The evilest person who committed the most horrendous deeds, propagated the worst ideas, or was responsible for other moustache-twirling affairs.

Anyone who is currently alive does not count.

  • NoSpotOfGround@lemmy.world
    182·
    6 days ago

    A dietitian who “established the link between cholesterol and heart disease, created K rations for the US military” and died in 2004 aged 100 is the world’s greatest villain for you?..

    • JayleneSlide@lemmy.world
      7·
      5 days ago

      Ancel Keys established a spurious link between cholesterol and heart disease. His Seven Countries Study was an early application of regression analysis. What is very rarely mentioned was that Keys omitted 5 countries (more? Can’t exactly recall) that didn’t fit the regression he wanted to show. (Ref: “Good Calories, Bad Calories,” Gary Taubes)

      Keys’ contributions to lipid hypothesis fucked the metabolic health of millions for decades.

      Regarding Keys’ centenarian expiration, go find a pic of what that dude looked like for the last few decades of his life. I’ll pass on the longevity and his diet plan.

      And if you’re interested in how nutritionally screwed we are in the US:

      • “Hacking of the American Mind” and “Sugar” by Robert Lustig, a Harvard endocrinologist
      • “The Dorito Effect” by Mark Schatzker There are lots more to choose from, but that’s a pretty big starting point
      • NoSpotOfGround@lemmy.world
        31·
        5 days ago

        Ok, so, regarding these ideas:

        • “it has not been revealed enough how damaging sugar is” – I would agree with this. I’m not sure that was his intention in particular.
        • Ancel (intentionally?) overlooked some data when forming his theory – I would agree with this too. But it doesn’t make the harm of cholesterol moot. Or do you now want to ignore the other data yourself? It just makes the situation more complex than simply “fat alone is bad”. Too much fat is still bad.

        He made a step, perhaps a bit too long in a mistaken direction, but understanding didn’t and won’t stop with him. How everyone reacted to his theory was also part of the fault.

        • JayleneSlide@lemmy.world
          3·
          5 days ago

          He made a step, perhaps a bit too long in a mistaken direction, but understanding didn’t and won’t stop with him. How everyone reacted to his theory was also part of the fault.

          These are excellent points and spot on. We’re all looking for the silver bullet and elevator pitch, even those of us who know better. “Oh, just stop eating fatty meat, eggs, and salt!” Except it’s way more complex than that. To Keys’ credit, he also highlighted the importance of weight management/obesity, cardiovascular health, and “regular” exercise. The definition of “regular” of course keeps getting modified.

          Too much fat is still bad.

          Agreed, although too much of anything is bad. “The toxicity is in the dose.” Keys pushed replacing saturated fats with PUFAs, which became a whole different problem with industrial PUFAs becoming the norm. Industrial PUFAs are high in Omega-6 EFA while being low in Omega-3 EFA. Humans don’t actually need any digestible carbohydrates to survive, but we very much need fats and protein to live. Nutritional research has merely been negotiating on where the borders are.

          But it doesn’t make the harm of cholesterol moot. Or do you now want to ignore the other data yourself?

          We worry too much about exogenous cholesterol, when endogenous cholesterol is the real problem. Cholesterol is a lot like that joke about the guy looking for his keys in the middle of the street. “Did you lose your keys around here?” “No, but this is where the light is.” Cholesterol, especially back when nutrition policy was being set, was what we could easily measure, and that was a correlation that science pursued. Epidemiological studies are notoriously tricky, sometimes just a step above anecdote. And to discuss these things in any serious detail requires a couple book-feet of text, most of it being contextual qualification.

          Regarding the importance of cholesterol as a risk indicator: What’s probably closer to the truth is balance of HDL to LDL and cholesterol to HDL, with triglycerides being a case-by-case basis. If I recall correctly >500mg/dL being the absolute level for concern and interventions, with >200mg/dL being considered abnormally high.

          I think in the end, we all have to find what works for us at our given point in life. Because no silver bullet and there’s no way to discuss these things simply and quickly.

          • xep@discuss.online
            2·
            5 days ago

            I believe the current view on LDL is that its level what the body needs it to be and generally doesn’t require intervention. However, the Tg/HDL ratio is a reasonably good indicator of your metabolic health. OTOH Tg should be below 100 mg/dL, and ideally it should be lower than the HDL reading. The ratio of Tg/HDL should be below 1.8, using mg/dL.

        • remon@ani.social
          121·
          6 days ago

          And he ruined cholesterol, too! Now I have to watch my salt intake. Thanks asshole!

          • xep@discuss.online
            51·
            5 days ago

            Cholesterol doesn’t cause heart disease, and salt in the form of sodium is fine too as long as you don’t have chronically elevated levels of insulin in your blood.

    • xep@discuss.online
      54·
      5 days ago

      Cholesterol has not been scientifically established to the cause of heart disease in human beings. It was based on a study that was done on rabbits fed cholesterol and vegetable oil. The ensuing focus on low-fat diets has caused in my opinion an untold amount of suffering, including my own NAFLD.

      Ancel Keys was a fish physiologist. He was highly charismatic, had a forceful personality, and dismissive of his peers that did not share his theory of heart disease.

      • JayleneSlide@lemmy.world
        3·
        5 days ago

        But ya know what has been proven to contribute to heart disease, atherosclerosis, dyslipidemia, NAFLD, hyperinsulimia/Type 2 diabetes, and chronic inflammation? Refined carbohydrates (Taubes, Lustig, et al).

        I kinda understand the downvotes because we’ve had 50+ years of saturated fat fearmongering. But when you start digging into this long running, test-in-production experiment on human diet and health, it’s hard to avoid conspiratorial thinking.

        • xep@discuss.online
          3·
          5 days ago

          The downvotes don’t bother me. The day I stop getting downvotes is probably when I no longer need to bring this up :)