Replies

And for all the rest—hydrogenated oils, margarines, potato chips—they are not sold because they are a need, as the original mega-farm products were. They were created because they had properties the mass marketers wanted: cheap to produce, long shelf life, they encourage repeat business (“bet you can’t eat just one”): and because they generate a large profit. This is the entrepreneurial genius of America, run amok. It is not a victim of its own success—-but its customers are, as the state of America's waistlines can attest.

I've read a few studies as well, detailing the costs to our health that hydrogenated and partially-hydrogenated oils can have, and that these additives have a direct link to the increase in Multiple Sclerosis patients in "modern" countries where foods containing them are mass-produced.

Pinging to the Multiple Sclerosis and Health lists for discussion, if anyone has heard similar.

This subject obviously released your inner totalitarian. I disagree with your initial premis and all following and suggest that most of what you hear on these subjects comes from lobbyists.

Almost all foods are labelled as to content. So... if people are buying them, they must like the taste. As time goes on we find out the effects of what we do.
The Romans had lead problems, their water pipes used lead and their cups had lead in them.

The pharmaceutical industry does not have a lock on us or anyone else. There is no hidden agenda, the reason that pharmaceutical companies get profit is because they are the best game in town.
If there was a better treatment or cure for MS, we would hear about it. The medical research industry is extremely diverse. It is made up of
1. Independent researchers who get research money from charitable foundations, like the Cancer Society and MS fundraisers and cancer Fundraisers, ever hear of Jerry's kids?;
2. Researchers who get funding from colleges;
3. Researchers who get money from the Government;
4. Various socialist countries around the world in a dozen different governments perform limited research;
5. There are also researchers who get money from pharmaceutical companies.

The Phds who perform all this medical research are on the whole an independent fortune and fame seeking group. They are looking for a breakthrough and if they suspect they have a breakthrough everyone hears all about it.

There are a dozen or more things in the pipeline for potential improvements in the treatment of MS. There are a dozen or so research groups looking into myelin regeneration.

I want the continued medical progress. These new drugs are imperfect, but they are the best we can do at this time.

I've read a few studies as well, detailing the costs to our health that hydrogenated and partially-hydrogenated oils can have, and that these additives have a direct link to the increase in Multiple Sclerosis patients in "modern" countries where foods containing them are mass-produced.

If that is the case (and I'm not discounting it), then there must be something else that goes "wrong" along the way to allow MS to set in. Maybe it's a faulty gene? e.g. a person with this faulty gene consumes trans-fats, which eventually brings on MS? The problem is that there are just SO many variables, that oftentimes, it's difficult to sort it all out.

Just look at the research into coffee consumption. One study finds that it's harmful, the other helpful. We are constantly barraged with all of these "studies", yet it's hard to assimilate all of them to try to do the right thing. Don't get me wrong: we NEED research, but it gets to the point where you just say to yourself "I give up, I'm just going to do things in moderation, and hope for the best". My 2 pennies....