Mike Adams at Natural News
has decided to use Tim Russert's death to sell his agenda and seemingly his books. If you take a look at this website, you'll see a couple of books written my Mr. Adams clearly displayed on the right hand side.
So what's the issue? It's this: before Mr. Russert has even been eulogized and buried, Mr. Adams has published an article in which he blames Mr. Russert's death on pharmaceutical industry. Mr. Adams doesn't know anything about Mr. Russert's medical history or daily eating and exercise habits. Nor does he know anything about his stress levels, yet he acts like he and his lifestyle alone could have single handedly saved Mr. Russert's life. Not only is this in bad taste, but it's also sickeningly manipulative.
Mr. Adams' goal is to sway as many people as possible to adopt his way of living. His argument is that people should eat healthy and exercise, therefore, eliminating any need for pharmaceuticals to control a health issue. On the surface, that sounds completely innocuous, a good idea, in fact. However, eating healthy and exercising alone is not going to solve everyone's health issues, something Mr. Adams doesn't acknowledge. Instead, says this:
What happened to Russert is about to happen to America's medicated population
Sadly, Tim Russert has learned the hard way what four generations of Americans are about to learn: That you cannot medicate yourself to good health, and when you try to do so, you often end up dying from the very medicine you thought was saving your life.
There's a book Tim Russert needed, and it's the same book that tens of millions of Americans need right now. It's called Prevent and Reverse Heart Disease by Caldwell Esselstyn. You can read about the book at his website, www.HeartAttackProof.com
This book, simply stated, teaches you how to reverse heart disease by changing what you eat. Change your diet, and heart disease vanishes, blood flow is restored, and the build-up of arterial plaque begins to fade away. It is absolutely true that through changes in diet and exercise, a person can make themselves heart attack proof.
That's a terrible over generalization and over simplification of a very complex health issue. Take my parents for example. They are both 64 years old and in excellent health. They both exercise every day. My dad runs on his treadmill for about a half an hour every morning. My mom runs/walks 2.5 miles every day, rain, snow, or sun. They also eat very healthy: lean meats, low fat, low glycemic index carbs, lots of fruits and vegetables, and plenty of protein like fish. And they take a variety of vitamins that are good for them: vitamins, minerals, garlic, omega 3 fatty acids, 81 mg aspirin and other things, every single day. And they've been living this way for years. From the time I was in grade school (think the 1970's), I was drinking skim milk and eating low sugar foods, long before it was popular to do so. Kid favorites like Hostess, Little Debbie, and other high carb, high fat sweets were banned from my house.
But that has not made my parents heart attack proof. They both are on Lipitor because, in spite of their excellent eating habits and daily exercise, they both have high cholesterol. Why?
It's genetic.
So Mr. Adams' argument does not apply to my parents, and I'm quite certain that there are plenty of other people just like my parents out there as well.
Now, maybe I'm over reacting here and Mr. Adams is just trying to save people's lives, but his tone sounds too snake oil salesmanesque for my taste. Instead of simply providing unbiased information on diet and exercise to educate his readers, Mr. Adams is arguing that living his way will make you heart attack proof, which is simply not possible. He's using Tim Russert's death to advance his agenda. That's in very bad form, Mr. Adams.
Cross posted at Wizbang
Yes, but is it a Healthy Heart Agenda?
As a parent, I believe the message needs to be transmitted even when the motive seems unsavory...or the message entertainingly benign...
See the recent Washington Post Series on Childhood Obesity for life-long effects
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/17/AR2008051701373.html
As fellow Upstate New Yorker and NBC colleague (a former "stocky") Al Roker chronicled in his documentary Childhood Obesity The Danger Zone, it’s a horrible feeling growing up as the ‘fat kid’ but the impending effects of continuing such eating habits accompanied with lack of physical exercise is much more lethal.
Couple that with an estimated $10 billion spent anually to market fast foods to children and youth and you have a true danger zone for heart health later in life.
Latest Apparently Benign Media Example to Make Roker’s Point
Panda Thumbs Down: a kiddie animation that markets “a get-fit and save-the-day boot camp plot” to well-meaning parents wobbles short of the mark.
With childhood obesity rates showing that every fourth child in a movie theater seat amply fills the space near you, I’m not sure now is the time for a hero who saves the day by not only being fat, but being rewarded repeatedly for it.
That’s “Kung Fu Panda” in a coconut shell: a movie geared towards the fattest, laziest youth to have ever lived on earth.
It’s a China-set, animated action/comedy with self-deprecating, pudgy panda Jack Black as the voice of Po, a rotund restaurant worker whom the village elders improbably designate as the warrior chosen to defend their homes against the prophesied return of a fearsome fighter.
To add layer to the cake, Po heads off to a kung-fu temple for special training under a Yoda-like mentor voiced by Dustin Hoffman named Shafi. However, the lumbering joke that won’t offend many in the audience is that clumsy, hungry Po can’t stop eating or goofing around long enough to complete his training.
Po wins support through the sheer force of his likeable personality (and his secret noodle soup), and his kung fu improves when Shifu — discovering him binging in the kitchen — realizes that Po will do anything for a cookie.
A hero whose power is an admixture of sloth and gluttony?
Nearly missed this part, because I was dallying out in the lobby refilling my super-sized soda and getting extra butter ladled on the kernals of corn so I’ll refrain from any further comment. Anyway, Po does declare (after his mastery dumpling chasing training) that he’s no longer hungry and uses that extra-body-surface-area to effectively vanquish his foe.
The concluding message: nope not the danger of type II diabetes or the redeeming benefits of a healthy heart fitness program. It’s that one’s fat liability can transform into one’s fattest ass-et.
Though you can bet Kung Fu Panda will be enjoying that Happy Meal (with the Panda surprise) sans his new-found Furious Five friends. They’ll be back in the gym training.
Posted by: crawbler | June 14, 2008 at 12:25 PM
Ever since Tim Russert's death I have been concerned about how it seems his doctor didn't do everything possible for him. Just having a stress test isn't enough. We know enough about heart disease that if Tim had had a heart scan his clogged arteries could have been spotted, and he could have likely undergone successful surgery. The idea that he relied on a pill, and clearly didn't exercise or diet enough -- to me, this is a recipe for disaster. I am not advocating any book or method. All I am saying is, I think Tim Russert himself would want us to investigate his death. I think he would want to know if millions of Americans are dying too young because not enough preventive measures are being taken by doctors and hospitals. Are these tests too expensive? Why aren't we being more pro-active when it comes to heart disease? I believe Tim's life could have been saved, and I believe we owe it to Tim to investigate.
Posted by: Elizabeth | June 15, 2008 at 12:38 AM
I too thought it may have been a little early, however when people hear of a death at such a young age we want to know why.
Esselstyn's research has saved many lives from certain death. If anyone knows the pain of heart disease, it would be a surgeon who has performed many of the procedures that hospitals push now a days.
Diet alone causes many illnesses, and diet alone will cure many.
You say that your parents live an active healthy life, however sometimes that is not enough.
In Esseltyn's study he took people who doctors told to go home and die, now some 20 years later they are still alive and now healthy.
The diet is basically a vegan diet, with one major difference, no oils of any kind. A person with heart disease should not eat oil of any kind [this includes olive oil and the so-called good oils]
Oil contributes to the plaque in the arteries, which is the number one cause of heart attacks. Clogged veins are about 10-15%, but the rest are usually caused by ruptured plaque.
Having a little oil is like pouring gasoline on a fire. The amount of oil small or large will not do the fire any good.
So if your parents are still using oil, they are not doing all they can to be heart attack proof.
Do some research on it, it may save their lives.
regards
Posted by: Tim | June 16, 2008 at 07:39 PM
I just read Mike Adam's article after reading your criticism, and I have to say that I think you're missing his point. While he does leave open the possibility that medicines did kill Russert (and the drug companies themselves cite risk of death as a potential side effect), his main point is that medicine gave Russert the false sense that his disease was being "conrolled" in the words of Russert's doctor. Obviously, it wasn't very well controlled, and no study has ever shown statins (the drug in question) to actually control disease or reduce mortality.
Secondly, it's too bad if you dismiss Esselstyn's book simply because you doubt Adam's motives. Esselstyn was a highly respected surgeon at the Cleveland Clinic, and his 20 year study is a serious peer reviewed work that clearly shows how diet can reverse heart disease. If you read the book, you would see that the reason your parents are on statins is that their diet simply does not go far enough in eliminating animal fats and oils. Genes may play a role, but I had terrible cholesterol numbers that have been dramatically lowered (well below 150 total) simply by following Esselstyn's diet. My doctor believed the same thing that you do, that my genes were responsible, but she happily took me off any heart drugs once my numbers came in, and my numbers have only improved in the year since.
Esselstyn, Ornish, and others are on to something here. This is not some internet naturoquack garbage. This is serious science that should not be ignored.
Posted by: Charlie | June 16, 2008 at 08:10 PM
I just read Mike Adam's article after reading your criticism, and I have to say that I think you're missing his point. While he does leave open the possibility that medicines did kill Russert (and the drug companies themselves cite risk of death as a potential side effect), his main point is that medicine gave Russert the false sense that his disease was being "conrolled" in the words of Russert's doctor. Obviously, it wasn't very well controlled, and no study has ever shown statins (the drug in question) to actually control disease or reduce mortality.
Secondly, it's too bad if you dismiss Esselstyn's book simply because you doubt Adam's motives. Esselstyn was a highly respected surgeon at the Cleveland Clinic, and his 20 year study is a serious peer reviewed work that clearly shows how diet can reverse heart disease. If you read the book, you would see that the reason your parents are on statins is that their diet simply does not go far enough in eliminating animal fats and oils. Genes may play a role, but I had terrible cholesterol numbers that have been dramatically lowered (well below 150 total) simply by following Esselstyn's diet. My doctor believed the same thing that you do, that my genes were responsible, but she happily took me off any heart drugs once my numbers came in, and my numbers have only improved in the year since.
Esselstyn, Ornish, and others are on to something here. This is not some internet naturoquack garbage. This is serious science that should not be ignored.
Posted by: Charlie | June 16, 2008 at 08:13 PM