The road to health

If I were to poll my overweight readers, I’m sure almost all of them would say that they are concerned about the health problems associated with obesity.  We’ve all heard that obesity increases our risk of heart disease, cancer, diabetes and a host of other conditions. 

But does that mean that these conditions are caused by our obesity?  Does it mean that when we lose weight, we are no longer at risk?

Unfortunately no! 

Sure, you will probably qualify for better rates and cover for your insurance, but being at an ideal weight and being physically fit do not protect us against degenerative diseases.  Lance Armstrong was in peak condition when he got cancer.  Think about Sheryl Crow, Christina Applegate, Randy Pausch, Patrick Swayze, Bill Clinton and many more well-known people who have had major diseases.  Take a walk through the cardiac and cancer wards of any hospital and you will most likely see a lot of people who are not overweight getting bypasses, recovering from heart attacks and battling cancer.  All of us have heard of fit people just dropping dead from heart attacks.

According to medical researchers, the question is not whether you have heart disease.  The question is how far along your heart disease is.  During the Korean war, autopsies performed on combat casualties revealed that 77.3% of the hearts examined had “gross evidence of heart disease”.  These soldiers were not overweight, or unfit.  They were in top condition in the prime of their physical lives.

The 1992 Bogalusa Heart Study confirmed the existence of fatty plaques and streaks (the beginning of artherosclerosis) in most children and teenagers killed in accidents.

We need to realize that weight is not the problem.  Weight is a symptom of the problem.  If you eliminate the symptom and not the cause, your risk of contracting one or more of the “dread” diseases does not diminish.  It’s also the reason why chronic cholesterol lowering drugs (statins) are useless. All they do is switch off the alarm, instead of putting out the fire.

It isn’t that the research hasn’t been done.  It has.  Scientists know an enormous amount about the links between nutrition and health.  But real science has been buried beneath a clutter of irrelevant or even harmful information – junk science, fad diets and food industry propaganda that reach into every area of our lives.

So, where do we turn for information that will keep us healthy, or get us healthy?

How about your doctor?  Unfortunately our medical system is so fixated on surgical and pharmaceutical “solutions” that doctors receive less than 21 hours training in nutrition, most of which has to do with supplementation.  I’m reminded of a incident a few years ago when my doctor found that my iron levels were low and prescribed a supplement.  I just ate more raisins and told him about it at my next visit.  He scoffed and said that food has nothing to do with health.  Needless to say, he’s no longer my doctor.  Furthermore, degenerative disease is highly profitable for doctors, hospitals and pharmaceutical companies.  As the saying goes, they want us sick, but alive!

We need to be more skeptical about what we read in the media or in the latest diet-bestseller.  Real scientists have the relevant qualifications, their books have long lists of references and they pubish their findings in a number of peer-review journals. 

But we need to know more than that.  Who paid for this research?   For instance, there have been hundreds of studies performed to ascertain the health risks associated with artificial sweeteners.  Is it any surprise to you that the ones who say that artificial sweeteners pose no harm, were conducted or paid for by the very companies that manufacture and sell these products? 

What professional ties does this scientist have?  Do you know that the people who sit on the boards that determine the nutritional guidelines often have close ties to the food industry?

How were the studies conducted?  For instance, a study of two groups of people, one whose members smoke three packets of cigarettes per day and another whose members have cut down to two packets per day, may conclude that there is no health benefit to be had by smoking less.  But clearly the study was flawed.   When it comes to nutrition we can’t only concern ourselves with one kind of research; we have to look at both human data and laboratory data.

And finally, is anybody in the field (the real world) using these guidelines and seeing their patients get well and stay well?

The real question here is whether we can accept that our choices and lifestyles determine our health, or lack thereof?  If the answer is yes, the next step is to get the necessary knowledge.  What you do with that knowledge is up to you.  But you have to know!  And tomorrow I’ll introduce you to someone who will tell you.

“… my people are dying from lack of knowledge.” Hosea 4:6