June 9, 2016 general

While the above graphic is chuckle-worthy, it is horrifying how many people believe everything they read on the internet or see on TV. However, even very intelligent and cautious people can be misled when they receive misinformation from their doctors and other supposedly credible sources. The trick to separating the gluten-free grain from the chaff is seeing if there is factual proof of what may only sound plausible. It is a matter of myth versus science.

Too often the truth becomes unrecognizable because it has had so much self-serving spin wrapped around it by vested interests. That was the case with the disastrous USDA food pyramid of a few years ago. It was not a product of science, but rather the work of lobbyists for the food industry. (The pyramid base was starchy foods and I nicknamed it the “obesity/diabetes pyramid”).

With medical information, a factoid may look only at some midpoint finding, not the end result that we assume. For instance, a drug or diet plan may indeed reduce blood cholesterol in a certain group of people. And yet it may have no impact whatsoever on preventing heart attacks or on saving lives.

Here are a couple current myth-busting examples:  

Disinfecting

The theory: Bleaching the heck out of everything at home (or school) should reduce the incidence of disease. (Chlorox brand brags about this idea on their website specifically noting the idea it will reduce cases of the flu.)

What the science shows: Over 9,000 children 6-12 years of age from various European countries were studied for one year. The researchers compared rates of influenza, tonsillitis, sinusitis, ear infections, bronchitis and pneumonia with the use of bleach at home for sanitizing. It turned out that greater use of bleach resulted in 20% more cases of flu, 35% more tonsillitis and 18% more recurrent infections in general. STUDY

Possible explanation: The extra sanitizing may have killed protective organisms along with those that might cause disease. And/or the sanitary conditions prevented kids from exposure to very small amounts of a virus thereby making their immune systems less prepared if they accidentally encountered a large amount of pathogen (like being in range of a sneeze).

Low Fat Dairy

The theory: Virtually every diet recommendation we hear from dietitians mentions that we should use low-fat or even fat-free dairy. They claim to be protecting us from calories and the “evils” of saturated fat and by extension from obesity and heart disease. Given the massive number of low-fat products at the typical grocery store, Americans have apparently believed what they said and voted with their dollars.

What the science shows: We now know that the scant science on fats (even saturated fat) was shaky at best and we have had it all wrong. One recent study showed less weight gain around the waist in men who ate full fat dairy. STUDY. A review of several studies showed less risk of obesity and cardiovascular disease with high fat dairy. STUDY. It was always at least hinted that fat in the diet contributed to bad skin. However, interestingly, a study showed that skim milk was more significantly associated with acne than full fat dairy. STUDY.

Possible explanation: For one thing, fat satisfies appetite and so, in its absence, we eat more food. Also, sugar is the real villain and the reduction of fat led to an increased intake of sugar. Finally, there are beneficial substances in fat and we usually seem to get in trouble whenever we start processing whole real food to remove parts of it.