Executive summary
* Inspired by last week’s note, which reported expert comments on a recent paper about ultra-processed foods, this note shares two public health responses to the first publication from my PhD.
* The first PhD paper was a meta-analysis of the randomised controlled trials that examined the evidence for two dietary fat recommendations at the time they were introduced (1977 US and 1983 UK). The recommendations were to restrict total fat to no more than 30% of energy intake and saturated fat to no more than 10% of energy intake.
* The paper had many striking findings. First there was no evidence for those recommendations. Dietary fat interventions made no difference whatsoever to heart deaths or overall mortality. The interventions reduced cholesterol but this made no difference to outcomes, which undermined beliefs about cholesterol. Additionally, only 2,500 sick men had been studied in 6 trials so if anything had been found, the results would not have applied to any women or healthy people and should not have been applied to tens of millions of people.
* The paper became the 64th most impactful paper in any discipline in 2015. This note shares the media reaction at the time.
* This note also shares the letters sent to the journal by Public Health England and Reading University and the replies of our research team. It also shares a highly relevant conflict for Reading University, of which I was unaware at the time.
Zoe
Source link