Trans fat doesn't stir much 'nanny state' debate

[Train Wreck]

Yes RR after watching Catalyst on ABC about colesterol .

Did you watch, media watch last night ?

They shot a lot of shit at that Catalyst episode. Bias, one sided and heavily edited

Edited November 13, 2013 by Train Wreck

[Stoned Offroad]

Hi salpon, you make really valid points but they seem to be based on the assumption that the government has our best interests in mind. In my opinion they don't, they wan't to control and modify our behaviour to suit their interests, not ours.

 

This has reminded me of that epic homemade lard thread that some dude posted recently, man those chips looked killer !

[brick]

You got on a bit of a tangent there Brick. I can agree with your final point that education is vital in reducing dangerous practices in the population, ie tobacco smoking. However I do believe government has a responsibility to restrict or ban the most dangerous of these, based on independent recommendations. Our difference in opinion probably comes down to political ideology. I would guess that you are fairly libertarian in your beliefs, Brick. 

You sound like my son salpon. We often have good debates on things like this and politics. Yes I do go off on tangents sometimes. I just don't like being told what to do or how to think by people purporting to know what is good for me, when they don't even know me. My opinion is only my opinion and how I think. If any government really cared about the population they would ban tobacco and alcohol and gambling but they can't! But banning something like trans fats is going to be used for political vote getting not because they really care about us, I still maintain it should start in the home like everything else.

Our society is now stuck deep in political correctness gone crazy. Again in my opinon we are heading towards Orwell's "1984" just a bit late.

[brick]

Did you watch, media watch last night ?

They shot a lot of shit at that Catalyst episode. Bias, one sided and heavily edited

No but I was told about it TW. Of course the episode had to be shot down. It is not good to go up against the pharma companies that are making squillions of dollars from drugs sold to the plebs by doctors who get thousands of dollars in perks from them. The good thing that will come out of this is that patients will now start asking their gp's questions that they would never have asked before. The new younger gp's are the best, they (well mine anyway) are interested in the welfare of their patients, they are open to new ideas. My generation of gp's just told you what to take, fobbed off any questions you asked with the attitude "I am right, you know nothing, trust me the side effects won't hurt you" type of shit.

This debate will go on for some time in the media cos it is good for ratings. But just maybe they will get some scientist to do the research on cholesterol and statins and all types of fats and confirm or debunk the theory on cholesterol and if it is good or bad to take the pills.

[Train Wreck]

No but I was told about it TW. Of course the episode had to be shot down.

Media watch had a pretty good reason though, 2 specialists had 7 minutes of air time, while 5 unqualified (in the field) people gave their views for 27 minutes. The episode was bias, one sided and edited hours of answers supplied by the 2 doctors. Heard on the radio today, some doctors have 1 in 5 patients stopped taking their meds due to the catalyst program.

They are expecting a rise in heart attacks.

[brick]

They are expecting a rise in heart attacks.

 

 

And I would expect that they would say that. Scare tactics TW. If your diet is well balanced and you are aware of the "dirty" food and you can exercise a couple of times a week then why should you have a heart attack because you stop your cholesterol meds. Maybe they are aiming this at diabetics, I don't know.

 

How can they say that though!  About heart attacks? Where is the proof that this will happen.

[Train Wreck]

Some people need to be scared, even that fails to work.

We are not one of the fattest nations on the planet due to lack of knowledge.

A bad diet is related to cholesterol. Tell all of the people with bad diets and lack of exercise what will happen, how many change their ways ???

Most look for a medical magic bullet instead. They are advised in most/all cases about how they can improve their health, does that alter their behaviour, very rarely...........

 

How can they say that though!  About heart attacks? Where is the proof that this will happen.

 

I don't know, maybe statistics/experience and working in the medical field.

[brick]

Would be good if this forum had a skype like thingo were we could talk/debate things. Would be a lot of fun. I see your point and salpons and agree to a certain degree. When I was doing cardio rehab after my heart attack I looked up just what causes cholesterol good and bad. I was surprised to find that eggs were on the good/bad list and prawns (not that I could afford to eat them regularly) the dietician said that we can still eat up to 5 eggs a week. Go figure! Spuds are a no no because of the carbs and rice could be substituted. Then the heart doctor said rice was not good either because of the starch. These were a couple of things amongs nearly everything we eat, except veggies. High protein meats are bad also not just what they are cooked in, preservatives etc the list goes on and on.

 

So what is good and what is not. Simple everything in moderation.

 

What catalyst has done has opened a Pandora's box and I really do hope that there will be a scientific study done on this. Proper research not just theory on both sides of the fence.

 

My problem is, as I stated before, people telling me what to do and how to live my life, I am old enough to make my own decisions. We live in a very informative era and if individual's need to be told what to do fine then tell them what to do but what about the people who can think for themselves. Which imo is where the problem lies.

[Train Wreck]

Would be good if this forum had a skype like thingo were we could talk/debate things. Would be a lot of fun. I see your point and salpons and agree to a certain degree. When I was doing cardio rehab after my heart attack I looked up just what causes cholesterol good and bad. I was surprised to find that eggs were on the good/bad list and prawns (not that I could afford to eat them regularly) the dietician said that we can still eat up to 5 eggs a week. Go figure! Spuds are a no no because of the carbs and rice could be substituted. Then the heart doctor said rice was not good either because of the starch. These were a couple of things amongs nearly everything we eat, except veggies. High protein meats are bad also not just what they are cooked in, preservatives etc the list goes on and on.

 

So what is good and what is not. Simple everything in moderation.

 

What catalyst has done has opened a Pandora's box and I really do hope that there will be a scientific study done on this. Proper research not just theory on both sides of the fence.

 

My problem is, as I stated before, people telling me what to do and how to live my life, I am old enough to make my own decisions. We live in a very informative era and if individual's need to be told what to do fine then tell them what to do but what about the people who can think for themselves. Which imo is where the problem lies.

Not trying to tell anyone what to do.

Hardly a nipper myself. Just keep an open mind  Don't take the word of either side.

Get more than one opinion from people that are meant to know what they are talking about.......

[salpon]

Brick raises another good point. There is lots of conflicting information about nutrition and diet out there, and it can be hard to know what to believe. I asked my doctor if she could help me with this, but she didn't provide me with any sources of reliable information or give me a way to find out more. I think doctors should focus a bit more on diet since it contributes to so many illnesses. I still think the Australian Dietary Guidelines offer the most reliable information based on the best available scientific evidence. http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/guidelines/publications/n55