jump to navigation

How Science Gets Settled September 16, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, history, Revolution, scandals, self-serving, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.

A brief little expose on how science – made up of the high priests of our day – gets “settled.”  Remember how, for decades, it was a veritable scientific law that consuming fat, especially animal fat, was what caused weight gain and heart disease, and how the government, scientists, media-entertainment complex, etc., all advocated a low fat high carb diet.  We were told eating eggs, butter, cream, and red meat- completely natural products – would kill you, while eating chemical complexes like margarine and heavily processed sugar laden foods was necessary for good health.

It turns out, all these recommendations were wrong.  It now seems even high salt intake may not be bad for you, especially if you lead an active life, and does not cause hardening of the arteries and high blood pressure as supposed.  In fact, a high carb, sugar-laden diet is probably the primary cause for the growing obesity of Americans and other Westerners.

And, it further turns out, these recommendations did not happen by accident.  It seems that when early research into the causes of coronary artery disease and subsequent heart attacks pointed at sugar consumption as a prime culprit, the sugar industry co-opted scienticians of the day to pretend it was fat that was the culprit, and helped directly or indirectly precipitate the deaths of millions of people:

In the 1960s, the sugar industry funded research that downplayed the risks of sugar and highlighted the hazards of fat, according to a newly published article in JAMA Internal Medicine.

The article draws on internal documents to show that an industry group called the Sugar Research Foundation wanted to “refute” concerns about sugar’s possible role in heart disease. The SRF then sponsored research by Harvard scientists that did just that. The result was published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 1967, with no disclosure of the sugar industry funding.

The sugar-funded project in question was a literature review, examining a variety of studies and experiments. It suggested there were major problems with all the studies that implicated sugar, and concluded that cutting fat out of American diets was the best way to address coronary heart disease.

The authors of the new article say that for the past five decades, the sugar industry has been attempting to influence the scientific debate over the relative risks of sugar and fat.

“It was a very smart thing the sugar industry did, because review papers, especially if you get them published in a very prominent journal, tend to shape the overall scientific discussion,” co-author Stanton Glantz told The New York Times…….

….In 1954, the researchers note, the president of the SRF gave a speech describing a great business opportunity.

If Americans could be persuaded to eat a lower-fat diet — for the sake of their health — they would need to replace that fat with something else. America’s per capita sugar consumption could go up by a third.

I have no doubt, that had polls of narrowly selected scientists been taken in the 70s and 80s, 97% or more would have claimed it was a scientific certainty that fat consumption was what led to heart disease, and that a high-carb, low-fat diet was the best way to ward off the grim fate of a chest-clutching demise.

The implications of the global warming shakedown are clear.  It is already known that self-interested industries and movements are heavily influencing much reported global warming research. There are  literally trillions to be made by solar and other alternative power sources if hydrocarbons can be legislated out of existence.  In addition, powerful ideological motivations are also in play.  I find the idea that the global warming hysteria, and the badly biased, often corrupt (as in made up, fabricated, adulterated, false, etc) “science” on which it is based, is a movement pure as the driven snow and solely concerned with benevolent motives shockingly naive.

Many of the major players in this movement are former communists – watermelons.  In addition to money, virtually unlimited power is also in the offing, the ability to achieve the communist dream of a worldwide centrally planned economy, with strict rationing for all but the anointed nomenklatura, brought about not through violent revolution, but through  the steady coopting of the regulatory apparatus and environmental scaremongering.

We are witnessing a global swindle on an unprecedented level, all done in the name of supposedly altruistic science.  One wonders if the eventual revelation of its total falsity at some future date will not gravely undermine the credibility of the scientific establishment.  I am skeptical it will.  It generally takes quite a bit of evidence to puncture religious belief, and that is exactly the kind of faith people have been trained – and not always without good reason – to have in so-called dispassionate science.

We shall see.  Or we’ll starve to death in the dark, one of the two.



1. tg - September 16, 2016

Totally agree. How do you feel about vaccines? I personally don’t take the flu vaccine. I also will not take the shingles vaccine. Everyone I know who took the shingles vaccine got shingles. I also would not take statins.

Baseballmom - September 17, 2016

Yep, I do not get either of those. Shingles vaccine is needed because of the evil chicken pox vaccine, which began with the cells of aborted babies. That whole chicken pox thing was a money making scam… Kids used to get together and have chicken pox parties in my neighborhood (in the ’50’s) – if word got out that the six year old down the street had chicken pox everyone who had NOT had them went over to that kid’s house…

skeinster - September 17, 2016

Here’s the thing: chickenpox is fairly innocuous as childhood diseases go. They used to only offer the vaccine to children with other underlying health problems.

The others? Not so much. Some of them were deadly- witness the little row of tombstones of four or five kids in the same famiily who all died within days of each other from diphtheria.
Or came with deadly or permanent complications, like measles encephalitis, blindness or deafness.

It’s sometimes tough to be a pro-vacciner among the Trad moms, who are into natural everything. Not all are, but there are some vocal opponents. I think most of them do not realize or care that their unvaccinated children are actually being protected second-hand by the vaccinated children around them.
Plus, border state, with God know what coming across.

But back to the original post- old enough to remember the reversal on so many things we were told, so yes, don’t pay much attention to the “guidelines”.
Eat a lot of different things, in as close to their natural state as you can, seems like a good tactic.

skeinster - September 17, 2016

Oops, that sounds like a criticism of BBM, which it’s not.
Just anti-vaxxers in general.

Baseballmom - September 17, 2016

LOL, did not see it as a criticism 🙂. I’m not anti-vac either, and particularly encourage my daughter and three DIL’s to get the old standbys…. Particularly pertussis, as my grandkids are in CA with thousands of “immigrants,” and it is a real problem! I was only pointing out the scam behind chicken pox/ shingles – and that, as you said, it was just a “childhood disease” that everyone got…. And got over. Then the $$$$ folks decided to play up Reye’s syndrome (taking aspirin with Chicken Pox) – they would even have TV shows centered on Reye’s – and pushed through legislation requiring the vaccine…. Vaccines have gone from actually necessary and helpful (polio) to money making scams (chicken pox).

2. MrT - September 16, 2016

Recommended by a TLM priest: Author Michael Crichton gave a famous speech at CalTech in January 2003 where he demonstrated how the big issues of modern science are settled by the consensus and clever propaganda of a small number of influential opinionated researchers and celebrity scientists rather than the scientific method. He points out the sham science in the 1970s that popularized the myth of extraterrestrial intelligence and nuclear winter.


3. Tim - September 16, 2016

My great-grandmother ate lard, meat and fat her whole life and lived to be 105 1/2. I had a great-grandparent alive when I was 29 and my wife (fiance at the time met and knew her. How many can claim that? So much for modern dietary advice.

4. LaGallina - September 17, 2016

Now here’s a topic I can comment on. Butter, lard, coconut oil, and olive oil are staples in my house. Bacon (without the nasty chemicals, of course) is actually good for you! Milk straight from the cow is how we drink it in our house. (Don’t tell the govt. That stuff will get you arrested faster than making cocaine deals on the playground.) And that homemade chicken broth your grandma told you to have when you were sick is loaded with nutrients. (As long as it is actual homemade broth made from actual chicken bones.) Coconut palm sugar is delicious and low glycemic.

And big juicy steaks are definitely your friend! Do not listen to the doctors telling you to skip the meat, and have the tofu with “Eggbeaters” instead! Don’t do it!!!

Real Food is your friend.

Weston A. Price and Sally Fallon are the names to look up for more information on all of that

Baseballmom - September 17, 2016

Hah! My kind of cook! When my older boys were young… 30 plus years ago – the big push was “low and no fat.” Everyone was giving their kids low and non-fat milk, no butter, Lord forbid eggs, cream and red meat! Well, none of that made sense to me and my boys and the princess were skinny so I fed them all the bad stuff…. Even cream on their cereal. Later the “experts” decide that…. Oops…. Fat is needed in the early years for good brain development! Yes, my oldest, a chemical engineer, his brothers, an attorney and an economist, their sister, another chem E…. And four more (not quite in careers yet) were blessed with awesome, fatty brains 😀. I can’t attribute all of it to fat, their father is very bright…. They get their good looks from their mama! 😀

LaGallina - September 19, 2016

Love it!

Tantumblogo - September 19, 2016

So we’ve been getting all our beef from home grown sources for years now. I cannot stand store bought chicken, but we are still a bit short in supplying ourselves entirely. Now I have a source for pork, too. So we supply about 98% of our meat from our own sources. Wheat, too.

Yes increasingly I think processed = terrible, but I do still love my Doritos.

5. Barbara Hvilivitzky - September 19, 2016

Yes, very apt analogy – the fat scare with the global warming scam. I eat as much fat (butter, coconut oil, olive oil, natural fat from meat/fish) as I can while staying away from ALL manufactured foods including bread and dairy products.

I also do my best to speak up when global warming believers start spouting off. And I don’t let them get away with calling it climate change either – they can’t keep moving the goal posts just because they look stupid.

Bottom line: I don’t believe any science junk that comes from ‘the world and his wife’ or from popular media. God gave me a brain and I do my best to use it.

Remember common sense? If something doesn’t pass the ‘follow the money’ test, don’t believe it.

Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: