Malhotra strikes again

Get your science fix here: research, quackery, activism and all the rest
Post Reply
User avatar
Tessa K
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2902
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 5:07 pm
Location: Closer than you'd like

Malhotra strikes again

Post by Tessa K » Mon Aug 23, 2021 12:05 pm

Malhotra is the cardiologist and arch anti-carber who claims that the traditional Italian diet was based on pizza made from cauliflower and that we should eat coconut oil every day (aka the Pioppi Diet - and yes, he has written abook about it).
Public Health Collaboration chair Dr Aseem Malhotra, a cardiologist who co-founded Action on Sugar, said the problem has become so acute that the NHS is no longer able to cope with the demand placed on it due to chronic ill-health.

Dr Malhotra said: “Why is 75 per cent of food given in hospitals deemed unhealthy? It’s extraordinary".

PHC campaign director Sam Feltham said: “With such an esteemed public health campaigner at the helm, I know we’re in good hands for a healthier future and promoting ethical evidence based medical practice.
https://inews.co.uk/news/health/doctors ... th-1162314

Al Capone Junior
Buzzberry
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2019 6:40 pm

Re: Malhotra strikes again

Post by Al Capone Junior » Mon Sep 13, 2021 12:25 am

Not to defend this yahoo. But I am pretty convinced by Dr Robert Lustig, whose vids I have watched and papers I've read, who also says sugar is the real devil. The fructose, specifically.

However, Dr L is a legitimate endocrinologist and researcher, who has not been appearing on quackwatch, SBM, Orac etc for the ridiculous things he says. His lectures are detailed with biochemistry, and he does not mistake correlation with causation.

Is he right? I think he may well be, but I'm nobody, and IANAD. Probably deserves his own thread. Lizard-men can split if they want, I'd love to see his work discussed here.

A sample...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kDJsxw0uMLM

User avatar
Tessa K
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2902
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 5:07 pm
Location: Closer than you'd like

Re: Malhotra strikes again

Post by Tessa K » Mon Sep 13, 2021 7:55 am

Al Capone Junior wrote:
Mon Sep 13, 2021 12:25 am
Not to defend this yahoo. But I am pretty convinced by Dr Robert Lustig, whose vids I have watched and papers I've read, who also says sugar is the real devil. The fructose, specifically.

However, Dr L is a legitimate endocrinologist and researcher, who has not been appearing on quackwatch, SBM, Orac etc for the ridiculous things he says. His lectures are detailed with biochemistry, and he does not mistake correlation with causation.

Is he right? I think he may well be, but I'm nobody, and IANAD. Probably deserves his own thread. Lizard-men can split if they want, I'd love to see his work discussed here.

A sample...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kDJsxw0uMLM
Lustig's statements on fructose metabolism and weight gain were disputed in a systematic review of clinical research on obesity and metabolic syndrome. Khan, T. A; Sievenpiper, J. L (2016). "Controversies about sugars: Results from systematic reviews and meta-analyses on obesity, cardiometabolic disease and diabetes". European Journal of Nutrition. 55 (Suppl 2): 25–43. doi:10.1007/s00394-016-1345-3. PMC 5174149. PMID 27900447.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Lustig#Criticism

User avatar
Cardinal Fang
Fuzzable
Posts: 331
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 7:42 pm

Re: Malhotra strikes again

Post by Cardinal Fang » Mon Sep 13, 2021 12:17 pm

Fructose is neither bad nor good. Lest we forget it's the principal sugar in fruit, so unless we're going to rebrand apples unhealthy ITYFIALMCTT

Where it gets a bad rap from is that it is sweeter than sucrose, and cheaper, so it gets put in processed food a lot just to save cash. So a lot of the things attributed to fructose are probably more attributable to a diet high in processed foods instead (increased risk of diabetes, increased visceral adiposity etc). The flip side of course is that because it's sweeter, it's sometimes recommended as a sweetener for diabetics, because you don't need as much of it, it doesn't trigger production of insulin by pancreatic β cells, and it results in a lower rise in blood glucose after a meal compared to the same product made with sucrose or glucose.

I suspect a lot of the "fructose bad" squad are confusing the chemical itself with the sort of foods it's often put into, and attributing ill effects caused by the latter to the former
Image

Post Reply