Adapted from BMJ 27 Jan 2018 from a study reported in PLOS Med
The UK Food Standards Agency uses a scoring system of their own devising to determine whether a food is “healthy” or not. Fruit, vegetables, fibre and protein get top marks and saturated fat, sugar and salt get a fail.
When 25 thousand participants in the European Prospective Investigation of Cancer study completed a seven day food diary at the start of the study, and their food choices were marked on perceived health benefits, there was no difference in the incidence of cardiovascular disease over the next 16 years.
Time to lay the Eatwell Plate advice in the bin?
Diabetes Diet 
It’s always good when large amounts of data can be assessed. Twenty-five thousand participants over sixteen years is a lot of information.
LikeLike
This?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5754044/
SADly (pun intended) this will probably be ignored, as was their previous epic
http://sci-hub.hk/10.1097/MOL.0b013e3280106b95
which showed a correlation between HbA1c and CVD starting from truly nondiabetic levels of 5% or less. Also demonstrated in a couple of huge New Zealand studies. Yet the AMA are now stating an A1c between 7 and 8 is ideal.
Now eat your grainz and prepare to die.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on SEO.
LikeLike
Many thanks!
LikeLike