Today’s news media is no longer the independent, investigative force they were in the past due to the increasing pressure of advertisers. This is no better illustration than the misleading reviews of medical research being publicized by radio, TV and news print. The distortions of reality, the misquoting and downright dishonest reporting makes blogging, one of the most important parts of modern society in my opinion.
When my friend, Jim Larsen, sends me articles like the review of a Lancet paper from April 2005 where the authors tell their audience that they should abandon their calcium and other nutritional supplements in favor of pharmaceuticals I get my hackles up (my wife thanks you Jim. The paper he sent me is so poorly done that my 9 year old would be scolded for writing it, I have to wonder whether some people’s drive for money has so clouded their thinking that any semblance of morality was dropped off somewhere far away from their homes. The participants in the study from the Lancet had a incredibly high drop out rate (over 1/3rd) which in and of it self should have thrown it out but it also did not look at levels of Vitamin D (critical in calcium metabolism), did not look at hydrochloric acid levels which are necessary for proper absorption of calcium and they use too low of a dose! Many of the studies putting down calcium also used the wrong form, calcium carbonate which is a cheap but very poorly absorbed form.
When you look at the advertising in journals like the New England Journal of Medicine (I commonly refer to it as the NEJ of Aggravation) and The Lancet, you can see why they consistently whore themselves to Big Pharma. You may think my words are harsh but the distortion and lying is of such a catastrophic nature, that I should be accused of being too mild in my characterizations of these people.
Now to turn my focus to the other side of nutrition, the hucksters and sales sharks who tout things like horny goat weed as the solution to all male sexual dysfunction, or some self-proclaimed health truth tellers from some dark corner of the Amazon who claim they are the only bastion of truth yet when you disagree with them (with good cause), they call you Nazi’s (yes I have been accused by one such lunatic as having opinions reminiscent of the perpetrators of the Holocaust) and big Pharma shills. These are the ones that allopathic medical practitioners point to as the model of alternative minded people. They do such a disservice to nutritional health that I feel some of them may really be the big Pharma shills.
While not all blogging is filled with truth sayers, by sharing our ideas and thoughts, we allow people to hear all sides of a story, not just the side that advertisers want you to hear. We blog not just to see ourselves on the net but to allow you to see what the truth might be. As for me, I will continue to blog as long as I see deceit, disinformation, falsehoods and shills.
how do you see the emergence of nutrigenomics as playing a role in this battle for optimal health?
I think that the concept of nutrigenomics is not as powerful a force as metobonomics (aka metabolomics). In the study presented in the journal Nature (April 20, 2006), we see that rats that were similar genetically reacted differently based on their individual chemistries.
The concept of biochemical individuality within the context of genetics is more valuable than just focusing on “treating the gene”. I also believe that you can change the gene itself as has been shown by Japanese researchers recently (Genome Research 16:567-575, 2006). This differs from my understanding of nutrigenomics which believes in supressing “bad” genes. I believe in a new bolder direction which combines nutrigenomics, epigenetics and metabonomics into one concept, something my team is working on at Carbon Based Corporation.
I will be posting much more on this in the coming weeks.