The Fool wrote: > So why did a seemingly unhealthy diet not affect indicators of > cardiovascular risk? In an interview with Reuters Health, Brehm > suggested that the benefits of losing more weight may offset the > disadvantages associated with high fat and cholesterol. "Perhaps > it's weight loss that causes the positive results (in > cardiovascular risk factors)...and it isn't dependent on the > diet," she said.
Or perhaps orthodox dieticians and nutritionists are completely clueless... They certainly look that way, considering all the foods they decide are bad for you one day, then they're OK or even *good* for you the next. Eggs are a good example. > Although the LCHP diet helped dieters shed more pounds than > the low-fat regimen, Brehm cautioned that much more research > is needed before consumers can consider this program to be > safe and effective. "More research does need to be done > before I think you can make any kind of recommendation as to > what you should follow," she said. The same is true for their recommendations. How much actual, unbiased research have they done on low-fat diets? ______________________________________________________________________ Steve Sloan ......... Huntsville, Alabama =========> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brin-L list pages ....................... http://www.sloan3d.com/brinl Chmeee's 3D Objects .................... http://www.sloan3d.com/chmeee 3D and Drawing Galleries .................. http://www.sloansteady.com Software ................ Science Fiction, Science, and Computer Links Science fiction scans ......................... http://www.sloan3d.com _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
