What do you think of this article?
I've always considered Walter Willet a good nutritionist
as he doesn't demonize carbs while admitting the importance of
good amount of fat in the diet and addressing the danger of low fat diet
and refined junk foods
_____________________________________________________________
from:
http://www.junkscience.com/sep02/Willett-response.htm

Wallowing with Willett

By Steven Milloy

September 22, 2002

In my Sep. 9 Wall Street Journal op-ed, “McJunk Science,” I criticized
McDonald’s recent decision to switch cooking oils.  My op-ed attributed
McDonald’s move to the junk science of Harvard University’s Walter Willett.

Willett responded to my op-ed with a letter (Wall Street Journal, Sep.
19), basically claiming that I lied. Willett is partially correct -
somebody is lying.

Below is his letter. My responses are in bold.

I respond, you decide.
***********************

Trans Fat, Heart Disease,
And McDonald's Scientists

On your Sept. 9 editorial page, Steven Milloy of the Cato Institute
repeats his claim that trans fatty acids pose no risk for heart disease.
[SM: My claim, first made in 1997, is that the relevant epidemiologic
studies do not support a link between consumption of trans fats and
increased heart disease risk.]

First, Mr. Milloy casts doubt on a causal relation between blood
cholesterol and heart disease and refers to my "acknowledgment that the
cholesterol-heart disease link is more myth than fact." [SM: I wrote,
“Moreover, it's not even clear that elevated cholesterol necessarily
leads to heart disease and death. In the much-vaunted Framingham Heart
Study -- where 5,200 men and women in Framingham, Mass., have been
extensively studied in over 1,000 published reports since 1948 -- high
cholesterol was not associated with increased heart disease risk after
age 47. After age 47, in fact, those whose cholesterol went down had the
highest risk of a heart attack. "For each 1 mg/dl drop of cholesterol
there was an 11 percent increase in coronary and total mortality,"
reported the study's authors.”]

This relation has been established beyond doubt by multiple lines of
scientific evidence, including many randomized trials of cholesterol
reduction, [SM: What about the above-quoted Framingham Heart Study?
Epidemiological surveys often report positive relationships between
cholesterol intakes and cardiovascular disease based on simple
regression analyses; however, when multiple regression analyses account
for the colinearity of dietary cholesterol and saturated fat calories,
there is no relationship between dietary cholesterol and coronary heart
disease morbidity and mortality. Further, a report from a 1993 British
Medical Journal meta-analysis for cholesterol reduction randomized
trials reports, “In the pooled analysis, net benefit in terms of total
mortality from cholesterol lowering was seen only for trials including
patients at very high initial risk of coronary heart disease (odds ratio
0.74; 95% confidence interval 0.60 to 0.92). In a medium risk group no
net effect was seen, and in the low risk group there were adverse
treatment effects (1.22; 1.06 to 1.42).”]

… and I have not ever suggested anything to the contrary. [SM: Willett’s
denial conflicts with statements attributed to him in Gary Taubes’ July
7 article in The New York Times Magazine. The article reads “Our levels
have been declining, and we have been smoking less, and yet the
incidence of heart disease has not declined as would be expected. ‘That
is very disconcerting,’Willett says. ‘It suggests that something else
bad is happening.’”]

As proven in randomized experiments, trans fatty acids increase total
cholesterol and the atherogenic LDL cholesterol fraction, and reduce
levels of HDL (the good cholesterol). [SM: So what? Trans fats
consumption would only increase LDL cholesterol temporarily in healthy
individuals. The more cholesterol in the diet, the less cholesterol the
body makes.]

Second, Mr. Milloy falsely claims that I co-authored every study that
claims to link trans fat consumption with heart disease. [SM: Willet
sort of has me here. My statement was true until March 2001. Pardon me
for overlooking the two studies Willett cites - but even the Institute
of Medicine ignored them in its July 2002 report. Such is their
importance. Keep in mind that Willet has been carping about trans fats
since at least 1993. Moreover, his defense amounts to form over
substance as discussed in my next comment.]

Oomen and colleagues in the Netherlands have found an increased risk of
coronary heart disease mortality among men consuming higher intakes of
trans fatty acids, [SM: Oomen admits at the outset of his in his study
that “Evidence on the relation between trans fatty acid intake and
coronary heart disease is limited.” Oomen’s study consists of only 98
cases of heart disease and reports a weak statistical association based
on dietary data that were not verified. Oomen’s study is obviously not
dispositive on anything and only reaffirms his own opening assessment.]

…and Siscovick at the University of Washington in Seattle found higher
risk of sudden cardiac death among those with higher intakes, measured
by concentrations of trans fatty acids in red blood cells. [SM:
Siscovick opens his February 2002 study saying, “The relation of
trans-fatty acid intake to life-threatening arrhythmias and primary
cardiac arrest in unknown.” His research is based on only 179 cases and
reports a weak statistical association that is not statistically
significant. As with Oomem, Siscovick’s study only reaffirms his opening
statement about the weakness of the epidemiology.]

Third, Mr. Milloy claims that studies of trans fat and heart disease
invariably report no or weak associations. Wrong again. [SM: Sorry,
Wally. Check out “Fear of Margarine.”]

The evidence of increased risk is remarkably consistent, as summarized
in a meta-analysis by Oomen and colleagues. [SM: I’m not aware of
Oomen’s meta-analysis and could not find it through PubMed. The
Institute of Medicine report doesn’t cite this study either. Secret
science?] In particular, Mr. Milloy claims that our own study of 90,000
women "fails to link trans fats with heart disease." In fact, we
reported a 50% greater risk of heart disease among women with the
highest intake of trans fat, which was highly statistically significant
after controlling for standard cardiovascular risk factors and other
lifestyle variables. Thus, the epidemiologic evidence is consistent with
the results of controlled studies of trans fat consumption and blood
cholesterol fractions. [SM: A reported 50 percent increase in an
epidemiologic study is meaningless - that’s basic Junk Science Judo. For
more on Willett’s study, check out my write-ups, “Fear of Margarine,”
“Fatheads?”, and pages 163-65 in Junk Science Judo: Self-defense Against
Health Scares and Scams.]

Mr. Milloy misrepresents the scientific evidence and insults the
corporate management and scientists of McDonald's Corp. by implying that
their decision to reduce and ultimately eliminate trans fat from their
products was made without a careful review of the scientific evidence.
[SM: I have not misrepresented the science. But I plead guilty to
insulting McDonald’s and Willett. One is intellectually bankrupt while
the other is morally bankrupt. You figure out which is which.] Although
ironic, I find myself defending a fast food giant that, in this
instance, has made a decision that will have immediate and important
benefits for consumers throughout this country and world-wide. [SM:
Wally, baby, you’re not defending McDonald’s. You’re defending your own
junk science-fueled career.]

Walter Willett, M.D., Dr.P.H.
Chair, Department of Nutrition
Harvard School of Public Health
Cambridge, Mass