Has anyone ...

Let's be clear...

by crustyg - 2019-12-14 03:37:53

..that there is no such thing as 'Heart Disease' any more than there is such as thing as 'Cancer'.  There are many different diseases of the heart and many forms of malignancy, and they have different underlying causes and treatments and survival rates.

Folk with furred up coronary arteries are different from those with HOCM, congenital CHB, WPW, athletic SSS etc., in just the same way that men with teratoma of the testis are different to those with large bowel malignancies or melanoma of the skin.  All 'cancers' but not remotely the same.

Linus Pauling, twice Nobel Prize winner, spent a huge amount of his life trying to prove that massive Vitamin C supplements prevent the common cold. They don't.

Hokum

by AgentX86 - 2019-12-14 12:11:10

Sounds like a bunch of bunkum to me.  How can diabetes go undetected in 2019?  All it tales is an A1C test to find the "average" blood glucose level.  A1C, and fasting lood glucose are pretty definite diagnostic for diabetes.  It sounds like he's redefining the term "diabetes".  Not very useful.

I think

by Pacer2019 - 2019-12-14 16:43:18

The guy makes some good points .... the research is starting to prove itself out. Many questions are being asked and things questioned. 
hasn't been that long ago in history that they finally realized germs cause infection.... I'm sure that was questioned. 
wonder how many people died because no one washed their hands ?

one area I am interested in is the preoccupation with LDL and treatment with statin drugs.  Not long ago there was consideration of distributing them over the counter ! Now their use is being questioned altogether. 
 

im kind of an outlier as it wasn't a poor lifestyle or a bad diet that had me on the operating table at a very young age for bypass surgery- I guess I should be more concerned about genetic research and reversing my genetic code ! 
 

All orthodoxies have two problems...

by crustyg - 2019-12-15 05:53:15

They make the assumption that we know everything and that everything we know is correct.  Neither assumption withstands more than a couple of seconds of thought.

So he may be correct, or at least be successfully challenging one or two facets of the current orthodoxies.

It's about 160 years since the germ theory of disease started to gain serious traction, so it's quite some time ago.

Your genetic inheritance - your DNA - is much less important than the interaction between your genes and the environment.  Gene setting - exactly *how* much a gene is activated, much of which is set during intra-uterine life, is critical (see David Barker and his collaborators' work), gene methylation (turns off a gene completely), genetic damage due to viral infection (look for the identical twins one of who developed leukaemia, the other didn't) has a huge impact (we immunise our cats against feline leukamia virus), so where you grow up, your mother's nutrition before birth and yours since birth, your level of activity and what you're exposed to - all of these are much more important than worrying about the one thing in your body that you can never change - your DNA.

But

by Pacer2019 - 2019-12-15 10:04:52

160 years isn’t a very long time when you consider how long man human life has existed .

Think of all the things where people said “it can’t be done” and scoffed at ideas or theories.

I try to keep an open mind and am always interested in ideas that question what is mainstream thought . 

Open mind

by AgentX86 - 2019-12-15 13:33:53

It's good to keep an open mind but don't let your brains fall out. "Diabetes" has a definition. We have the means to test it. It's not like 160 years ago when we knew NOTHING about biology or more precisely, everything we thought we knew was wrong. Unless our whole understanding of the universe is wrong, there are definite "knowns". This is one of those "knowns", at least as far as the accepted definitions of the terms. If you insist on changing accepted definitions, well, join the PC movement where right is wrong and male is female.