelines. These guidelines have contributed to the unnecessary suffering and premature deaths of millions worldwide. They say that in nutrition, evidence-based medicine (EBM) has done an excellent job – mostly of improving some scientists, doctors, dietitians and pharmaceutical and food companies’ bottom lines. 

US biochemistry professor Dr Richard Feinman is a vociferous critic of the current state of EBM and the influential US dietary guidelines that draw on it. Feinman is professor at SUNY (State University of New York) Medical School’s department of cell biology. He agrees that EBM is little more than ‘the position of experts on one lucrative side of a scientific conflict’. Here, he dissects EBM with surgical, scientific precision, to expose its inability to save lives from the growing pandemics of obesity and diabetes. – Marika Sboros.



Calorie craziness: dishing up the real dirt on CICO!

CaloriesWhat’s with our obsession with the calorie? Do we even really know what we are talking about when we fuss about calories? My favourite health blogger and ‘reluctant nutritionist’ Sammy Pepys dishes up the dirt on the CICO model – calories in, calories out. Here’s why calories can’t make you fat – even if they wanted to. And what you really need to fuss about. – Marika Sboros

By Sammy Pepys*

Have you been eating all those tasty calories again? Recent media headlines such as: Is it our fault if we eat too many calories? (an article in The Conversation) and Britons under-report calorie intake (on BBC TV show how the ‘C’ word dominates our thinking on diets, obesity and many other health matters. Let’s get some things straight about calories:



Radical! Rebel doctors, data geeks reject ‘rule book’ to beat diabesity

DEATHConventional medical treatment to beat obesity and diabetes clearly isn’t working. Both conditions are pandemic, so much so that doctors now call them diabesity. Conventional ‘wisdom’ about the reasons for diabesity isn’t proving very helpful or very clever.

Now, a radical, ‘rag tag’  group of Canadian and South African doctors and data ‘geeks’ has thrown out the research ‘rule book’ in their small but ground-breaking study just published in the South African Journal of Medicine (SAMJ). They say the staunch faith most doctors still have in classic randomized trials is misplaced. So-called  ‘evidence-based medicine’ that doctors are supposed to rely on isn’t working to treat or beat the diabesity pandemics. 

Their inspiration is Prof John Ioannidis, Professor of Medicine and of Health Research and Policy at Stanford University School of Medicine. Ioannidis says powerful vested interests have “hijacked” evidence-based medicine and made medicine a ‘threat to public health’. The group knows they are up against doctors who are not ready to face some inconvenient truths.  Jerome Burne is an award-winning British journalist who has been specialising in medicine and health for the last 10 years. Here, Burne looks at why these ‘research mavericks’ are ushering in a research revolution and why they will need all the help they can get. It’s a vital read for anyone concerned with health. – Marika Sboros



Harvard’s hungry voice of nutrition sanity – David Ludwig!

Dr David Ludwig

Dr David Ludwig

Like many people, I used to be in awe of Harvard University Medical School. Until increasingly odd science began emanating from luminaries Harvard’s hallowed research halls. In 2009 the New York Times published reports on the ties of Harvard professors and lecturers to drug companies. Time magazine picked it up in how drug industry money is tainting medical education. Harvard appears increasingly impervious to dodgy behaviour of some professors. They seem to think it’s in their job description to muzzle scientific debate that opposes powerful vested interests.

Getting some Harvard professors to understand how iffy that is appears extraordinarily difficult. A quote by the late US investigative journalist and author Upton Sinclair springs unbidden mind. ‘It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!’ Medical doctor and Harvard nutrition specialist Dr David Ludwig helps to restore faith in Harvard. Here, blogger and ‘reluctant nutritionist’ Sammy Pepys looks at how Ludwig maintains his influential independent thought and mind on nutrition. – Marika Sboros



Gary Fettke turns into ‘Australia’s Tim Noakes’!

 

Dr Gary Fettke

Dr Gary Fettke

By Marika Sboros

The Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (AHPRA) has banned orthopaedic surgeon Dr Gary Fettke from giving his patients nutrition advice. It has done so after a two-year “investigation” into Fettke’s qualifications.

Overnight they’ve turned him into “Australia’s Tim Noakes”.

Elements of this case mirror the  Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA) case against Prof Tim Noakes, a world-renowned scientist who is also a medical doctor. There are  big differences, but both the AHPRA and the HPCSA cases open up a medical Pandora’s box. Both go to the heart of what it means to be a real “doctor of medicine”, and who is best qualified to give advice on nutrition:



CANADIAN STUDY SHEDS LIGHT ON WEIGHT LOSS, MEDICINE THAT ‘NO LONGER CURES’

light bulbIn Part One, South African doctors and dietitians say this small Canadian study isn’t worth the paper it’s written on. In the final Part Two, Foodmed.net  looks at why this research really does shed new light on weight loss and diabetes, despite what the critics say.

Though small and short-term, experts say it  is  part of a movement towards ‘pragmatic trials’ that blur the lines between science and clinical practice. The movement is a new paradigm to replace medicine that ‘no longer cures’ and instead produces ‘customers for the pharmaceutical industry’: 



CANADIAN STUDY SHOWS LCHF WORKS FOR DIABESITY, BUT THAT’S NOT THE REAL MESSAGE

Photo credit:Photo credit: Wonder woman0731 via Foter.com / CC BY

Obesity and diabetes are so common these days, doctors often refer to them as diabesity. Her’e’s a small Canadian study in the SAMJ that posits a whole new paradigm in research to treat diabesity. It’s a path filled with life-saving promise of ‘a ‘cure’ for obesity and diabetes. However, this study is not so much about diet as it is about terminal flaws in the system for generating evidence for medicine.

 In Part 1 of a two-part series, Foodmed.net looks at why this study by Canadian and ex-pat South African doctors just may live up to the authors’ hopes and dreams of a real breakthrough, and what that means for patients who are obese or diabetic. More importantly perhaps, we look at why medical and dietetic establishments are not receptive to its message and evidence-based medicine: 



Dietary guidelines: why they make you fatter, sicker

overweightGovernments, doctors and dietitians use dietary guidelines to dish up advice to you on what to eat and what not to eat. You’d expect that advice to be  evidence-based. Your expectations are not always realistic. 

The US dietary guidelines are the world’s most influential public health nutrition advice. All English-speaking countries embraced the guidelines when the US government  launched them in 1977. These guidelines were without much solid science to back them up then. They remain so today.

Here,  in Part 1 of a 2-part series, US physician  Dr Michael Eades explains why the dietary guidelines are making us all fatter and sicker. It’s a sobering read. – Marika Sboros