Here are new guidelines for preventing stroke

The good news is that the best way to reduce your risk for stroke is also the best way to reduce your risk for a whole host of health problems — eat a healthy diet, move your body and don't smoke. The bad news is that it's not always so easy to sustain.

Not exactly a surprising revelation but it is good that the article first focus on this. Lots of times people get hooked on minor causes and disinformation so the first priority is to center the conversation in this well demonstrated main cause and not get distracted with things that are very secondary.

The group recommends foods in the so-called Mediterranean diet such as fruits, vegetables, whole grains and olive oil, which can help keep cholesterol levels down. It suggests limiting red meat and other sources of saturated fat. Instead, get your protein from beans, nuts, poultry, fish and seafood.

For some people it becomes necessary to use statins to lower the cholesterol level (and it is extremely good how fast development of new statins have been, with the latest versions being a huge improvement), but doctors will systematically begin with diet and excercise as the first line of action. After all this not only improve cardiac health because of the reduction of cholesterol levels, but also helps with many other chronic diseases.

Diet and exercise can help control weight, another important risk factor for strokes. But a new class of drugs that can drastically reduce weight have been approved by regulators, providing new tools to reduce stroke risk since guidelines were last updated.

But while those drugs can help, people still need to eat well and get exercise, cautions Dr. Fadi Nahab, a stroke expert at Emory University Hospital.

Many people have the wrong idea thinking that the new drugs replace diet and excercise, in reality they just facilitate the lifestyle changes that help the people. For many that have struggle many years with failing strategies the drugs represent the push they needed to have a healthy routine daily and much better prognosis for their future life.

The new guidelines for the first time recommend doctors screen patients for other factors that could increase stroke risk, including sex and gender and non-medical factors such as economic stability, access to health care, discrimination and racism. 

This was something where many healthcare professionals were very vocal about, if it is well known that in the US all these factors greatly impact the health, how come the guidelines ignored them systematically? That the new guidelines recognize and give importance to them will probably help a lot of patients that may have been considered of low risk before but now may get a more attentive care.

The group recommends foods in the so-called Mediterranean diet such as fruits, vegetables, whole grains and olive oil, which can help keep cholesterol levels down. It suggests limiting red meat and other sources of saturated fat. Instead, get your protein from beans, nuts, poultry, fish and seafood.

The focus on cholesterol and the avoidance of red meat and saturated fat is very outdated (debunked), but keeps showing up in the MSM, together with the compulsory promotion of Ozempic et al.

How come the Japanese are the longest life expectancy? because the only food mention that has never been in the Japanese diet is olive oil. Olive oil is over rated and should be relegated to the same benefits has any non saturated oils, zero.

The focus on cholesterol and the avoidance of red meat and saturated fat is very outdated

No it is not, just because personalities on tiktok claim this does not make it true, which actual institution of medical science in the world defends the claim that cholesterol levels are not important for cardiac health and that the healthier diets are not as mentioned in this article?

None? not even one in any country of the world?

That is because those are not outdated concepts but very relevant.

And no, pretending every single institution of medical science in the world is in some impossible conspiracy to hide the truth is not an argument, is the same excuse every antiscientific propaganda group in the world tries to use when confronted with the fact that no evidence supports their antiscientific claims, from flat earthers to creationists and homeopaths.

How come the Japanese are the longest life expectancy? because the only food mention that has never been in the Japanese diet is olive oil

This makes no sense at all, the mediterranean diet is one of the most famous healthy diets that is correlated with very long life expectancy (and quality of life) and obviously it includes olive oil. If your claim were true this would be impossible to see.

Who has the longest life expectancy ? with 84.85 or who next with 84. 43 and who is after that with 84.19. and none of the three have a mediterranean diet. all three have an Asian diet in common. Japan, South Korea and French Polynesia. So this myth and heresy about the marvel of the MED diet BS and has no statistic or evidence or data to prove it. More pseudo science with no evidence of longer life expectancy which would be the foremost data and evidence needed to support a claim.

Unfortunately, it was too late for my family.

The focus on cholesterol and the avoidance of red meat and saturated fat is very outdated

No it is not, just because personalities on tiktok claim this does not make it true, which actual institution of medical science

Yeah, the institutions that are mainly concerned with profitability will encourage focusing on cholesterol because they have a profitable chemical that can reduce it, which BTW has not been shown to significantly improve longevity...

BTW, who said anything about TikTok?

Also, if they were truly interested in reducing strokes, they would do something to discourage mass distribution of the shots.

For life-style caused diseases, correcting the lifestyle should be the obvious immediate remedy, and not big pharma chemicals with the added advice to improve life-style.

For those who live near quality health care, there is now treatment for some strokes. Modern medicine is amazing.

Who has the longest life expectancy ?

Italy is still in the top ten, this would be completely impossible if the lack of olive oil was a requirement as you mistakenly claimed, if that was any reason the mediterranean diet would be correlated with lower life expectancy when in fact is the opposite.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5902736/

Yeah, the institutions that are mainly concerned with profitability will encourage focusing on cholesterol because they have a profitable chemical that can reduce it, which BTW has not been shown to significantly improve longevity...

When this includes all and every single one institutions in the world it is obvious that this is not a real reason, it is just an excuse, and a terrible bad one impossible to believe the same as when used by creationists, flat earthers, etc.

Statins have clearly demonstrated benefits just because you like to claim that every association of cardiologists are inepts that can't evaluate the available evidence that does not make it so.

Also, if they were truly interested in reducing strokes, they would do something to discourage mass distribution of the shots.

Again completely false, there is no evidence of this being beneficial, even if you really like to believe this false concept.

For life-style caused diseases, correcting the lifestyle should be the obvious immediate remedy, and not big pharma chemicals with the added advice to improve life-style.

Did you even read the article?

virus

Italy is still in the top ten, this would be completely impossible if the lack of olive oil was a requirement as you mistakenly claimed, if that was any reason the mediterranean diet would be correlated with lower life expectancy when in fact is the opposite.

Italy is no. 7 in the life expectancy statistics, and the preceding countries are not associated with "mediterranean diet", whatever that is (never seen a clear definition, and countries in the area have pretty diverse diets).

When this includes all and every single one institutions in the world it is obvious that this is not a real reason,

Wow, we have gone from "respected medical institutions" to "every single one institution in the world" now. I am impressed!

Italy is no. 7 in the life expectancy statistics, and the preceding countries are not associated with "mediterranean diet", whatever that is (never seen a clear definition, and countries in the area have pretty diverse diets).

Therefore proving the value of the diet, the reference provided is just another example why.

Wow, we have gone from "respected medical institutions" to "every single one institution in the world" now. I am impressed!

And you could very easily disprove this bringing examples of cardiology associations, medical universities, etc. etc. in any country of the world that say cholesterol is not a factor of risk of cardiac health or that statins are useless. Yet once again you bring exactly zero examples. This more than anything I can say proves the consensus is clear and loud.

Yeah Virus. Here is another fact that you over looked. All three countries are the only farming areas located in a nuclear fall out zone. Japan, Korea and French Polynesia are the only area in the world that has been exposed to nuclear fallout are more than any other areas yet all three have the top three life expectancy in the modern world. And all three have never had olive oil in their diet. let see pseudo science explain that.

Here is another fact that you over looked. All three countries are the only farming areas located in a nuclear fall out zone. Japan, Korea and French Polynesia are the only area in the world that has been exposed to nuclear fallout are more than any other areas yet all three have the top three life expectancy in the modern world. And all three have never had olive oil in their diet. let see pseudo science explain that.

What you are doing is precisely pseudoscience, pretending spurious correlations are significative without providing any actual argument for this to be the case, much less any proof of actual causation. It is of course also terribly obvious that your claim is completely false, the US have had nuclear fallout, The USA, UK, China, India have also had nuclear detonations, yet you fail to mention them precisely because including them completely defeat your point. That is a telltale sign of pseudoscience.

Again, if according to you olive oil is so bad, how come countries like Italy that use it so much are also on the top ten of longevity? How come so many African countries (that have never had olive oil in their diet) have such low life expectancy? If the factor you are trying to blame for being unhealthy is present in countries where people have such long lives, and is absent in countries where people live much shorter lives that would clearly indicate you are wrong.

virusrex

How come so many African countries (that have never had olive oil in their diet) have such low life expectancy?

Err.... are your your world-wide experts and respected institutions saying that thing like civil war, crime rate, etc have not effect on the statistical life expectancy? Please consult them again.

Mongolia is considered the "stroke capital of the world" because it affects a younger population than high-income countries.

Err.... are your your world-wide experts and respected institutions saying that thing like civil war, crime rate, etc have not effect on the statistical life expectancy? Please consult them again.

Congratulations, that is precisely the point, pretending one single factor would magically be enough to decide if a population have higher or lower life expectancy is completely irrational and can't be taken seriously. Against the argument that one population have high longevity exclusively because of the presence or absence of one single ingredient of the diet is for all purposes a ridiculous claim, specially when there are countless examples that disprove it.

Against the argument that one population have high longevity exclusively because of the presence or absence of one single ingredient of the diet is for all purposes a ridiculous claim, specially when there are countless examples that disprove it.

Exactly, like when they over demonize red meat and saturated fats...

virusrex

Against the argument that one population have high longevity exclusively because of the presence or absence of one single ingredient of the diet is for all purposes a ridiculous claim, specially when there are countless examples that disprove it.

Agree. As for me, I have several times pointed out that there is a number populations that are healthy on a wide variety of diets, as long as they do not include overprocessed factory junk. Who are you arguing with?

Exactly, like when they over demonize red meat and saturated fats...

That red meat and saturated fat are bad for cardiac health do not depend exclusively on epidemiological data but on clinical and experimental data as well, and studies that claim the epidemiological effect never consider it in isolation from other factors as the original comment here tried to do. Any report that would try to do it would not be able to pass peer review.

Agree

The point should have been obvious without explanation, the quoted text was an even more obvious example of this invalid argument.

As for me, I have several times pointed out that there is a number populations that are healthy on a wide variety of diets, as long as they do not include overprocessed factory junk.

And as the comment from wallace clearly indicate there are also populations that have terribly unhealthy diets without any "overprocessed factory junk" such as the Mongols, for some (like the eskimo) even Americanizing the diet represented an improving as a diet.

Who are you arguing with?

The text quoted before the comment with the obviously invalid argument, as you yourself proved John-San cold not have been more wrong with the claim.

Virus. What you gave as a fallout example are all deserts. Any simpleton knows your food is grown in fertile areas not deserts. You alway leave out the important factor with your suggestion of fact. As the above as prove this again

Virus. What you gave as a fallout example are all deserts

No, it was an example that your claim makes absolutely no sense since it does not demonstrates anything (Zaphod said the same) and even worse it relied in false information, if anything this proves the opposite of what you tried to claim since the use of such invalid arguments means you could not find any actual evidence or arguments to support what you claimed.