mercredi 3 février 2010

Broda Barnes, MD, sur la toxicité des gras polyinsaturés

Via 180DegreeHealth, et tiré du livre 'Solved:The Riddle of Heart Attacks' (1976):

p.70
“It is a sad commentary on the American scientist that the potential danger of unsaturated fats had to be brought to their attention by an abnormal number of cases of cancer in
patients receiving diets high in unsaturated fats for the prevention of heart disease. In 1971 a report by Pearce appeared in Lancet, vol. 1, page 464, entitled, ‘Incidence of Cancer in Men on a Diet High in Polyunsaturated Fat.’ Why was this article sent to England where unsaturated fats have never been popular? Was it refused publication in American journals? It seems strange, but regardless, there has been an attempt to sweep this information under the rug… there were almost twice as many deaths from cancer in the group on polyunsaturated
fats.”

p. 71
“It seems foolish to administer a poison (unsaturated fat) requiring an antidote (Vitamin E) for neutralization; it would appear more logical to avoid the unsaturated fats in the first place.”

p. 71
“In 1967 Norkin reported more cirrhosis of the liver in rats fed corn oil than in those fed a saturated fat, coconut oil.”

p. 73
“…unsaturated fats hasten aging of the skin, are toxic to both animals and man, and furthermore, that the use of such diets has not prevented heart attacks.”

p. 72
“Now 19 years after the warning that unsaturated fats might cause cancer, polyunsaturated fats are being thrust upon the public by the press, radio and TV. Similar evidence from a pesticide, a
food additive, or a pollutant in the environment would call for immediate action with cessation of the use of the suspected item until it was proven safe.”

p. 73
“The American Cancer Society was shocked at a 5 percent rise in cancer the first seven months of 1975 when a one percent had been anticipated. In the frantic search for causes of the rise in cancer certainly the increasing polyunsaturated fats for the past 25 years cannot be neglected. The housewife followed the scientists’ advice 25 years ago when the circumstantial evidence indicated that heart attacks might be avoided by crowding in more polyunsaturated fats and avoiding animal fats. Now it is apparent that the saturated fats were not causing the rise in heart attacks… The evidence that the polyunsaturated fats are toxic and may cause cancer is not theoretical; it is far more conclusive than the evidence that saturated fats were causing heart attacks.”

p. 74
“It is time for the housewife to make another decision. Can she afford to continue the unsaturated fats with their demonstrated toxicity and run the risk of cancer in her family? It was difficult to deny the members of the family their eggs, bacon, etc., but mothers have a way of achieving a desirable change. Now she has found that a mistake was made and she should be just as eager to reverse her stand and prevent some new tragedies. It will be hard to ignore the propaganda that the saturated fats cause heart disease. That propaganda will stop abruptly when the housewife passes up the unsaturated fats and fills her basket with cream, butter, eggs, lard, fat meat, and the other goodies which the family has been craving. The propaganda for unsaturates is perpetuated only by the vested interest of the manufacturers. The few pennies saved on the budget by purchasing cheaper margarines and oils may be a poor investment compared to the prolonged and horrible death from cancer. If the polyunsaturated fats are safe, let the manufacturers prove it on animals before a new plague develops from the false statements that unsaturated fats will prevent heart attacks.”

“Everyone should have the privilege of playing Russian Roulette if it is desired, but it is only fair to have the warning that with the use of polyunsaturated fats the gun probably contains live ammunition.”

Le GIEC...encore!

Une trouvaille sur le blogue antagoniste.net (sources originale, Times Online, Royaume-Uni):

January 24, 2010

UN wrongly linked global warming to natural disasters











Jonathan Leake, Science and Environment Editor

THE United Nations climate science panel faces new controversy for wrongly linking global warming to an increase in the number and severity of natural disasters such as hurricanes and floods.

It based the claims on an unpublished report that had not been subjected to routine scientific scrutiny — and ignored warnings from scientific advisers that the evidence supporting the link too weak. The report's own authors later withdrew the claim because they felt the evidence was not strong enough.

The claim by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), that global warming is already affecting the severity and frequency of global disasters, has since become embedded in political and public debate. It was central to discussions at last month's Copenhagen climate summit, including a demand by developing countries for compensation of $100 billion (£62 billion) from the rich nations blamed for creating the most emissions.


Nouveau scandale au GIEC

Provenant du Telegraph au Royaume-Uni:

The United Nations' expert panel on climate change based claims about ice disappearing from the world's mountain tops on a student's dissertation and an article in a mountaineering magazine.

The revelation will cause fresh embarrassment for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which had to issue a humiliating apology earlier this month over inaccurate statements about global warming.

The IPCC's remit is to provide an authoritative assessment of scientific evidence on climate change.

In its most recent report, it stated that observed reductions in mountain ice in the Andes, Alps and Africa was being caused by global warming, citing two papers as the source of the information.

However, it can be revealed that one of the sources quoted was a feature article published in a popular magazine for climbers which was based on anecdotal evidence from mountaineers about the changes they were witnessing on the mountainsides around them.

The other was a dissertation written by a geography student, studying for the equivalent of a master's degree, at the University of Berne in Switzerland that quoted interviews with mountain guides in the Alps.

The revelations, uncovered by The Sunday Telegraph, have raised fresh questions about the quality of the information contained in the report, which was published in 2007.

It comes after officials for the panel were forced earlier this month to retract inaccurate claims in the IPCC's report about the melting of Himalayan glaciers.

Sceptics have seized upon the mistakes to cast doubt over the validity of the IPCC and have called for the panel to be disbanded.

L'édifice de propagande réchauffiste craque de partout depuis le début du Climategate fin novembre, à un point tel que même les médias traditionnels se sentent obligés d'en parler!



La citation du jour

“What happens to a country when you destroy the currency? Out of the Weimar Republic, they elected Hitler.”
-Rand Paul, fils de Ron Paul

Le gouvernement Fédéral Américain cherche à maximiser son investissement dans GM et Chrysler...

...en déclarant que les gens ne devraient pas 'conduire leurs Toyotas' et qu'ils devraient les 'amener à un concessionnaire s'ils pensent que ce dernier peut les réparer'.

Évidemment, M. LaHood (secrétaire du Transport) a affirmé s'être mal exprimé.

Il critique également Toyota pour sa gestion du rappel en disant que 'la sécurité du peuple Américain est son unique souci'.

On peut également interpréter de façon plus cynique ces commentaires et l'attitude de Washington envers Toyota.

En effet, rappelons-nous que le gouvernement Fédéral Américain contrôle GM et Chrysler depuis leur 'sauvetage' l'an dernier, et que leur principal compétiteur est...Toyota.

Donc, loin d'être un parti neutre et désintéressé, Oncle Sam bénéficierait certainement de façon majeure si Toyota voyait sa réputation entachée et perdait des parts de marché...

mardi 2 février 2010

Les Primes de départ du ministre Houde

Un entrefilet a attiré mon attention dans le journal Métro de vendredi:

Le fonctionnaire le mieux payé du gouvernement du Québec lorsqu'il a annoncé son départ en septembre dernier, le sous-ministre des Finances Jean Houde, n'est pas demeuré à la retraite bien longtemps même s'il a quitté avec une prime de départ de 247 756 $, soit un an de salaire.

Cet ex-banquier qui a accédé aux plus hautes sphères de la fonction publique a discrètement quitté le gouvernement au terme d'un contrat de quatre ans, le 5 septembre dernier, à l'âge de 64 ans.

Quatre mois après son départ, Jean Houde a vite été recruté par la plus importante société-conseils en matière de fiscalité, Samson Bélair/ Deloitte & Touche, qui compte 30 bureaux au Québec.

Selon Mme Ouellet, les bonis de départ d'un an, aussi généreux soient-ils, n'ont pas pour objectif de permettre aux hauts fonctionnaires de se détacher du gouvernement pour au moins un an.

«M. Houde avait un contrat qui comportait une clause de départ», a-telle dit. Le Journal a tenté en vain de rejoindre Jean Houde.

* Jean Houde gagnait 247 756 $, selon des documents obtenus par Le Journal de Montréal en vertu de la Loi d'accès à l'information. Cela faisait non seulement de lui le fonctionnaire le mieux payé de l'État, mais aussi la personne la mieux payée dans tout l'appareil gouvernemental, incluant le premier ministre Charest.

* Recruté à la Banque Nationale par le gouvernement libéral, M. Houde a été président du conseil d'administration et PDG d'Investissement Québec.


Le problème de ces primes de départ ridicules, souvent octroyées même en cas de démission volontaire, ont été relevées par la Ligue des Contribuables depuis quelque temps.

Gardons en tête ces primes de départ grotesques, entres autres gaspillages de fonds publics, quand on entend le gouvernement et les syndicats nous dire qu'il n'y a plus d'endroits ou couper, et que les impôts et tarifs doivent être augmentés pour boucler le budget...

Le Premier Ministre de Terre-Neuve Labrador et le système de santé Canadien

On nous rabat évidemment les oreilles depuis des décennies sur la supériorité du système de santé public Canadien par-rapport au système semi-privé Américain.

Il semble toutefois que le premier ministre de Terre-Neuve-Labrador a une opinion différente, à tout le moins quand il s'agit de ses propres soins médicaux.

En effet, M. Danny Williams va subir une intervention chirurgicale cardiaque aux États-Unis, parce que cette opération n'est 'pas disponible' au Canada.

Les gestes parlent plus fort que les mots, surtout dans le cas d'une province ayant été éclaboussée par un scandale touchant des tests de dépistage de cancer du sein...