"Healthy" eating won't save you
The study below is very desperate to come to politically correct conclusions. They looked at extreme quintiles only, which means that they ignored the majority of their data. And even after that they found only minute Hazard Ratios.
The real conclusion of the study is that "healthy" eating confers no health benefits. It is doubtlful if anyone knows what healty eating is. There have been many records of people thriving on quite extreme diets -- Traditional Eskimos, for instance
Healthy Eating Patterns and Risk of Total and Cause-Specific Mortality
Zhilei Shan, MD et al.
Question Is there an association between Dietary Guidelines for Americans–recommended dietary patterns with total and cause-specific mortality?
Findings In this cohort study of 75 230 women from the Nurses’ Health Study (1984-2020) and 44 085 men from the Health Professionals Follow-Up Study (1986-2020), greater adherence to several healthy eating patterns was associated with a lower risk of death. These associations were consistent in different racial and ethnic groups, including Hispanic, non-Hispanic Black, and non-Hispanic White individuals.
Meaning These findings support the recommendations of Dietary Guidelines for Americans that multiple healthy eating patterns can be adapted to individual food traditions and preferences.
Abstract
Importance The current Dietary Guidelines for Americans recommend multiple healthy eating patterns. However, few studies have examined the associations of adherence to different dietary patterns with long-term risk of total and cause-specific mortality.
Objective To examine the associations of dietary scores for 4 healthy eating patterns with risk of total and cause-specific mortality.
Design, Setting, and Participants This prospective cohort study included initially healthy women from the Nurses’ Health Study (NHS; 1984-2020) and men from the Health Professionals Follow-up Study (HPFS; 1986-2020).
Exposures Healthy Eating Index 2015 (HEI-2015), Alternate Mediterranean Diet (AMED) score, Healthful Plant-based Diet Index (HPDI), and Alternate Healthy Eating Index (AHEI).
Main Outcomes and Measures The main outcomes were total and cause-specific mortality overall and stratified by race and ethnicity and other potential risk factors.
Results The final study sample included 75 230 women from the NHS (mean [SD] baseline age, 50.2 [7.2] years) and 44 085 men from the HPFS (mean [SD] baseline age, 53.3 [9.6] years). During a total of 3 559 056 person-years of follow-up, 31 263 women and 22 900 men died. When comparing the highest with the lowest quintiles, the pooled multivariable-adjusted HRs of total mortality were 0.81 (95% CI, 0.79-0.84) for HEI-2015, 0.82 (95% CI, 0.79-0.84) for AMED score, 0.86 (95% CI, 0.83-0.89) for HPDI, and 0.80 (95% CI, 0.77-0.82) for AHEI (P < .001 for trend for all). All dietary scores were significantly inversely associated with death from cardiovascular disease, cancer, and respiratory disease. The AMED score and AHEI were inversely associated with mortality from neurodegenerative disease. The inverse associations between these scores and risk of mortality were consistent in different racial and ethnic groups, including Hispanic, non-Hispanic Black, and non-Hispanic White individuals.
Conclusions and Relevance In this cohort study of 2 large prospective cohorts with up to 36 years of follow-up, greater adherence to various healthy eating patterns was consistently associated with lower risk of total and cause-specific mortality. These findings support the recommendations of Dietary Guidelines for Americans that multiple healthy eating patterns can be adapted to individual food traditions and preferences.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2800411
**************************************************Lauren Sanchez shows off her enviable curves in an orange bikini and TINY tweed shorts as she strolls hand-in-hand with Jeff Bezos in St. Barts
Lauren Sanchez showed off her toned physique in an orange bikini top and tiny shorts while enjoying a pre-holiday getaway in St. Barts with her billionaire fiancé, Jeff Bezos.
The former news anchor and the Amazon founder were spotted walking hand in hand on the French-speaking Caribbean island on Sunday, a few days before her 54th birthday.
Sanchez initially had on a Chanel Formula 1 T-shirt that retails for a whopping $4,450, which she had altered into a crop top to reveal her stomach.
She paired the tee from the French luxury label's Cruise 2022/23 collection with pink and tan tweet shorts that also appeared to be Chanel.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-12882211/lauren-sanchez-bikini-st-barts-jeff-bezos.html
*************************************************Progressive Dem who defunded Austin Police ripped for requesting police patrols at home: 'Height of hypocrisy'
A progressive congressman associated with "The Squad" who proudly voted to defund the Austin Police Department as a city council member and blasted the department just last week for alleged racist practices is under fire after requesting a police patrol at his home from the same department.
"It’s come to our attention that Anti police king of the defund movement in Austin @GregCasar who only last week called APD an agency with racist practices has requested enhanced patrols around his house for the next week," the Austin Police Retired Officers Association posted on X Tuesday.
"We want everyone in Austin to feel safe," the post added. "But this seems to us as the height of hypocrisy from the congressman. Maybe he should hire private security like his fellow squad members do. Sure seems like he wants the police in his neighborhood just not yours."
Casar's request was made through the United States Capitol Police in Washington, D.C., which forwarded the request to the Austin Police Department.
Casar was perhaps the most vocal driver of defunding the Austin Police Department in 2020 while he was a member of the city council. It led to a police shortage and a wave of officer retirements that critics say the city has still not recovered from.
"We did it!!" Casar posted on X in August 2020. "Austin City Council just reduced APD's budget by over $100 million *and* reinvested resources into our community's safety and well-being."
Additionally, Casar sent a letter last week to the Justice Department criticizing practices within the Austin Police Department, highlighting the "need for systemic reforms to the Department's policies and practices of excessive and lethal use of force, racial discrimination, and discrimination against people with mental health conditions."
News of the request for the security detail, which was confirmed by Fox News Digital, drew immediate criticism from Austin residents on social media, many suggesting the request was an example of hypocrisy.
"So @GregCasar believes APD is a racist institution that requires DOJ oversight but then requests more APD patrols around his house," Austin personal injury attorney Adam Loewy posted on X. "Interesting juxtaposition."
"Greg Casar is a fraud," Travis County GOP Chairman Matt Mackowiak posted on X.
Dennis Farris, president of the Austin Police Retired Officers Association, told Fox News Digital he believes Casar should receive extra protection if there are officers available to do it and there is a credible threat but added the request is the "height of hypocrisy."
"A week ago, he was calling the Austin Police Department a racist department that targeted Black and brown people, and this week he's asking the exact same department to do enhanced patrols around his house," Farris said.
"It doesn't matter what political party they're in. If they ask us for our help, we will give it to them," Farris added. "The last thing we want is something happening to them. My issue with it and the issue that most of my members are going to have with it is the fact that this guy, you know, it's the whole squad thing, right? It's the whole, 'We hate the cops, we hate the cops, we hate the cops. Oh, please, come help us now.' He is the architect. He is the architect of defund the cops in Austin. He started this whole mess."
*********************************************
Authoritarian? Conservatives Want to Restore the Constitution. The Left Can’t Handle It.
The Constitution created three branches in the federal government: the legislature to make the laws, the executive branch to enforce the laws, and the judiciary to settle disputes about the laws. Yet the federal government we know and very much do not love doesn’t operate the way the Constitution says it should.
Instead, unelected bureaucrats write more rules than Congress does, the president cannot fire bureaucrats who oppose his efforts to keep his promises to the people, and the Supreme Court has unilaterally rewritten the Constitution on issues like abortion, same-sex marriage, and gender ideology.
Conservatives have launched many efforts to restore the federal government to the way the Constitution says it should work, but the Left has increasingly demonized those efforts as backward, racist, or—more recently—a form of authoritarianism.
In The New York Times, Maggie Haberman wrote: “Why a Second Trump Presidency May Be More Radical Than His First.” Among other things, Haberman warned that former President Donald Trump, were he to win the presidential election next year, “would seek to expand presidential power in myriad ways—concentrating greater authority over the executive branch in the White House, ending the independence of agencies Congress set up to operate outside of presidential control and reducing civil service protections to make it easier to fire and replace tens of thousands of government workers.”
Haberman seems not to remember how Trump’s administration fought against him in unjustified ways, operating as a “deep state” to prevent him from fulfilling his campaign promises. Preventing the executive branch from operating in this way is not a form of authoritarianism but an effort to bring bureaucrats back under the control of the voters’ elected representative.
Trump’s Agenda 47 and Project 2025, a conservative movement project led by The Heritage Foundation, aim to empower a conservative president to fire executive branch workers who would oppose the president’s goals. (The Daily Signal is The Heritage Foundation’s news outlet.)
Another key conservative reform, the Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act, or REINS Act, would require Congress to pass regulations that would significantly impact the U.S. economy.
President Joe Biden’s White House pledged to veto the REINS Act if Congress were to pass it. The Office of Management and Budget said the act “would undermine agencies’ efforts by inserting into the regulatory process an unwieldy, unnecessary, and time-consuming hurdle that would prevent implementation of critical safeguards that protect public safety, grow our economy, and advance the public interest.”
While the Left frames these conservative reforms as “authoritarian,” Biden tried to cancel up to $20,000 in student debt for certain borrowers, with the stroke of his pen. The Education Department estimated that this would cost $305 billion in the next 10 years. Had the Supreme Court not ruled the plan unconstitutional, the student loan bailout would have inflated college costs, hindered economic growth, rewarded increasingly woke universities, and benefitted upper-income earners at the expense of those who didn’t go to college or who paid off their loans.
Biden has made similarly unilateral moves to push his transgender orthodoxy and his climate alarmist agenda. Ironically, the president faces his own kind of “deep state,” bureaucrats who are opposing his pro-Israel rhetoric.
Meanwhile, the Left has orchestrated a campaign to delegitimize the Supreme Court, with outfits like ProPublica targeting justices such as Clarence Thomas.
The Left has attacked Thomas in part because the court’s majority now supports originalism, the view that the Supreme Court should uphold the original public meaning of the Constitution, as opposed to reinterpreting the text to achieve the Left’s goals.
Originalism grew as a reaction to the court’s decisions in cases such as Roe v. Wade (1973) and Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), which twisted passages in the Constitution out of recognition to create new rights that the Founders and those who later amended the Constitution at the time of the 14th Amendment would have opposed.
Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., unwittingly revealed why the Left opposes originalism. He tweeted in 2020, “Originalism is racist. Originalism is sexist. Originalism is homophobic. Originalism is just a fancy word for discrimination.”
Markey’s problem isn’t Originalism—it’s that he isn’t willing to get his efforts opposing “racism,” “sexism,” “homophobia,” and “discrimination” through Congress, the body that makes law, according to the Constitution. He’d rather have the Supreme Court dictate his preferred agenda, and he opposes the good-government reforms that make it harder for nine unelected judges to create new laws.
The Left’s attacks on the Supreme Court represent an obnoxious tantrum after the nation’s highest court has—at least for now—rejected its old modus operandi of writing the Left’s agenda into the Constitution. Now, the court increasingly calls balls and strikes, in ways that frustrate both sides of the aisle but more closely represent the Founders’ vision.
Efforts to rein in the deep state and encourage Congress to make laws, rather than passing off that duty to bureaucrats, echo the originalist movement in the judiciary. These reforms aren’t aimed at authoritarianism or gumming up the works—they’re aimed at making the federal government more accountable to the people once again.
*****************************************************
"Believe the woman": Innocent Australian men prosecuted as a result
The NSW Director of Public Prosecutions is a woman, Sally Dowling SC.
A third man accused of sexual assault by a woman who has made multiple “pattern” rape allegations will walk free after NSW’s Office of Public Prosecutions discontinued proceedings, just weeks after a damning court judgment called on prosecutors to re-examine her claims.
Charges against the accused – known as JM – are set to be formally withdrawn in court amid scrutiny on the ODPP, which has been accused of taking a “lazy and perhaps politically expedient” approach to prosecutorial decisions.
The prosecution of JM follows the acquittal of two other men who faced near-identical allegations they had sexually assaulted the complainant, who claimed she was too drunk to consent.
But a District Court judge earlier this month found the woman had an “idiosyncratic” and erroneous view of what constituted sexual assault which was not challenged by prosecutors, who put the cases before a jury in what was labelled a miscarriage of justice. The woman had earlier pursued other criminal complaints against a string of other men.
After confirming late on Monday that the case against JM was proceeding despite District Court judge Robert Newlinds calling on prosecutors to “join the dots” and critically analyse the woman’s claims, the ODPP has now confirmed the prosecution has been discontinued.
“The reasons for discontinuing an individual prosecution are privileged and will not be disclosed,” the office said in a statement. “The ODPP is not aware of further prosecutions currently on foot involving the same complainant.
“The decision to proceed with or terminate any prosecution is taken carefully and in accordance with the Prosecution Guidelines. Factors taken into account include matters relating to the victim, the accused and the offence.
“Factors which are irrelevant to the decision include political, individual or sectional interests, including media coverage or public sentiment.”
The discontinuance of the prosecution against JM comes after Judge Newlinds registered a “deep level of concern” over the abrogation of the prosecutor’s duty to interrogate complainants’ allegations amid concerns the ODPP was putting hopeless cases before juries and called upon prosectors to stop further prosecutions of men as a result of allegations levelled by the complainant who had gone to police about a string of men, at least six of whom faced charges in court.
“I think the prosecution took the lazy and perhaps politically expedient course of identifying that the complainant alleged she had been sexually assaulted and without properly considering the question of whether there was any evidence to support that allegation, and just prosecuted so as to let the jury decide,” he said in a costs judgment in the case of R v Martinez, which was dismissed by a jury after one hour of deliberation earlier this month.
“This must stop. Justice has not been served and will not be served by repeated cases being prosecuted based on obviously flawed evidence.”
In the Martinez case, the complainant had alleged she was sexually assaulted because she had been drunk and could not remember the evening in question. However, the court heard that she had initiated sex and enthusiastically consented.
Another case against a defendant dubbed AS also went before a jury in November, with that accused also acquitted. The case against AS involved a very similar scenario, and Judge Newlinds said the men could not receive a fair trial because the jury was prevented from hearing details of the complainant’s history of accusing multiple men.
NSW DPP Sally Dowling SC, responded angrily to the criticism levelled by Judge Newlinds, issuing a statement saying the ODPP would make a complaint to the Judicial Commission.
“The ODPP unequivocally rejects any suggestion that it makes prosecution decisions lazily or on the basis of political expedience, or that it operates according to ‘some sort of unwritten policy’, as the judge has speculated,” the ODPP said in a statement.
“Such remarks unfairly impugn the integrity of the Director of Public Prosecutions and the staff of the ODPP.”
****************************************
My other blogs. Main ones below:
http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)
http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)
http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)
http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs
*****************************************
/>
Kristina Pimenova, once said to be the most beautiful girl in the world. Note blue eyes and blonde hair
Bliss: What every woman wants: to feel safe and secure in the arms of her man. Robert Irwin and Rorie Buckey. See
No comments:
Post a Comment