Foods to avoid high cholesterol | The Great Cholesterol Con: The Truth About What Really Causes Heart Disease and How to Avoid It

5 Responses to “The Great Cholesterol Con: The Truth About What Really Causes Heart Disease and How to Avoid It”

1. Martin on June 12th, 2010 9:33 pm

   Another author jumping on the train cholesterol. You know things are always a bit more if you have two books with the same Namen.Ja eat almost no fat is bad for you. Yes can write a book about it and get a few bob. Yes may include restitution of Humor.Aaaargh terrible! Please stop or even to search peer-to preach instead of “ad-cat” to get the MassenIst me or not, any replacement document Halbgebratener Health rave reviews? Is everything a conspiracy Corporation Rating: 5.1

2. M. H. Al-shaer on June 12th, 2010 9:37 pm

   Thus, it appears that Big Pharma, and your doctor conspired to ruin your health so that they verdienen.Darf money I ask, how? If Big Pharma produce research on cholesterol to doctors to induce them to prescribe statins to improve your health. . . as they are in the conspiracy? Do you really think that all drugs are bad and you are better with natural remedies. . . I would ask them that. . . . do you think, if one of these natural remedies have been as wonderful as it claims to be, do you really believe that a pharmaceutical company would not pull it out and sell it to you to make an expensive drug product quality and a fortune of it you heraus.Lassen me tell you: If you read the book for entertainment. . I do not see dassaber if you are reading for information and worse, if you believed it. . . Then you have to say that all these legitimate people and organizations like the American Heart Association, American College of Physicians conspiring against you. . . . as by reading this book by someone they know (why should we believe he is trying to help you have concluded) says it is difficult to find great medical discoveries, but it is very easy to cure some selling on the Internet, to heal and miracles do fabrizierenAlso rich you really think, it is after your money? Conspiracy against you?? Rating: 5.1

3. launter on June 12th, 2010 10:50 pm

   “Nobody believes the official spokesman … but everybody trusts an unknown source” R. NessenWählen your opportunity to take statins based on the evidence below rather influenced through this book (I would say is worse than the pharmaceutical industry). Heres a summary of the main COOPERATION ForschungsergebnisseCholesterolapplikation Trialists meta-analysis of all data. Lancet 2005:366:1267 secondary prevention (ie if you already have some form of cardiovascular disease): number needed to treat (NNT): 21 to prevent more than five years of a heart attack or stroke. ie. This means a person of a stroke or heart attack, 21 people were on statins for five years verhindernPrimärprävention (in the absence of established cardiovascular disease) in patients at high risk: 40 to NNT 5 years of a heart attack or stroke in the first meta-analysis verhindern.WEITERE prevention trials Lancet 2007:369:168. They found in patients without preexisting heart Kreislauferkrankungen1. No evidence of reduced Gesamtmortalität2. Total cardiovascular events with statins reduced (NNT of 67 over 5 years) 3 analysis shows that benefits can be seen only in men aged 30 to 69 high risk (NNT 50) 4 Obvious that women not benefit, nor anyone else at the age of 69Dies is probably the most important data you need to decide on taking statins. If you have any side effects you are wondering if the payment of the benefits listed above wert.Für those of you that all of a large Medical / pharmaceutical conspiracy should keep in mind that more than one GP Kendrick, think he works for a pharmaceutical company. If I truly paranoid, I think that this major anti-cholesterol-push is driven by pharmaceutical companies, because simvastatin patent and theres no money are not statins. The only way they can lay the foundation for the next major drug fat! It happens every time a drug patent expires (and is therefore much cheaper) Theres still a big slagging, so they can not sell a new and improved 20 times the KostenDu also wonder why the self Kendrick-Experts have not done any research on the description published his theories of the Enlightenment. Of course, if large enough, and his theories are valid, they will be published in a peer reviewed journal? N? I wonder why not? Kendrick wrote for the red flags of publishing for exposing many issues of modern medicine and frustration of the majority opinion. That means it has a particular interest in the contempt of his colleagues and, inevitably, is biased in its carrying amount you believe more? Thousands of heart specialists, professors of medicine, etc., given to the issue or a general practitioner who works for a pharmaceutical research companies? Hmm. . . Rating: 5.1

4. tither on June 13th, 2010 1:43 am

   Well, judging by the comments that people buy this book, looking already have their mind (perhaps those with a phobia of pills or those who have had side effects) and they’re for him for a search on Amazon to confirm what they already believe. Kendrick did a good job of pandering to the public and take the opportunity here to have a rant about his colleagues while they glorify their own superiority. A revolutionary martyr, his “head is on the chopping block Infront of his colleagues! What courage! Please! Take a look at Hulda Regehr Clark “cure for all advanced cancers” that all cancers are caused by liver fluke, going against the medical opinion believes, perhaps we should pay for their courage ( or congratulations on your bank account) as well! Kendrick distorted the facts and confuse the issues and used false analogies to suit his purposes. Take for example the “high fat heart disease because plan. This is not a revelation. Eating a diet high in fat, but eats a normal amount of food is not an increased rate of heart disease, of course, have. This does not justify the appointment of a chapter “eat what you want, the regime has nothing to do with heart disease,” have. Thats just dum. We also learn, cholesterol is essential for systems body. Yes, but this relevant? Perhaps, but not in the way he teaches us. with a proposal that the major argument against the assumption of cholesterol. Potassium is important for the body, but too of it can still kill! The fact is that in the majority of the population who are overweight (approximately 30% United States and its empire, quadrupuled over the last 25 years), get a lot of weight fat, ie. they have a high fat diet and consume a large amount. Certainly, it is likely that they eat plenty of carbohydrates, which should also be sought. But the One reason why fat is often targeted by the department of public health because it contains more calories per gram, while other types of foods (proteins 4 cal / 4 cal carbohydrate / g fat 9 calories / g!). Even the “low-fat diet” advice often heard at high risk of the targeted individual is not your average John Doe. This will promote in the hope that eating less fat in the diet is not only cholesterol individuals (and hope to reduce to reduce cardiovascular disease risk individuals, although there are evidence a bit thin), but also people to lose weight, now you’ll say, obesity is not associated with heart disease and many other serious health problems? (Well, I’m sure it’s one of the Kendricks have future goals in creating a name for themselves) principle, really cut one of the types of foods from the diet ( particularly fat and protein, essential fatty acids and essential amino acids that are not can be produced by the body) should not contain, we need a balanced diet that is consistent with much of Denken.Ein medical research by pharmaceutical companies (and much is not), but people who work there are not all in cahoots to deceive the public, it would be a person with a conscience to let the cat out the bag and left the company would continue mass. Look at what happened and Merck Vioxx. Physicians caring for patients are not always secret documents. Its absurd. Unfortunately, the “its all about money” argument is attractive for many reasons and often distorted thinking. Drug companies are allowed to have money as a major goal, but can not do it, they have fascinated and charmed everyone. People take drugs for hypertension, heart disease, stroke, etc. have in general a slight increase in average life expectancy of the population between them. Kendrick is proposed that we should not one of them? Perhaps, and certainly deal with the many. Personally, while I received no significant side effects I should be taking statins, I would like my risk of heart attack (until ‘proven otherwise reduce), while reducing the risk of small size. Especially as coronary heart disease is the commonest cause of death in Großbritannien.Warum dismiss it as the disease if you don’ are not important? I prefer not to have a heart attack could, I would die in the same age! There are many drugs that have not been proven effective, the morbidity and mortality. Morbidity is irrelevant? It seems Kendricks in Augen.Kendrick also a chapter on stress and its association with heart disease. Now, eh? If this is mean’t to be a revelation. NOTGrundsätzlich is the world’s research on heart disease is changing and more evidence, but not in a perfect manner. can any branch of the development of treatments and write a book on inadequancies inconsistencies and research surrounding it. It seems like a living Kendrick his life is worth. It would be permissible if it was presented without bias and as casually (not to mention if this is a stupid juvenile ruthless sarcasm). The problem is when it would not boring and the public would not buy it and it is not scientific enough for doctors to want to read wurde.Vielleicht when writing medical research refined his ideas about cholesterol and response challenge is the nature of the structure of atherosclerotic plaques, may have found a better drug than statins, for now I think I will make recommendations on tragen.Abschließend Kendrick has some of the gaps in research on statins and This can be useful to the public in deciding to go further than statins productive, especially if its primary prevention, or if you have any side effects and excessive zeal GP said. (When there is a solution simple even if the adoption!) Unfortunately, it does so in a congratulatin oneself and in a highly tendentious. It is a reasonable approach to try at least to inform the public. I found a lot of his anecdotes and sychophantic disgusting. In general, this book reminded me of ads for “fit in three weeks” or something similar, supposedly exposing the stupidity of traditional knowledge, but in reality is shifting from being themselves to be very stupid. The Con colossal Kendrick has a sound much better. I have no doubt that this review, however, considered of little that it is the most reasonable people are not interested in this book, in which an “anti-cholesterol” establishment of the death (presumably leaving a heart attack), his voice. A common argument is “In the 10 countries that the saturated fats they consume fewer deaths from heart disease and the 10 countries who eat less saturated fat in their diet to heart more deaths. “Kendrick Typical categorical statement that the issue confused. It appears to be associated in any way, next thing you want to say is that obesity is good for you. Of course, people with unhealthy diets are health problems. There are many other factors to consider, such as race, concomitant disease, environment, availability and quality of food in the diet, poverty, age of the population increases, etc. The Indigenous Australians are at the top of his list, and they have billions of other health and social problems, many of them do not even have drinking water or sanitation. This list, it speaks of what he had not published, was (surprise!) A influences longer an American wrestling match. The debate about whether it is specifically “saturated fat”, the problem is still not finished and begins to think that people are more trans fat in its context. I do not necessarily recommend cutting fat from the diet but saturated. Another common quote “The most striking evidence is that low levels of cholesterol are strong predictors of risk of premature death.” This is certainly not surprisingly robust, or if one includes those with abnormally low cholesterol levels. Doh! Is it any wonder that the bodies of people, shops are seriously ill (eg, those who have cancer or other chronic diseases begin to flow)! Doh! Do you expect to increase blood cholesterol in a patient dying of cancer? be seen, of course, people with low cholesterol levels is an increase in mortality may be associated with high mortality in some cases, and in this way, lower cholesterol, but it is far from be the cause of cholesterol. This statement means very little, except for those who do not understand and come to the conclusion that low cholesterol ADB müssen.Ein other reviewer wrote: “How sad that the world is not a medical practice likely that a genuine effort to heal the patient “is. Yes that is correct, go to the doctor, but rarely what they want to help you. What ???!!!! I suspect, is exempt Dr Goshawk himseld of this, a little arrogant, sounds self-righteous for me. Another member of the Thinc. org. Apparently, a clear rational thought, no paranoia, no hmmm.Nebenbei Heres a quote from hilaroius Kendrick in the media about the placebo effect “Then, after I test and listen carefully to the patient can tell the doctor. “If you take this pill, I think it is full will do good.” In many cases there. Where is the illusion?. “As a patient, you want to be attended as such? Then take a pill when the doctor says it will be better, but you do not know if there is scientific evidence behind it ? Are we all are treated like children? “I’m for complementary therapies when they make us feel good, but I’m not for the distribution of some sugar pills patronsing GP told me they scold Pillen. Sorry magic cure all, but this anti-establishment, paranoid conspiracy Big Business Corporation, phobias and pill medicine without argument bashing me crazy Rating: 5.1

5. W. R. Willoughby on June 13th, 2010 3:57 am

   The book contains useful information, and it is very funny and good, but far too technical for the ordinary layman. Rating: 5.3

Leave a Reply