Arghh.
This is why it is so hard to know how to eat right:
Exhibit A: Reprinted Agence France-Presse article, on Yahoo -
Fast-food binge harms liver, but boosts good cholesterol: study
Exhibit B: ABC's take on the same study -
Fast Food: The Fast Track to Organ Damage
A reports that the study noted, according to AFP:
* The goal was to increase body weight by 10 to 15 percent to measure the impact of an abrupt surge in calorie intake.
* Volunteers were to eat twice a week at a fast food restaurant while refraining from exercise.
* Good Cholesterol (HDL) got a boost.
* The marker for liver damage, ALT, was seen, and indicates an increasingly fatty liver.
* "That signs of liver damage were linked to carbohydrates was another key finding" .. "It was not the fat in the hamburgers, it was rather the sugar in the coke,"
* That this liver damage was also a precursor to diabetes.
* The health benefits, HDL, apparently come from Fat.
* The diet's Saturated Fat correlates with an increase in healthy cholesterol.
* This is consistent with the "French Paradox"
B reports the following, taking the study, and asking an unrelated person questions, and making some assertions contradictory to the report while not mentioning that they're contrary to it!
* The calories eaten were !outrageous¡, says an associate professor of pediatrics!
* Other studies have shown that a diet high in fat and calories puts people at a greater risk for diabetes, heart disease, and obesity!
* "But the Swedish study ... showed that the liver is also at risk when you roll up to the drive-through window." And, that apparently was the only thing it showed.
* "The extra fat is the big enchilada here, the equivalent of about three sticks of butter daily," the pediatrician said.
... 3 Sticks of Butter. 330 grams. A Big Mac contains 29 grams of fat - you'd need to eat 11 or 12 of them in two meals. Even a large Fries is only 30 grams of fat.
* "The liver processes fats in the blood. Excessive calories and fats overload the organ, causing fat to build up in the liver cells and leading to liver damage." .. I can explain how misleading the first sentence is in a few pages. Note the inclusion of 'Excessive Calories' without explaining. The body is a lot more complex than this by an order of magnitude, but I suppose since we are aiming for a third grade reading level, that's okay..
* .. What good health effects? We're not going to mention that.
..
The fat in the food is the most caloric, therefore it is the cause of the liver damage, unlike the study itself said. Also, the other calories, but really, fat is universally bad people, we've asked a pediatrician. And by eating out, somehow 330 grams of fat a day were eaten, and calories skyrocketed to OVER 9000.. 5000!
Did they even read the study? Did they really report a damn thing on it? What was their point, save bias reinforcement and unnuanced scare tactics?
And how is someone who hasn't spent much of their time studying these topics supposed to tell that the ABC article is BS? Well, other than the fact that it was reported on Good Morning America.. people are likely to take it all at face value. These are experts after all! News Experts, expertly attracting as much viewership and attention as possible. Everything else is secondary, isn't it? If that.
Exhibit A: Reprinted Agence France-Presse article, on Yahoo -
Fast-food binge harms liver, but boosts good cholesterol: study
Exhibit B: ABC's take on the same study -
Fast Food: The Fast Track to Organ Damage
A reports that the study noted, according to AFP:
* The goal was to increase body weight by 10 to 15 percent to measure the impact of an abrupt surge in calorie intake.
* Volunteers were to eat twice a week at a fast food restaurant while refraining from exercise.
* Good Cholesterol (HDL) got a boost.
* The marker for liver damage, ALT, was seen, and indicates an increasingly fatty liver.
* "That signs of liver damage were linked to carbohydrates was another key finding" .. "It was not the fat in the hamburgers, it was rather the sugar in the coke,"
* That this liver damage was also a precursor to diabetes.
* The health benefits, HDL, apparently come from Fat.
* The diet's Saturated Fat correlates with an increase in healthy cholesterol.
* This is consistent with the "French Paradox"
B reports the following, taking the study, and asking an unrelated person questions, and making some assertions contradictory to the report while not mentioning that they're contrary to it!
* The calories eaten were !outrageous¡, says an associate professor of pediatrics!
* Other studies have shown that a diet high in fat and calories puts people at a greater risk for diabetes, heart disease, and obesity!
* "But the Swedish study ... showed that the liver is also at risk when you roll up to the drive-through window." And, that apparently was the only thing it showed.
* "The extra fat is the big enchilada here, the equivalent of about three sticks of butter daily," the pediatrician said.
... 3 Sticks of Butter. 330 grams. A Big Mac contains 29 grams of fat - you'd need to eat 11 or 12 of them in two meals. Even a large Fries is only 30 grams of fat.
* "The liver processes fats in the blood. Excessive calories and fats overload the organ, causing fat to build up in the liver cells and leading to liver damage." .. I can explain how misleading the first sentence is in a few pages. Note the inclusion of 'Excessive Calories' without explaining. The body is a lot more complex than this by an order of magnitude, but I suppose since we are aiming for a third grade reading level, that's okay..
* .. What good health effects? We're not going to mention that.
..
The fat in the food is the most caloric, therefore it is the cause of the liver damage, unlike the study itself said. Also, the other calories, but really, fat is universally bad people, we've asked a pediatrician. And by eating out, somehow 330 grams of fat a day were eaten, and calories skyrocketed to OVER 9000.. 5000!
Did they even read the study? Did they really report a damn thing on it? What was their point, save bias reinforcement and unnuanced scare tactics?
And how is someone who hasn't spent much of their time studying these topics supposed to tell that the ABC article is BS? Well, other than the fact that it was reported on Good Morning America.. people are likely to take it all at face value. These are experts after all! News Experts, expertly attracting as much viewership and attention as possible. Everything else is secondary, isn't it? If that.