By Kennedy Shelley
The British Medical Journal (BMJ), the respected journal of the British Medical Society is picking at 50 years of “settled science.”
The BMJ has been a brave voice in the wilderness in attacking conventional nutrition advice, the war against cholesterol and how we look at heart health.
In 2015 it ran an article attacking government food recommendations because it was based on politics, and not science.
The article written by journalist Nina Teicholz savaged the recommendations lack of scientific data for the basis of the recommendations.
The professional dietetic association went on the warpath.
The group “Science in the Public Interest” (which is mostly composed of liberal arts professors and trial lawyers) demanded a retraction of the article, but the BMJ refused to cave to the mob pressure.
The BMJ instead put together an independent group of reviewers to look at the charges raised by Science in the Public Interest and said they had no scientific grounds for their critique.
That is very rare for a major medical publication which is very dependent on funding from the major food manufacturers as well as Big Pharma.
Now they are taking on traditional wisdom and Big Pharma by supporting fat in the diet.
The central point of their editorial position is you can’t clog your arteries by eating fat.
This is almost medical heresy.
They point out that the real danger is inflammation in the arteries which can lead to plaques in the artery wall. These plaques resemble pimples.
The plaques are not a danger unless they rupture which is akin to a pimple popping.
This results in coronary thrombosis and myocardial infarction that will kill you within minutes.
The current way of dealing with these plaques is to treat them like a plumbing problem. Doctors think of them like a clog that needs to be broken.
The result has been the wholesale use of stents in people who have not had a heart attack.
Stents are proven to be a life saving treatment to open arteries to the heart following a heart attack, but the BMJ published a study which showed definitively that these devices provide no benefit and do nothing for patient health if used before a heart attack.
Stopping unnecessary stenting would save about a half a billion dollars a year in medical costs. But that is money that surgeons, hospitals and the devise manufacturers would like to have.
(To learn more about the problem with stents, see this article in Freedom Health News)
Now the BMJ is coming out against low-fat diets, and the voices of medical orthodoxy are going nuts.
What is at stake is literally over a trillion dollars to Big Pharma because if cholesterol isn’t the problem, you don’t need a statin drug.
Statin drugs do one thing, it chemically lowers cholesterol, specifically the so-called bad cholesterol.
Statins have been traditionally the biggest selling drugs on the planet and have resulted in over a trillion dollars in profit for Big Pharma. (See this article for more information)
But the BMJ is saying that the problems with cholesterol are a big fat lie. In fact, cholesterol has nothing to do with heart health, but the problem really is inflammation caused by insulin and dietary sugar.
It is rare for a major medical journal to stand up and announce that the “Emperor isn’t wearing clothes” but the BMJ has the science squarely on their side. Let’s hope others are listening.