Skip to content
My WebMD Sign In, Sign Up
Heart disease and dairy.
avatar
bobby75703 posted:
Several people comment on eliminating dairy for heart health. But how real is the relationship of Dairy and risk of dying from a heart attack? I don't have the answer, but I did find some interesting data from the Dept of agriculture, and compared that data to the NIH heart disease graphs.


In a nutshell, while death rates from heart disease were in decline in the US, per capita milk consumption was also in decline.


But while death from heart disease was declining, per capita consumption of all cheese was skyrocketing.


Reply
 
avatar
billh99 responded:
http://www.science20.com/quantum_diaries_survivor/correlation_causation_independence-98944

Correlation, Causation, Independence


 
avatar
iride6606 replied to billh99's response:
Outstanding, three of my favorite words. This the relationship that some here do not recognize but are part of every outcome analyzed by a researcher. Some here don't realize that research is not a single two axis world. For instance what the original post does not recognize is that there is a possibility that the double axis theory being put out there could very well not prove the desired causation.The independence is most likely not THE observation but A observation as there are other related correlations such as the advancement of medical treatment during the time the causation was observed. It's like saying the weather was better when milk production was up, any two things that happened simultaneously may be A correlation but have no causation. This is why we do trials.

Thanks for posting this!
 
avatar
bobby75703 replied to iride6606's response:
Bingo iride! You and Bill both got it right! This is exactly the point I have been trying to drive home.

The general public sees the decline in heart disease and the use of statins, and consumers assume its the statins driving down heart disease.


But as you point out there are many other factors at play.


The welcome decline in heart disease in the US is credited to statins, but is it the statins?


The average Joe is unaware heart disease began its decline 20 years before statins came around, and the average Joe is unaware the rate of decline pre and post statins remained unchanged.

So what was driving heart disease down before statins? My best guess is the decline in cigarette smoking. The decline in smoking continued after statins arrived. Although we have leveled out at around 18% smokers, new laws restricting smoking in public places has continued to clear the air.

At the same time emissions from cars and industry have declined.

So how much of the decline in heart disease deaths should we credit to cleaner air, or credit to medical advancements?

While many people may credit statins for the decline after 1987, statins could not be responsible for the decline before they existed.

Food for thought.
 
avatar
billh99 replied to bobby75703's response:
The welcome decline in heart disease in the US is credited to statins, but is it the statins?

That is why I based my decision by reading research papers and doctors discussion.
 
avatar
bobby75703 replied to billh99's response:
What to you think caused the decline in heart disease for nearly 20 years prior to statins? Anybody.
 
avatar
iride6606 replied to bobby75703's response:
I would be happy to. This:

From 1964-1984, coronary heart disease mortality declined 40% and stroke mortality declined 55%. This improvement may be attributed to numerous efforts to reduce cardiovascular disease risk factors. The percentage of males (20 years and older) who smoke cigarettes decreased from 52.1% in 1965 to 32% in 1985, while the decrease among females was from 34.2% in 1965 to 28% in 1983. The percentage of persons 25 to 74 years of age with high-risk cholesterol levels has decreased from 26.9% in 1960-62 to 21.9% in 1976-80. From 1960-1980 the percentage of persons with blood pressure higher or equal to 160/95 remained at 21%, the percentage of those with blood pressure higher or equal to 140/90 remained at 41% and the proportion of overweight persons remained at about 28% in the US; but public awareness of the importance of high blood pressure screening and control increased significantly, leading to increases in the number of persons with hypertension receiving treatment to control their condition. If the decline in cardiovascular disease mortality is to continue, further preventive efforts are in order.

So to sum up, in addition to fewer smokers, cholesterol levels in men and women declined during this period. Less cholesterol, less heart disease.

http://www.healthguidance.org/entry/6324/1/Cardiovascular-Disease-The-Facts.html
 
avatar
bobby75703 replied to iride6606's response:
Excellent!

So in a nutshell:
* Smoking declined considerably among males.
* Smoking declined modestly among females.
* Cholesterol declined modestly.
* Blood pressure remained the same.
* Overweight persons remained the same.

"So to sum up, in addition to fewer smokers, cholesterol levels in men and women declined during this period. Less cholesterol, less heart disease."


When we have two or more things happening at once, how do we know which changing factor bears the most weight? or if one of the factors had no influence on the decline?


Which factor do you think was the biggest contributor to the decline?





 
avatar
iride6606 replied to bobby75703's response:
You can spin it any way you want, the numbers speak for themselves. There simply is no mystery here.
 
avatar
bobby75703 replied to iride6606's response:
Many have said smoking is the greatest risk factor. Would you tend to agree?
 
avatar
billh99 replied to bobby75703's response:
When we have two or more things happening at once, how do we know which changing factor bears the most weight? or if one of the factors had no influence on the decline?

Those numbers are only look at the total population.

To help tease out the individual affects there have been long term studies that tracked a large number of people. And for each person they tracked thinks like diet, habits, blood test, etc.
 
avatar
bobby75703 replied to billh99's response:
"Those numbers are only look at the total population."


Yes, its what I refer to as the big picture. It looks at changes in history and the resulting impact on our nation as a whole.


 
avatar
billh99 replied to bobby75703's response:
But if you only look at the forest you miss the details off all of the different trees that make up that forest.
 
avatar
bobby75703 replied to billh99's response:
Agreed. There is nothing wrong with zooming in and taking a close look at details. But while we are looking under the microscope at a leaf, we shouldn't lose sight of the forest.

A jigsaw puzzle is made up of many pieces, but we won't have a clear image until we step back and look at the whole picture.


Featuring Experts

There are no Expert stories for this community right now

Helpful Tips

shannon9585
Shannon, when I have looked thru my lab test hard copies, I saw that the lab techs had divided the hdl -good- cholesterol value into the ... More
Was this Helpful?
3 of 4 found this helpful