Annika Dahlqvist and Annika Rosengren faced off in a televised debate
In the country that gave us their famous meatballs, the Volvo vehicle, and the classic hit-making 1970s singing group ABBA, there’s quite a firestorm of controversy and discussion going on within the realm of public debate regarding the validity of a high-fat, low-carbohydrate nutritional approach (LCHF) on health. I’ve already blogged about the explosion of exposure that livin’ la vida low-carb is getting this year in the nation of Sweden and it shows no sign of slowing down thanks in large part to the work that Dr. Annika Dahlqvist is doing to spread the TRUTH about the health benefits of consuming fats, even saturated fats, while cutting down on the carb intake.
The latest turn of events in this ongoing diet battle took place on March 15, 2009 when one of the leading public service morning television news programs on Sveriges Television (SVT) interviewed a physician about a study showing a lower occurrence of cardiovascular disease over the past couple of decades since low-fat diets have been promoted. Predictably, they marched out this university professor named Dr. Annika Rosengren who made the statement that the lack of saturated fat in the recommended diet has kept cholesterol levels low and that was the primary factor in the improved heart health results.
Needless to say, this didn’t sit too well with proponents of LCHF, including Dr. Dahlqvist, Dr. Andreas Eenfeldt, and other leaders of the low-carb movement in Sweden. As you can see from the following rough translation of Dr. Eenfeldt’s blog post, he was pretty livid about it lamenting that no voices of opposition were brought on to present another viewpoint.
“But the report (on this study makes people) think the (professor and other “experts” featured on the television program) know better–naturally (they’re gonna say) saturated fat kills. Amazingly enough, (these “experts” never reported) exactly how many (people) died (from eating saturated fat). And (there was) no other view (countering these arguments) heard.”
Dr. Eenfeldt organized a campaign for LCHF supporters to write to SVT as well as the Swedish Broadcasting Commission demanding equal time for the pro-saturated fat message to be heard. This blatant bias against the LCHF message is illegal in Sweden because the television stations are required by their licenses to maintain impartiality when it comes to controversial subjects like this one. Had they done their due diligence and allowed someone like Dr. Dahlqvist or Dr. Eenfeldt to appear on the program to articulate the other side, then there would not have been a problem.
Needless to say, they were flooded with so many e-mails and letters of complaint that SVT had no choice but to offer the other side. So, who did they turn to for more information about the healthy benefits of consuming saturated fat? Was it any of the many LCHF advocates in Sweden? Nope. The television reporter went to see a representative from the National Food Administration–the Swedish version of the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA). Not surprising, they spouted the same old garbage that was shared on the previous program by Dr. Rosengren confirming it to be accurate information.
“Saturated fat is bad for you, and LCHF is only approved for short-term treatment of diabetes and obesity,” the Livsmedelsverket spokesman stated.
Again, there was outrage in the Swedish low-carb community at this utter disregard and ignorance regarding the science behind LCHF for weight loss and disease prevention over the long-term. This time, SVT did the right thing and invited both Dr. Dahlqvist and Dr. Eenfeldt to appear with Dr. Rosengren for a live televised debate on saturated fat, but Dr. Eenfeldt was not able to attend. The appearance happened on March 19, 2009 and you can read a very rough Google translation of the transcript of this debate by clicking here.
I watched the debate when the video was posted online (it has since been removed) to see the demeanor of both Dr. Rosengren and Dr. Dahlqvist and it was quite evident that both were well-prepared with what they wanted to say. The professionalism of both was evident (although I couldn’t understand a word they were saying), but you could tell Dr. Rosengren was getting increasingly agitated by the assertions Dr. Dahlqvist was making about saturated fat.
The debate started out well with Dr. Dahlqvist explaining why a low-carb, high-fat diet is one of the best things you could do for improving your health. She said the insistence by those who promote a low-fat diet on people eating “the food industry yellow shoe polish” (her hilarious description of margarine) is more harmful than butter will ever be. Dr. Dahlqvist added that a saturated fat-based diet is a “natural” one for weight loss and health.
This, of course, set off Dr. Rosengren who disagreed that saturated fat is healthy at all. However, mimicking the style of American low-fat diet guru Dr. Dean Ornish when he told me in my podcast interview with him last year that “we all agree” on diet, she goes on to admit that people can lose weight very well on a low-carb diet and that she’s no fan of margarine either. However, Dr. Rosengren then switched gears to say there are different kinds of saturated fats and fatty acid compounds that can raise cholesterol levels and that this is a “very complicated issue” that contains “conflicting” research. Nevertheless, she said the preponderance of the evidence points to the fact that “saturated fat is harmful.”
The moderator then turned to Dr. Dahlqvist and said that the National Food Administration and cardiologists have echoed this sentiment that saturated fat is bad for people to consume. She then asked if all of these “experts” are wrong? You gotta love the answer she gave: “Yes, they all are wrong! It is only we who are right!” HA! Nice one, Dr. Dahlqvist! She explained that it was Ancel Keys in the 1950s who made the erroneous proclamation that saturated fat was dangerous and raised cholesterol levels (something Gary Taubes documents well in his book Good Calories, Bad Calories as well as in the new documentary film FATHEAD). She added that the science has since evolved and yet our thinking on saturated fat has not.
“People have become thin by eating saturated fat and become fat from eating carbohydrates and a low-fat diet,” Dr. Dahlqvist exclaimed.
The moderator said these conflicting messages over whether saturated fat is good or bad has “squeezed” her as a consumer looking for credible information about what the truth is when such diametrically opposite viewpoints are being shared. Dr. Rosengren responded to this by saying that Ancel Keys was right in the 1950s and his hypothesis has been proven correct by ongoing research today. She added that “there is no scientific support for” the consumption of natural fats. Dr. Dahlqvist retorted that this is the “original diet” of our early ancestors and that without the consumption of saturated fat during the evolutionary development of man, we wouldn’t be around today. She made an excellent point about the changes in our diet that took place when margarine was introduced to the food supply.
“Ever since margarine and omega-6-laden vegetable oils like corn oil and sunflower oil have been used, we have only gotten sicker and sicker. We’re really sick now!” Dr. Dahlqvist remarked.
She said there is plenty of research to back up these claims, but that ongoing research has been stifled because scientists are “paralyzed by the fear of saturated fat.” Additionally, she said there is an enormous amount of money from the Swedish Nutrition Foundation, food industry, and other lobby groups to prevent quality research on this subject from being fairly conducted. This kind of influence makes any research against natural saturated fats “just nonsense,” Dr. Dahlqvist contended.
To clarify what fats she is referring to, Dr. Dahlqvist said the healthy ones are animal fats and natural vegetable fats such as nuts, avocados, and coconut fat. She again stated that people shouldn’t eat the “shoe polish” sold by the food industry as margarine because it is “industrially processed in every possible way…extremely polluted and…highly toxic.” Dr. Rosenberg chimed in that she wasn’t opposed to high-fat cheese and butter, but not in large quantities. She then repeated that this reduction in saturated fat consumption is what has led to cardiovascular disease dropping and Dr. Dahlqvist retorted, “There is no evidence for it.” This is when the debate got REALLY good. Here’s a rough transcript of the final moments of the televised debate:
Dr. Rosenberg: “We know that saturated fat raises cholesterol…”
Dr. Dahlqvist: “That’s only in your imagination. No, it does not. Saturated fat does not increase cholesterol.”
Moderator: “This is like talking to people from different planets! For some, this may indeed be a life or death issue.”
Dr. Dahlqvist: “And it is!”
Moderator: “How do we learn what’s right?”
Dr. Dahlqvist: “If people eat what I say, then they’ll live; eat the way Dr. Rosenberg says, then they’ll die.”
Moderator: “Wow, that’s some allegation. Would you like to respond?”
Dr. Rosenberg: “Yes I would. I am always a little worried when people are so sure of themselves and have no research to support what they are saying. Because I looked at your web site and to the publications you referred me to and there were a few studies that looked at the relationship between saturated fat and heart disease, but there was not a single critical study. So you do not have all the studies listed together, just the ones that you want to show.”
Dr. Dahlqvist: “I’m more interested in running real research on real food instead of trying to keep up with all this nonsense that simply looks at different relationships between things that do not say anything about causation, but only co-variation. That is what you are doing.”
Moderator: “Now, I do not know if we have gotten any smarter, but thanks for coming.”
That got just a little heated there at the end of the program, didn’t it? Not surprisingly, there were split opinions from the pro-LCHF community about Dr. Dahlqvist’s performance whether it did more harm than good when she made such an incendiary comment like if people “eat the way Dr. Rosenberg says, then they’ll die.” My impression was that she did an outstanding job articulating the message that saturated fat is not as harmful as we have been led to believe. I sent an e-mail to Dr. Dahlqvist thanking her for being such a strong proponent of the LCHF lifestyle and she acknowledged the controversy about her appearance.
“Unfortunately I have a lot of critics, mostly low-carbers, who thought that I was too aggressive. It’s never easy to be ‘good enough,’” she responded in an e-mail.
I asked her why she believed there has been so much criticism from people on her side.
“I said that people would die if they ate the foods that the low-fat establishment recommends,” Dr. Dahlqvist shared. “Some of the low-carbers considered this an exaggeration. But I think it is a realistic threat.”
No doubt, she now feels torn about her performance in this debate because of all the criticism from the people who are supposed to be on her side. Dr. Dahlqvist is THE face of LCHF in Sweden, so the disappointment people have been expressing to her has to be discouraging. One of my Swedish blogging friends explained that Swedish culture mandates that people act modest and polite in public settings, especially when appearing on television. So when Dr. Dahlqvist noted that people would “die” eating a low-fat, high-carb diet, it was a bit “politically incorrect.”
As an American supporting a high-fat, low-carb nutritional approach to health, though, I didn’t see anything wrong with what she had to say because she merely pointed out the proven facts that are already out there and articulated them in such a way that anyone who was listening to her would understand. This idea that carbohydrate consumption can lead to death is not unprecedented in the United States–remember Dr. James E. Carlson’s 2008 book release Genocide: How Your Doctor’s Dietary Ignorance Will Kill You? Pretty hard-hitting stuff! And there’s a new book coming out next month by an author named Dr. Robert Su entitled Carbohydrates Can Kill (I’ll be featuring him on my podcast show in a couple of months) that pretty much makes the same argument that Dr. Dahlqvist did in this television appearance. In other words, we need MORE people willing to talk like this if we are ever going to make a dent in the hearts and minds of those who need to hear this message the most.
To that end, I say KUDOS TO YOU, Dr. Annika Dahlqvist. You are a low-carb hero in my book and I urge you to keep shouting it from the mountaintops what an amazing way of eating this high-fat, low-carb diet really is. Wouldn’t it be fantastic if we could get some of the heavy hitters in the low-carb world in the United States of America to appear on the Today show or Good Morning America to debate the issue of saturated fat? I assure you, the gloves would come off and happily so because this open conversation is long overdue. Sweden is still leading the charge and I’m proud of leaders like Dr. Dahlqvist and Dr. Eenfeldt for standing up for what is right.
Share your reaction to how Dr. Dahlqvist handled herself in the televised debate last week by leaving a comment below. Do you think she was too aggressive as some LCHF supporters in Sweden have contended or was the way she described things accurate? Tell us what YOU think about what’s going on with our Swedish low-carb friends.
To add to this debate I love what Dr Andreas Eenfeldt says about saturated fat. If it was as dangerous as the “professors” wants us to believe, why on earth does breast milk contain so much of it? The first food that our offspring eats will kill them? The food that nature designed is dangerous to our health? So strange..
That’s a GREAT point Dr. Eenfeldt makes, Asa! Without saturated fat, our brains would have never developed when we were infants. They don’t call us a “fat head” for nothing!
–Jimmy
I’m from Sweden and I watched this show of course. Everyone is different. Some people don’t mind agressiveness, but others dislike it pretty much. I think agressiveness makes people talk about the show. Personally I think the aggressiveness is just fine, but those that don’t believe in her probably don’t like it.
There have been some short LCHF shows like this one lately. But they are way too short and the moderators are generally not very good. We need some longer shows and better discussions. Every show is the same: the LCHF (low carb) opponent talk about all the thousands of scientific reports that show saturated fats are bad for you. And the low carb representive says that the reports are bullshit. The End. We need deeper discussions than that. Let’s hope we get to that.
Tim, you are EXACTLY right. Longer, more broad discussions of the science behind eating saturated fat are sorely needed. Perhaps at some point we could get Gary Taubes, Dr. Mike Eades, Dr. Richard Feinman, Dr. Steve Phinney, Dr. Jeff Volek, or any of a whole host of American experts to fly into Sweden to articulate the relevant points. I could see it happening at some point down the road in a couple of years when the Swedish public becomes much more open to the idea of LCHF.
–Jimmy
I am all behind Dr. Dahlqvist, but I don’t really like her punchline. We are all going to die whatever diet we use. The point is that LCHF promotes health, LFHC causes sickness. Length of life is not the issue.
But you have to admit, that statement got people’s attention, Michael. And that, I think, was the ultimate point that Dr. Dahlqvist was trying to make.
–Jimmy
It is quite clear that Annika D came across as a bit too aggressive to the Swedish public, but I think this was due to the fact that Annika R was so outspoken in the preceding television interviews on the dangers of saturated fats. Personally, I do think that it is time to talk candidly on this subject in Sweden, though it is not always considered politacally correct. By the way, the SVT television channel is a state owned, governed by laws of an unbiased approach to all issues.
I think Dr Dahlqvist performed in an excellent way, but as you said, the policy in Scandinavia and Finland is not to stick out, to be polite and humble when performing in public.
I would hope some doctor would be brave enough in Finland too to raise the Low Carb flag. Doctoral theses have been done with good results toward Low Carb, but they usually end up saying that unsaturated fats are healthy in the Abstracts. There are very many people in Finland who eat this way, also doctors, but for a doctor it would be professional suicide to declare this way of life in public. (We actually have a couple of doctors doing that, and they are publicly ridiculed and, because of that, not invited to participate in nutrition debates) Ancel Keys’ followers rule the nutritional elite and no differing views are tolerated. People are getting fatter and sicker, and the establishment drums out that there are less heart disease deaths. I believe they mean that these incidents are better taken care of when they occur, not prevented.
Marianne in Finland
nearly 6 months on moderate LCHF, -10 kgs and very much healthier
I think she did an outstanding job as always!
Like an above commenter alluded to – it’s the quality of life and not the quantity (length) of it. Still can’t believe there’s so much backlash about what just plain works.
Rosengren says ” am always a little worried when people are so sure of themselves and have no research to support what they are saying. Because I looked at your web site and to the publications you referred me to and there were a few studies that looked at the relationship between saturated fat and heart disease, but there was not a single critical study. ”
My question to her: Where are the critical studies showing that eating less saturated fat lowers heart disease mortality? Where is the proof that low fat works?
Fanaticism such as hers in the pursuit of the lipid hypothesis has blinded us to the truth that after almost 30 years of following this low fat message in America, the mortality rates from coronary heart disease, cancer and diabetes are rising, not declining as they should be if the lipid hypothesis were true.
One quote says it all:
“The diet-heart hypothesis has been repeatedly shown to be wrong, and yet, for complicated reasons of pride, profit and prejudice, the hypothesis continues to be exploited by scientists, fund-raising enterprises, food companies and even governmental agencies. The public is being deceived by the greatest health scam of the century.”–George Mann, ScD, MD, Former Co-Director, The Framingham Study
I’m a swede and in the beginning after seeing the debate I thought Dr. Dahlqvist went on a little be too much. But after a couple of days I changed my mind, and I think her performance was great. I actually remember all the important things she said, I meen it was kind of a simple message. Maybe if she been to soft on Rosengren an ordinary don’t-know-what-to-eat-person shouldn’t have remembered the importance of the message. Allthow I think Dr. Dahlqvist should have referred to some studies, or here homepage so people really could learn about the truth in this matter. But as I said the did great. However, I think Dr Eenfeldt did better when he was on the TV4 debate about low-carb diets. That was in my opinion a brilliant performance, and he should be the number one choice when this matter comes up again on television.
I’m a Swedish Lowcarber myself and have been for years.
I started it as a test and found out that it worked for me, despite all experts saying that you can’t lose weight by eating fat and cutting down carbs.
They’ve been saying that ever since but have gradually changed their attitude to know admit that you CAN lose weight on a lowcarb diet but that it’s unhealthy for your heart.
First of all, I think Dr. Dahlqvist has done a remarkable job. Without her we wouldn’t be where we are today, with debates and media etc.
And her behaviour and attitude is very un-swedish – to oppose the “establishment and their rules” without apologising for it!
Actually, that goes for the whole LCHF-movement… We’ve stopped apologising for saying that we feel great and we lose weight by changing diet. Very un-swedish that so many people have stopped listening to the authorities and started listening to our own bodies.
Rosengren says ” am always a little worried when people are so sure of themselves and have no research to support what they are saying. Because I looked at your web site and to the publications you referred me to and there were a few studies that looked at the relationship between saturated fat and heart disease, but there was not a single critical study. ”
And the same can be said for herself and the official guidelines, that everyone believe is the single truth.
Where are the studies that show that by eating natural fats you get heart disease? I’ve seen a few studies that basically tells us nothing. They’re all speculation, because sausages and junk food aren’t LCHF.
If you get sick by eating at McD’s you can’t say that it’s because you’ve eaten a lot of meat, can you? BTW what meat? Do hamburgers really contain meat nowadays?
Sounds like the Vikings ate pretty low-carb:
http://www.vikinganswerlady.com/food.shtml
Maybe low-carb is awakening the warrior in Dr. Dahlqvist . . .
LOL! That’s pretty good, Dave. Dr. Dahlqvist is indeed a low-carb warrior!
–Jimmy
Aggressive? YES. We NEED to be aggressive against the diet dictocrats. How else can we shake up public opinion? By being humble and gentle? NO. Give ‘em hell, read them the riot act. They deserve it. Ignorance needs to be shown up for what it is!!!
Great post, Jimmy!
Michael McGuckian posted a comment above; and I absolutely agree with your comment, Jimmy:
But you have to admit, that statement got people’s attention, Michael. And that, I think, was the ultimate point that Dr. Dahlqvist was trying to make. –Jimmy
Ofcource everyone will die at some point. Question is – would we like to die before we “should” die – or would we like to live a few years longer – and in the meantime be healthy and be able to enjoy our lives?
Since the food industry and the medical industry are so well incorporated with each other (they even own each other!) and the lobbying they can do, and the impact they have with large amount of money – the right way is not to be polite and polictical correct!
We really need someone like Dr. Dahlqvist (and others!) to stand up against the “industry” that wants us to eat our selves sick and then stop us full of medicines…!
i cannot listen to doctor dahlqvist. she is too much for me. not nice at all. i rather listen to doctor eenfeldt.
i have a lot of friends and people i know that are helped by lchf. they have lost weight and they all tell stories about serious health problems getting much better or are gone. just by changing food.
unfortenately not every man and woman on earth is helped by lchf.
i don´t want to sound like i´m against lchf. because i´m not.
i just bought dr eenfeld´s latest book about lchf and diabetes to my daughter. because i now, lchf will help her.
but lchf can´t help me. i have hashimoto. and get sick when i eat lchf. i feel better eating “the old way”. lots and lots of vegs, meat, fruit and some carbs like wheat and potatoes.
Hi there!
I am very much interested to know about details and sudgestions of this diet. ?Could somebody please lead me to a proper Website?
Thanks a lot: Kira from Costa Rica
Kira, go to this page on Dr. Dahlqvist’s web site for more information on the diet she uses.
–Jimmy