Disclosing Conflicts of Interest in Medical Research

Image Credit: Pixabay. This image has been modified.

Dishonest Doctors

One of the critical questions to ask whenever reading a medical journal article is, “Who funded the study?” In most journals, researchers are required to identify their sources of funding, so what’s the problem? Well, researchers can obscure the true origin of financial support: They can hide it, disguise it, or even launder the money through a front group. A case in point is a study downplaying the risks of lung cancer that was funded in part by the Foundation for Lung Cancer: Early Detection, Prevention, and Treatment. That doesn’t sound so bad until you realize it was underwritten by millions of dollars from a tobacco company. There’s no obligation to “disclose a funding source’s source of funding,” which allows “companies to evade financial disclosure requirements” and makes it harder to “follow the money trail.”

As I discuss in my video Disclosing Conflicts of Interest in Medical Research, why does the funding source matter? Every single one of eight reviews covering over a thousand studies found that research funded by industry is more likely to make conclusions that are favorable to industry. For example, why do some review articles on the health effects of secondhand smoke reach different conclusions than others? The only factor found was whether an author was affiliated with the tobacco industry. “This is a disturbing finding. It suggests that, far from conflict of interest being unimportant in the objective and pure world of science…it is the main factor determining the result of studies.”

Not that we’d even know, because 77 percent of authors failed to disclose the sources of funding. And that’s another problem: The responsibility to disclose funding sources is left entirely up to the authors. So, how many researchers divulge the truth? Evidently, a law was passed in Denmark requiring physicians to register any time they worked with industry, which allowed researchers to cross-reference the studies physicians published to see how honest they were. Forty-eight percent of the time, the conflicts of interest were not disclosed, “reinforc[ing] the perception that physicians simply don’t take conflict of interest seriously” (or at least Danish physicians don’t).

What about the United States? Historically, there had been “no means of confirmation or verification” when an American doctor said they had no conflict of interest. Then in 2007, hip and knee replacement companies were forced to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in fines for giving orthopedic surgeons illegal kickbacks. “[M]any orthopedic surgeons in [the] country made decisions predicated on how much money they could make—choosing which device to implant by going to the highest bidder….[W]e expect doctors to make decisions based on what is in the best interests of their patients,” said the Department of Justice’s U.S. Attorney of the District of New Jersey, “not the best interests of their bank accounts.” Part of the settlement was that the companies would have to make public all the payments they made to physicians. The release of those records offered a rare opportunity to see if physicians were telling the truth on disclosure forms. And, lo and behold, more than half of payments were not disclosed, totalling millions of dollars.

That was for surgeons and medical device companies. What about doctors and drug companies? The same thing happened: Drug companies were forced to disclose who they were paying off. In looking at the publications of the doctors who got the most money—at least $100,000—the study found that they were worse than the surgeons. In 69 percent of the cases, they failed to disclose their industry ties. The problem is that we just assume researchers are going to be honest and tell the truth, but these “findings suggest that the accuracy and completeness of [conflict-of-interest] disclosures cannot be assumed.” So, even when a paper says no conflict of interest, who knows if it’s really true.

A long-time editor-in-chief of the New England Journal of Medicine wrote a scathing piece on drug companies and doctors who failed to disclose hundreds of thousands of dollars from drug companies like GlaxoSmithKline, which has been fined literally billions of dollars for activities such as bribing and suppressing data. When GSK got results that were “commercially unacceptable,” the company just buried them. Billions of dollars in fines get assessed, but for drug companies, that may just be the cost of doing business. “As reprehensible as many [drug] industry practices are…much of the medical profession is even more culpable.” We can expect drug companies to prioritize the bottom line, but maybe we should expect more from the healing profession.


What else might your doctor not be telling you? See:

Good examples of conflicts of interest include:

Instead of just disclosing conflicts of interest, how about getting rid of them? That’s the subject of my video Eliminating Conflicts of Interest in Medical Research.

In health,
Michael Greger, M.D.

PS: If you haven’t yet, you can subscribe to my free videos here and watch my live, year-in-review presentations:

Discuss

Michael Greger M.D., FACLM

Michael Greger, M.D. FACLM, is a physician, New York Times bestselling author, and internationally recognized professional speaker on a number of important public health issues. Dr. Greger has lectured at the Conference on World Affairs, the National Institutes of Health, and the International Bird Flu Summit, testified before Congress, appeared on The Dr. Oz Show and The Colbert Report, and was invited as an expert witness in defense of Oprah Winfrey at the infamous "meat defamation" trial.


74 responses to “Dishonest Doctors

Comment Etiquette

On NutritionFacts.org, you'll find a vibrant community of nutrition enthusiasts, health professionals, and many knowledgeable users seeking to discover the healthiest diet to eat for themselves and their families. As always, our goal is to foster conversations that are insightful, engaging, and most of all, helpful – from the nutrition beginners to the experts in our community.

To do this we need your help, so here are some basic guidelines to get you started.

The Short List

To help maintain and foster a welcoming atmosphere in our comments, please refrain from rude comments, name-calling, and responding to posts that break the rules (see our full Community Guidelines for more details). We will remove any posts in violation of our rules when we see it, which will, unfortunately, include any nicer comments that may have been made in response.

Be respectful and help out our staff and volunteer health supporters by actively not replying to comments that are breaking the rules. Instead, please flag or report them by submitting a ticket to our help desk. NutritionFacts.org is made up of an incredible staff and many dedicated volunteers that work hard to ensure that the comments section runs smoothly and we spend a great deal of time reading comments from our community members.

Have a correction or suggestion for video or blog? Please contact us to let us know. Submitting a correction this way will result in a quicker fix than commenting on a thread with a suggestion or correction.

View the Full Community Guidelines

  1. As distressing as this article could be, I found a solution. A WFPB diet has reversed my health crisis of 7 years ago, reduced medication requirements 90%, and reduced my overall expenditures on healthcare > 90%. The less I depend on them, the less they can screw me for self-enrichment.

    Practically speaking, I have never met a doctor who is not part of the WFPB community who knows more about protecting health than I have learned right here. In fact, at my last physical, a new doctor was assigned my case. She announced she had reviewed my file and began asking questions how I’d accomplished what she saw in their charts. . . without their help or medication. So I explained and referenced Dr G’s work. She was taking notes. . . and probably wondering how this non-professional had already accomplished what she didn’t even know was possible.

    FYI, I had severe ulcerative colitis, cardiovascular disease, and cancer. . . plus some other miscellaneous stuff. All reversed. Lifestyle medicine works far superior than anything the medical establishment ever had to offer. I did that for 60 years, this for 5 years. No contest. I am healthier today than I’ve been for decades and my weight and body dimensions have returned to where I was in my 20s. Dr G deserves most of the credit for that.

    1. farmcountry,

      That is such a powerful testimonial!

      Your new doctor taking notes brought tears to my eyes. Crying now.

      People could live and be healthy and not be mutilated or poisoned by drugs.

      When I was watching PlantPure Nation yesterday, I know that it is a grassroots movement, which has to happen and that is outside of the doctors.

      People, like you, walking around and sharing your story, is the answer.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBKnG9Y0owQ

      1. Deb, thanks for the link and kind remarks. I saw that documentary and strongly endorse for all to watch. It’s I think analogous to Dr G’s post today where monetary conflict of interest is blatant. In the video, behind each of those fad low carb diets, you have MDs, quoting medical “research” that is often funded by industry, selling lies to the public. In both cases, profits are put ahead of people’s lives and health.

        Add to this cesspool of corruption the bought-and-paid-for elected “representatives”, whose sole interest is funding his next election campaign. And Big Pharma dwarfs the nearest runner up on how much they spend to buy legislation which profits their business.

        We will never fix this system of layered corruption. But each individual who takes responsibility for their own lives votes with their dollars, both food choices and medical care.

        1. We will never fix this system of layered corruption.
          ———————————————————————
          According to the futurists, this should fix itself when we own personal AI and printers that monitor our bodies and create “medicines” that address any problems.

          I won’t say they are right, but it does seem feasible on down the line.

    2. Wow, farmcountry, that’s fantastic! Thanks for sharing, and hopefully you tell this to everyone you can

      I’ve been fortunate to have pretty good health,. I’m 53. Several years ago I made a firm decision to stay out of the clutches of the medical-pharmaceutical industry and stay as healthy as possible. This blog just reinforces my reasoning!

    3. Dear Farm Country,
      Thank you so much for writing the letter I have imagined writing over the past year. What you wrote is amazingly similar to my experience.

      For 75 years I enjoyed the typical American diet. This led to my having all the risk factors associated with cardiovascular diseases. At age 75 I had 2 small strokes and triple bypass surgery. During my recovery I read Essylstein’s Prevent and Reverse Heart disease and totally went plant based. The following years How Not To Die and this website reinforced my resolve for lifestyle change and eliminated all my previous risk factors except age and previous health history. I feel good, look good, and am in better health than I have ever been. Thank you for all this Dr. Greger. Your dedication and courage to expose the problems of the present medical system has really changed my knowledge base and changed my life. I am 80 now and I’m certain whatever time I have left will be spent in good health.

    4. Farmcountry,

      You give me hope!
      I am a few years older and want desperately to get off my BP meds And low dose daily aspirin.
      I have cleaned up my diet but probably not there yet at 100%. Getting there. Wondering if there are carbs you avoid despite their being plants.
      Would love to see what you typically eat in a day.
      Hoping you will be kind enough to share.

        1. Barb,
          I am truly embarrassed.
          I searched for his reply at the time but gave up after not finding it for days. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. I would still benefit from seeing a sample day’s meal plan. I don’t think I eat as much as so many others do. That’s why I can benefit from learning from others who have had similar health issues and resolved them.

          1. Barb,
            I know you sometimes get impatient and irate with posters who are repetitive so I do apologize. Slow to learn all this.

            1. Lida, no problem at all and I am glad I was able to find the page! Many of us so appreciated reading about farmcountry’s experiences and are grateful for your questions Lida. It’s difficult to track replies on here specially when we are called away for maybe days at a time.

              And Lida, it is me that owes the apology. I have a clipped writing style that can easily be taken wrong and is not reflecting my enthusiasm or joy in helping just a bit. I will try to do better.

              1. Barb, your reply was not rude at all. If not for it, I would never have seen that article on Latino longevity.

                I’m PBWF all the way for many years, do a minimum 12-hour fast every day (eating close to bedtime helps), perfect weight for many years, and LOVE my IP!!

    5. Farmcountry,
      My abject apology for having somehow missed seeing that thorough response to my appeal for more information from your story of how you took hold of your health and reversed so many health issues similar to mine. I never saw that particular publication
      from Dr. Greger and therefore missed your kind explanation.
      Thank you very much!

      1. Even more embarrassed to see that I must have read it since I posted replies and can’t understand how I missed your post!

        Again, please accept my apology and my appreciation for your taking the time to respond with such helpful information.

  2. This is off-topic but I thought it worth sharing anyway. This comes from an article in one of the UK tabloids

    ‘The loss of a single gene up to three million years ago could explain why heart attacks are common in humans, researchers believe.
    A decade ago scientists discovered Homo sapiens are the only animals to regularly suffer heart attacks as a result of plaque accumulating in the arteries.
    Our ancestors are thought to have passed down a mutation in the gene CMAH, which has left us unable to produce the molecule Neu5Gc.
    When scientists ‘knocked out’ CMAH in mice, the rodents’ arteries ‘furred up’ almost twice as much as the unmodified animals’ blood vessels.
    And eating red meat may only heighten the risk, the study also suggested. Lamb and beef are rich in Neu5Gc, which our bodies do not recognise.
    Feeding Neu5Gc to mice that lacked CMAH increased the plaque in their arteries by 2.4 times. The ‘non-human molecule’ is thought to trigger dangerous inflammation’
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-7275901/Heart-attacks-humans-price-evolution.html

    1. eating red meat may only heighten the risk, the study also suggested. Lamb and beef are rich in Neu5Gc, which our bodies do not (sic) ‘-) recognise.
      ——————————————————————-
      Learning this and Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease are what steered me off red meat years ago. I stayed with Chicken for a long time but have tapered off that to almost nil.

  3. This reminds me of a recent series of articles in the New York Times, about a Harvard physician (cardiologist, I think) who wanted to conduct a study “proving” that moderate drinking was heart healthy. The NIH was ostensibly to fund his study, but the doctor and his associates went to liquor manufacturers to ask that they donate money to NIH, which would then be funneled to fund this study. The manufacturers would have input into the study design, and possibly more.

    Who would know that this research was funded and partially overseen by industry? By a so-called “researcher” who was not asking a question, testing a hypothesis, but looking for data to support his pet theory? Funded by NIH, run by a Harvard professor. Sounds legit, right? Investigative reporting discovered this fraud. The project was first put on hold, then canceled, I believe.

    And it’s just the tip of the iceberg. Makes me distrust a lot of what I read about research results. And I’m a former research scientist.

    1. Dr. J.

      You are a former research scientist!

      That is very cool.

      I was not very science-oriented, but if I had been, I would have loved doing research.

      I did take biology in high school and all I remember is that they forced us to dissect very smelly frogs and I didn’t learn anything. I was being abused back then, so it might not have just been that, but I honestly did not like that they were having young people take part in frog murder.

      Laughing, I had let a frog get away a few years earlier.

      If the science music video guy was teaching me, I probably would have become a scientist.

      I genuinely don’t remember anything at all. I don’t even remember what teacher I had. If I hadn’t been forced to dissect a frog, I wouldn’t know that I took the class.

      1. I purposely skipped that class!!! I could imagine the horror the frog went through to get there. (Very active imagination) I bit the bullet & took the ‘F’ grade. I’d still not go today.

    2. My daughter has a Ph.D. in brain and cognitive science. She’s a middle-aged college professor, and she says that the majority of medical studies are eventually disproved. She says it’s why medical science doesn’t give much credence to a study unless the study and its experiments are duplicated, at least once and preferably by another agency.

      1. Yes,

        https://blogs.sciencemag.org/books/2017/04/03/a-journalist-shines-a-harsh-spotlight-on-biomedicines-reproducibility-crisis/

        Amgen tried to replicate cancer studies and 47 out of 53 couldn’t be replicated.

        Bayer did a similar process for drug target studies and 65% couldn’t be replicated.

        In psychology, one Dutch researcher fabricating data put out 50 fraudulent papers before being found out.

        That is the part that doctors do know that that is partly why they think WFPB is bogus.

      2. Yes you are quite correct. Unfortunately, there’s a dearth of confirming studies because there’s little motivation to work on old studies to merely replicate results. Not much money nor glory in it (e.g. Nobel prizes aren’t handed out for follow-up studies; just for the breakthroughs).

        1. The fact that companies like Bayer did do the studies to replicate the results probably says that the people trying to go forward with the data were frustrated.

      3. she says that the majority of medical studies are eventually disproved.
        —————————————————————————————–
        And in many cases not because their premise was wrong, but the way the study was setup is flawed.

        Personally, I think there is gold in going back and re-doing failed studies when set up intelligently.

  4. Solution is to pass a law to make funding sources for all research and payments to health care professional by major corporations public. Then to create a regulatory body to monitor the process. Given the current political process/structures such ideas are kept suppressed as those who are supposed to represent all of us are now firmly in the thumb of corporations and associations.

  5. It seems to me that all those companies who fund studies with the intention of painting a false picture of the health risks associated with pretty much anything should be considered crimes against humanity and be prosecuted as such. After all, it’s premediated right?

  6. I personally witnessed this at a hospital where I worked before I retired. Reputable well known surgeons were accepting monies to use certain hip replacement tools. It was a shock to us when investigation revealed this. Greed took first place over patient considerations. Then, on a smaller scale I repeatedly saw doctors at a medical center accept everything from clocks to cash for employee luncheons all the time. Drug reps were almost tripping over each other to reward doctors for prescribing their diet pills etc. Disgusting!!

  7. The federal government is married to the doctrine that marijuana is a dangerous drug. Funding sources for medical studies are easily hidden. So why, Dr Greger, do you so automatically believe the studies claiming that marijuana is a dangerous drug?

    1. Joseph,

      I have listened to all of Dr. Greger’s marijuana videos and feel that he has been genuinely balanced.

      Balanced enough that a percentage of the audience will think he is pro-pot and a percentage of the audience will think he is anti-pot.

      He listed the pros and cons in every video.

      1. More than that.

        I am going to say that the marijuana series amazed me more than any series because my life experience, young people damaged their brains, several of them went on to have schizophrenia and some ended up at pot parties where people tried to kill people and I also have people who have gone to get pot brownies and ended up in the ER flatlining and needing to be brought back to life. The hospital said that it was his condition and that it wasn’t the pot, even though it was in exact proximity to when the person took it. And, with my dog, he liked it at the beginning of his cancer diagnoses and I thought it might be shrinking his tumors, but then he started hating it and the tumors were obviously growing. Each ot those things were represented, along with the good things.

        My cousin has been told that his condition is terminal and I want him to take it and that was represented, too.

    2. It’s not that it is necessarily ‘dangerous’, as much as that it pretty much has no real positive medical value, (and just like cigarettes) lines your arteries with tar and plaque, and contributes to lung cancer. Marijuana’s value today is way ‘overblown’. Just another excuse for Americans (the world’s largest consumers of legal and illegal drugs) to get high. Says something about the ‘stress’ of being an American. Do yourself a big favor…get ‘straight’.

  8. Nothing will change until we start jailing the CEO of big pharm for bribing doctors, price gouging and price fixing, falsifying studies and promoting off label prescriptions.
    #1 is ban all advertising to the public and demand that those advertising dollars go directly to price reductions.

  9. What about conflicts in the research on Statins? Half the people who die of heart attacks have normal cholestorol levels. So is all the money and side effects associted with these drugs really worth it?

    1. Thomas Smith,

      Dr. Greger talked about it in a video. Does that mean cholesterol doesn’t matter or does it mean that “normal” is too high?

      Either way, trying to change lifestyle first is what he recommends in his blog entry:

      “Statins may produce adverse effects in up to 1/3 of patients, whereas therapies based on dietary and lifestyle changes generally result in few or no adverse side effects. People may be able to lower cholesterol with lifestyle choices such as diet, exercise, and not smoking, which may together account for more than 90% of heart attack risk. In comparison, pharmacological therapies such as statins typically reduce cardiovascular disease risk by 20 to 30%. The best statin drugs can do in reducing absolute heart attack risk is 3.1% over six years, while a whole foods, plant-based diet could possibly reduce absolute risk by 60% after four years and may lead to a 25% drop in the bad to good cholesterol ratio within one week, which is the equivalent to a therapeutic dose of a cholesterol lowering statin drug.”

    2. If you look at the serious research by credible authorities on this stuff, you will find that yes they are worth it. A thousand highly vocal cranks with websites (and some doctors selling stuff) will disagree of course but the research is solid.
      https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg181/evidence
      https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/38/32/2459/3745109
      https://www.cochrane.org/CD004816/VASC_statins-primary-prevention-cardiovascular-disease

      As for this ‘half the people with heart attacks have normal cholesterol levels’ statements where do you get this figure from?

      We know that heart attacks (myocardial infarctions – MI) cause cholesterol to decline. eg
      https://journal.chestnet.org/article/S0012-3692(16)35525-8/pdf

      and that critically ill patients with infection, trauma and sepsis experience significant declines in cholesterol (and heart attacks etc are pretty traumatic)
      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC374382/

      These are things which the anti-statin and ‘high cholesterol is harmless’ brigade never ever mention. We can only speculate about why they do not.

      So your figure may be correct, I don’t know, but it would be misleading even if it were. The real question is what were their cholesterol levels before their condition/heart attacks etc occurred?

      1. I was on statin years ago but I developed liver problems (a known side-effect). Nevertheless, most people who won’t change their diet/lifestyle seem to benefit. Interestingly I came across this report this morining about older patients who had been hospitalised for acute coronary syndrome (ACS)

        ‘Notably, the number needed to treat to prevent one primary endpoint was 125 for the patients younger than 75 years but only 11 for those age 75 and older over the follow-up averaging 6 years.
        The primary endpoint had consisted of CV death, myocardial infarction, stroke, unstable angina hospitalization, or revascularization more than 30 days after the ACS hospitalization.’
        https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/915960?src=wnl_edit_tpal&uac=129079FG&impID=2039506&faf=1

        Note that this was treatment with ezetimibe plus a statin. perhaps the benefits would be greater with a longer follow-up.

        ]Drugs do have a place for some people in certain circumstances.

  10. I had an endocrinologist tell me a week ago that autoimmune/chronic diseases are all genetic. I was shocked at her blatant lie. It made me lose respect for her. I wanted to give her a way out of her deceptive statement and said, “What about diet?” She said, “Well, there’s really nothing you can do.” Oh, please.

    I don’t buy into the statement anymore that doctors don’t know about the nutrition cure. Yes, I believe they may not want to know, however. There’s way too much science out in plain site to deny it.

    1. Hiking Viking,

      I will say that the way the internet is set up, you are offered more and more and more of what you are looking at.

      If they are looking up drug interactions, they will be offered that type of content.

      I had never heard of Dr. Greger 2 years ago and had not ever heard any of it and I was Googling every single night.

      The chiropractors were as anti-medical as they get, but none of them were WFPB.

      I can go over to the PEMF community and most of them were influenced by sites like Self-hacked and almost all of them are Keto. There was one other Vegan over there, but the Keto people have never heard Whole Food Plant-Based logic and the Vegan was even more fascinating. He said that he had heard Pritikin when he was a younger person and he had never heard of Dr. Greger and the rest. He heard Pritikin and went Vegan and didn’t keep up with the culture at all.

      1. When I have been watching videos, the biggest comment by people everywhere is, “Why haven’t I ever heard of this before?”

        I watch PBS like crazy and never saw a Dr. Greger or any of these doctors.

        Somehow, I have caught Dr. Amen and Dr. Hyman and Dr. Axe, but none of them are communicating a WFPB message.

      2. Well said. Camps are somewhat isolated depending on one’s “beliefs”. Seems like we just all need to try to “get along” and trust in whole foods as a treatment when appropriate. Thanks for spreading the word.

    2. I believe they just are not taught it. I too was once told “Food doesn’t matter.” Only a fool argues with an idiot, so I proved them wrong by doing & then got a new Doctor. Many Doctors hate the internet for being so giving of information freely.

  11. I can say this much, my friends may be Keto, but we have walked all the way through to where they embrace the WFPB message, even if they don’t believe they could do the diet.

    We are having nice talks now and my Keto friend was trying to figure out how a woman with Parkinson’s could go WFPB.

    That is such progress to me.

  12. I feel like the final message of a grass-roots movement is the real answer.

    Getting into the churches would help, but the emphasis has to be Whole Food Plant-Based. They would be suspicious of “Vegan” as a message. They would be very much in favor of Plant-Based.

  13. The thing about Christianity is that big portions of the communities already believe that God wants to provide a way to heal all of their diseases and that He gave plants for medicine. Plus, there are things like the Daniel fast where a young person took a stance and gave up meats and sweets and the really strong young Christian leaders are doing that fast already. For 21 days at a time. Christians believe that we are supposed to take care of our body as a temple – whether we do it or not – and that was the hardest one for me – who became a Christian older. It is nice that I don’t have that on the back of my conscience anymore.

  14. You get it as Plants as Medicine and taking care of the temple in the right churches and it will spread like wildfire and each denomination and each nondenominational church has its own “right” church.

    What I know is that for one stream it would be a church like Saddleback in California and for another stream, it would be a church like Bethel also in California. Lucky that California is probably one of the best places to try to go Whole Food Plant-Based.

    1. I am not sure if I am saying that in a useful way.

      Christians teach and believe with all their hearts that all diseases can be healed and that God gave plant food as medicine and they do water fasting and do fasting off of sweets and meats often every year, but they don’t know they could reverse the diseases with those things.

      It is hard to explain.

      They do the things by faith believing that God wants them to do it as part of His wanting to heal their diseases, but they don’t have them as the actual mechanism for healing.

      More of an obedience and act of worship.

      I have done water fasts. Now I know they actually were a good idea and do something on their own. Same thing for Daniel fasts. No sweets and no meats and no gluttony are all pretty good ideas.

      I didn’t have a sense that my blood pressure might be dropping during it or my cholesterol or that I could reverse Diabetes.

      1. I don’t know if I can explain it.

        If I get cancer as a Christian, I will often either water fast or fast off meats and sweets, but may not know to keep going, because that part isn’t a mechanism of healing to me. It is how I set myself apart with God in obedience to His Word.

        1. What I like about Plant Pure is that they fed the people.

          When I used to do various fasts like Daniel fasts or fasting at Lent, I didn’t have new foods I liked replacing the one’s I gave up.

          They are selling foods. I am not sure if they are really WFPB or if those will taste good, but if they do, they could have people Change so much easier.

  15. I find my question here to be relative to this subject making me wonder how many people take an aromatase inhibitor (AI) like Letrozole (Femara) and have high cholesterol. The drug manufacturer doesn’t list this as a side effect but when I drilled down on the internet I found it to be a small possibility and I seem to be in that percentile of having high cholesterol with this AI. This is Big Pharma at its worst, not caring for the consumer.

    I have been plant-based for 14 months and still have total Cholesterol over 200. I have consumed meat on 6 occasions during that time, most of those in the 1st 6 months. My total cholesterol was 248 in the beginning, 211 in 6 months then 235 after 12 months.

    I’m frustrated and confused that I have not improved at least my total cholesterol. I stopped the Letrozole with my oncologist’s knowledge and will do blood lipids again at the 3 month mark to see if this helps.

    I would like some feedback from Dr Greger if he is open to comment on my situation.

      1. Dear Deb,

        This is not a place for stating or pronouncing your ‘religious beliefs’. I do not come here for that, and quite frankly find it nauseating and more than a little disgusting.

        This is a place for ‘science’.

        Nobody cares what ‘Church’ you hang out in. Leave it at home.
        Next thing we know, some ‘fool’ will be bringing up the 2nd Amendment…

        The Science of diet as it pertains to our health. Thank you very much.

        1. LG King,

          I am not thinking about it as pronouncing my religious beliefs. I was talking about how to start a grassroots movement and actually Plant Pure Nation started in churches and maybe that shouldn’t be allowed in this movement, but they did it.

    1. Debrah,

      Are you post-menopausal?

      That and low thyroid seem to affect it.

      There is good advice in that FAQ post.

      Increasing the quality of the diet might help.

      Watch that you aren’t using oils.

      Fiber and flaxseed and greens and beans are good things to try.

      Keep with it.

      Sometimes switching between foods can make a difference.

      Make sure you are taking viable B12 and iodine and D3 particularly if you are older.

      A few of us had B12 still being insufficient while we were supplementing with Methyl B12. Thyroid’s need it. I am cyano now, but Methyl by itself is the one which didn’t work properly for sure.

    2. Hello Debrah,

      I’m sorry to hear about your health struggles. Fortunately it sounds like there are some things you can do to improve your cholesterol values. You mentioned that you ate meat a handful of times throughout your journey on a plant-based diet, but what about other animal products like eggs and dairy? Those can also raise cholesterol levels. Furthermore, consuming oil can raise cholesterol levels due to saturated fat content. For best results, you can try adopting a strict whole foods, plant-based diet.

      If that still doesn’t lower your cholesterol far enough, here’s a great article on NutritionFacts that provides additional techniques for lowering cholesterol.
      https://nutritionfacts.org/questions/what-can-i-do-to-lower-my-cholesterol-it-seems-ive-tried-everything/

      I hope this helps,
      Dr. Matt, ND

  16. I believe that this type of research fraud with dark funding from pharmaceutical companies will be made impossible in the future by BLOCKCHAIN, the technology behind crypto currencies.

    1. I dunno Leo, Once crypto currencies become more mainstream (Libra?) I’m wondering if it may not be easier to move money without being traced.

      If Libra gets it right, there should be enough oversight to keep that from happening. But if the Funders were using Bit Coin for instance, blockchain is actually their cloaking mantle, if I’m understanding how that all works.

  17. Does anyone know of an honest lab that does research into vegetables, which is crowd funded? (Something like the study on spices done in Scandinavia.) If so, please post.

  18. This discussion strikes me as highly remiss for not mentioning Dr M., as his moral courage vastly exceeds any other MD that I have ever seen, heard or read. He explains in detail (from intimate personal knowledge) how doctors are trained and hence why they are who they are. I am not posting his name or title of books as this would likely trigger a filter precluding this post. His writings are well worth exploring and readily available online. Here is a YouTube link to “How to Talk to Your Doctor”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Szlr2wOb7g
    Here is another on “Vivisection According to Dr Robert M.”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4GVbh6h3JWY

    1. “Mendelsohn was an anti-vaccination activist, an opinion widely rejected by the medical community.[9]

      His book Confessions of a Medical Heretic was negatively reviewed in the Journal of the American Medical Association, the reviewer noted that “the technique of describing one specific situation or case history and then generalizing to all situations or all case histories is a dangerous one, and such extrapolations are carefully avoided by all responsible scientists. However, this approach of Mendelsohn’s supplies the grist for his mill— and its faulty.”[10]

      Quackwatch has noted that Mendelsohn “engaged in irresponsible criticism of the medical profession and science-based health care during most of his medical career.”[11]

      Nutritionist Kurt Butler described Mendelsohn as a “Whiney-voiced crackpot who made himself rich and famous by leading the bash-doctors movements now in vogue. Mendelsohn, now deceased, made a career of telling Americans that their doctors are out to rob and kill them. He urged everyone to avoid doctors and go instead to chiropractors, naturopaths and health fraud store clerks for their health care.[12]”
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_S._Mendelsohn

  19. Thanks Tom, for bolstering Dr. Mendelsohn’s credibility via the sources you cited. The ad hominem statements should prove especially effective toward this end with readers that are capable of critical thinking. I suppose you would dig up the same sort of material if the subject was Noam Chomsky.

  20. Seems to me that the four Wikipedia paragraphs immediately above the four that Tom copied/pasted are more relevant and worthwhile. Here they are:

    “Mendelsohn said that the greatest danger to American women’s health was often their own doctors, and contended that chauvinistic physicians subjected female patients to degrading, unnecessary and often dangerous medical procedures. Cancer treatments like hysterectomy and radical mastectomy, according to Mendelsohn, were among the most indiscriminately recommended surgical procedures.[5]

    In an era in which the side effects of medications and the risks of medical treatments were hardly known except to doctors, Dr. Mendelsohn insisted that patients, too, had the right to such information. In the first of his books to attract widespread publicity, Confessions of a Medical Heretic (Contemporary Books 1979), he describes his efforts to make the Physician’s Desk Reference, the authoritative guide to medications and medical treatments, available to the public.

    In Confessions, Mendelsohn argued that the methods of modern medicine were often more dangerous than the diseases they were designed to diagnose and treat. He advised consumers to be suspicious of their doctors. “One of the unwritten rules in Modern Medicine is always to write a prescription for a new drug quickly, before all its side effects have come to the surface.” (Confessions of a Medical Heretic, p. 32)

    Mendelsohn opposed immunization for children, claiming the shots are dangerous and worthless.[8]”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This