See All
Preferences
My Communities
My Discussions
My Email Digests
Announcements
New US Diet Guidelines: What Not to Eat
Instead of just giving Americans a list of healthy food choices, the federal government takes a stab at showing us what not to eat. Get the facts here.

So what caused the decline?
It was during this period both smoking and emissions went into decline. Both of which directly impact vascular health.
It really is pretty simple, fast foods are bad for you, no real revelation here and cholesterol can cause heart disease. Charts and graphs are nice along with all the time lines and state by state comps, but still way deeper dive than necessary. ff you believe in the medical application of statins great. If you don't that's good as well. That's why we're all different.
Anyways, I'm new and my cholesterol is 154, LDL 64 and HDL 39. I've been on Simvastatin for years they work for me. Looking forward to joining in.
JJ
What isn't understood yet is the underlying mechanism behind the cause of Cardiovascular disease. This has yet to be identified.
40 years ago it was thought consumption of saturated fats and high serum cholesterol levels were responsible. However this hypothesis has been fading as half the heart attacks happen to people with low cholesterol. Meanwhile populations who consume higher saturated fat diets don't always have higher rates of heart disease.
The point of the graph above is to point out despite America's increased consumption of fast food, death rates from heart disease declined. A fact few people are aware.
In my thinking, that's what hasn't changed and the medical profession has advanced as we all know. Poor diet and lifestyle stays the same and medical treatment advance results in a decline in heart disease. Really kind of simple but the charts are entertaining I guess.
JJ
100% agree we have better medical technology. No question about it. There were also other major improvements that took place after 1970 that may have contributed to the decline.
Our diets are more than just what we eat. Yes, what we eat is important, but what we inhale constitutes the Lion's share of our daily intake into our arteries.
There is a growing body of evidence that small air pollution particulate worsen cardiovascular disease and contribute to heart attacks and strokes. Its not the only risk factor, but study after study is showing a clear association.
It was post 1970 that both smoking and emissions declined in the US. Smoking, auto emissions, and factory emissions are all by-products of combustion. All the same with slight variances, but still toxic by-products of combustion.
Conversely, we can explore parts of the world where emissions are on the increase, and so is the death rate from heart disease.
Association doesn't prove causation. If that were true then pine trees would cause heart disease. But the study evidence of particulate pollution is compelling to say the least.
Again, this is not complicated. Poor diet would be the baseline and medical advances would be the variable and that is how association is proved. What you are provide is a possible causation without evidence.
This all more data than anyone needs for the purpose of this forum. Eating badly increases your risk of heart disease. The rest is personal belief.
I looked at a few more of your posts, one said you were leaving. What was that about?
The chart does contain an X and Y axis.
Any concern about the validity of the timeline chart above would need to be directed to the National Institutes of Health.
Its their timeline chart. Not mine.
Any concern over the validity of McDonalds history would have to be directed to McDonalds.
Any dispute over air pollution as a risk factor for heart disease should be directed to the American Heart Association since they endorse it.
Its not my theory. Medical Researchers beat me to it by about 10 years. I can only discuss their theory.
Sadly, despite better medical advances, heart failure is on therapid increase. It isn't all good news.
For you to prove no association to causation, you would need an axis that compares the increase or decrease in the consumption of McDonald's. What you are trying to do is prove there is no association which is like proving something didn't happen mathematically, that's very difficult and almost impossible.
Again, I am curious why you decided to stop posting. You obviously have some passion for this. Oh well, good luck.
Take care,
Bobby
Here's a great example of comparing a negative association to a causation I just finished reading;
http://www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2012/12_0005.htm
Precisely. The change in music had nothing to do with the decline in heart disease. Likewise the bad change in America's eating habits to fast food also had nothing to do with the decline.
The typical guy on the street has this association of a fast food with inducing heart disease. I certainly grew up with that association. Its still stuck in my mind.
So if fast food does cause heart disease, why did heart disease decline while fast food consumption increased?
That was the point of the timeline overlay.
Again, it is very difficult to prove something didn't happen due to an outside association, that's my point.
But how would one explain the decline in INCIDENCE of heart disease ( different graph) as fast food consumption increased? Fewer Americans were getting heart disease as fast food increased.
How would one explain the higher rates of heart disease in populations that had yet to become fast food nations?
Women's Health Newsletter
Find out what women really need.
Featuring Experts
There are no Expert stories for this community right nowPopular Discussions
Helpful Tips
Helpful Resources
Related News
Related Drug Reviews
- Drug Name User Reviews
Report Problems to the
Food and Drug Administration
You are encouraged to report negative side effects of prescription drugs to the FDA. Visit the FDA MedWatch website or call 1-800-FDA-1088.
Other Cholesterol Management Information
More Related Communities
The opinions expressed in WebMD User-generated content areas like communities, reviews, ratings, or blogs are solely those of the User, who may or may not have medical or scientific training. These opinions do not represent the opinions of WebMD. User-generated content areas are not reviewed by a WebMD physician or any member of the WebMD editorial staff for accuracy, balance, objectivity, or any other reason except for compliance with our Terms and Conditions. Some of these opinions may contain information about treatments or uses of drug products that have not been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. WebMD does not endorse any specific product, service, or treatment.
Do not consider WebMD User-generated content as medical advice. Never delay or disregard seeking professional medical advice from your doctor or other qualified healthcare provider because of something you have read on WebMD. You should always speak with your doctor before you start, stop, or change any prescribed part of your care plan or treatment. WebMD understands that reading individual, real-life experiences can be a helpful resource, but it is never a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment from a qualified health care provider. If you think you may have a medical emergency, call your doctor or dial 911 immediately.
Health Solutions From Our Sponsors
©2005-2013 WebMD, LLC. All rights reserved.
WebMD does not provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See additional information.


