Linoleic acid and heart issues

So well-researched I couldn’t do better myself.

Even used the red box chan method. Nice.

FI
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/science/Vegetarians-prone-to-strokes-Study/articleshow/3227413.cms

A study that tried to find positive (pro-veg) differences had arbitrary, strict age limits and time exclusions.
https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/70/3/516s/4714974
“There were no significant differences between vegetarians and nonvegetarians in mortality from cerebrovascular disease, stomach cancer, colorectal cancer, lung cancer, breast cancer, prostate cancer, or all other causes combined.”
Logically, if meat consumption caused colon cancer, that is impossible.

Pro-vegan paper
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4073139/
“Non-vegetarian diets were compared to vegetarian dietary patterns (i.e., vegan and lacto-ovo-vegetarian) on selected health outcomes.”
Why not compare vegetarian to vegan?
“Males experience greater health benefits than females. Limited prospective data is available on vegetarian diets and body weight change.”
Don’t bother studying that, though.
“Large randomized intervention trials on the effects of vegetarian diet patterns on neurological and cognitive functions, obesity, diabetes, and other cardiovascular outcomes are warranted to make meaningful recommendations.”
…useless.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10408398.2016.1138447?journalCode=bfsn20
Vegetarian, vegan diets and multiple health outcomes: A systematic review with meta-analysis of observational studies
There appears to be a confound e.g. not drinking.
Claim:
“This comprehensive meta-analysis reports a significant protective effect of a vegetarian diet versus the incidence and/or mortality from ischemic heart disease (−25%) and incidence from total cancer (−8%). Vegan diet conferred a significant reduced risk (−15%) of incidence from total cancer.”

DATA: (they hope we won’t look at)
“With regard to prospective cohort studies, the analysis showed a significant reduced risk of incidence and/or mortality from ischemic heart disease (RR 0.75; 95% CI, 0.68 to 0.82) and incidence of total cancer (RR 0.92; 95% CI 0.87 to 0.98) but not of total cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases, all-cause mortality and mortality from cancer. No significant association was evidenced when specific types of cancer were analyzed.”
Clear as mud.

You’re literally more likely to DIE on this diet but they claim “protective”.

Vegans – putting the DIE in DIET.

“The analysis conducted among vegans reported significant association with the risk of incidence from total cancer (RR 0.85; 95% CI, 0.75 to 0.95), despite obtained only in a limited number of studies.

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/0eca/e24d13bacf38f3ddc6178b07312d566a4d8d.pdf
excellent example of propaganda

Insulin > Heart attack connection

http://www.webmedcentral.com/wmcpdf/Article_with_review_WMC00851.pdf

https://health.harvard.edu/heart-health/takotsubo-cardiomyopathy-broken-heart-syndrome

Years of gender-based research have shown that in matters of the heart, sex differences abound. One striking example is the temporary heart condition known as takotsubo cardiomyopathy, first described in 1990 in Japan. More than 90% of reported cases are in women ages 58 to 75. Research suggests that up to 5% of women evaluated for a heart attack actually have this disorder, which has only recently been reported in the United States and may go largely unrecognized. Fortunately, most people recover rapidly with no long-term heart damage.”

“Takotsubo cardiomyopathy is a weakening of the left ventricle, the heart’s main pumping chamber, usually as the result of severe emotional or physical stress, such as a sudden illness, the loss of a loved one, a serious accident, or a natural disaster such as an earthquake.”

What if you induce it in a man?

And who isn’t “stressed”? Gangstalking rationale?

And that’d look nice and natural on a death certificate.

The precise cause isn’t known, but experts think that surging stress hormones (for example, adrenaline) essentially “stun” the heart, triggering changes in heart muscle cells or coronary blood vessels (or both) that prevent the left ventricle from contracting effectively. Researchers suspect that older women are more vulnerable because of reduced levels of estrogen after menopause. In studies with rats whose ovaries had been removed, the ones given estrogen while under stress had less left-ventricle dysfunction and higher levels of certain heart-protective substances.

That might be the single reason women live longer.

Takotsubo symptoms are indistinguishable from those of a heart attack. And an electrocardiogram (ECG) may show abnormalities similar to those found in some heart attacks — in particular, changes known as ST-segment elevation. Consequently, imaging studies and other measures are needed to rule out a heart attack.

Soy is a chick food

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/07/140730043439.htm

Need I mention phytoestrogens?

Lifelong soy consumption, similar to the diet of women in Asia, produces the least atherosclerosis. Switching to a Western diet after menopause, similar to Asian migrants to North America, leads to just as much atherosclerosis as a lifelong Western diet, and switching to soy from a Western diet after menopause helps only if there isn’t much atherosclerosis already.