A major medical paper on primary heart disease prevention admitted that cardiovascular disease risk factors have proven useless for predicting heart disease among our population and that reducing risks factors doesn't translate into reduced clinical disease or fewer premature deaths.But the solutions to this conundrum were the most unbelievable examples of ad-hoc reasoning.
The paper was the American Heart Association's new Guidelines for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Women. It differed from its 2004 Guidelines in one significant way: women previously classified as low or intermediate risk are now all labeled as "at risk" and targeted for intervention. They arrived at this plan because virtually all heart disease occurs in women without "risk factors" and of low risk.
Instead of acknowledging what the medical literature has shown for decades -- that these risk factors themselves are problematic and that relying on them to predict who will succumb to disease or premature death is insupportable -- they took a unique twist.
The guidelines previously developed for women of "high risk" -- "preventive" measures, including "heart-healthy" diets, physical activity, weight management; and pharmaceuticals to address health indices considered risk factors -- have been made universal to all women. Their reasoning was that all women have a "high" lifetime risk for cardiovascular disease...
Tofu and bean sprouts won't help you to live longer, but you should eat them anyway, because they are less pleasurable.