@article{3d6ca631a55c4152badbdb4e732409c7,
title = "The Women's Health Initiative. What is on trial: Nutrition and chronic disease? Or misinterpreted science, media havoc and the sound of silence from peers?",
abstract = "The first results of the Women's Health Initiative dietary intervention trial were published in the USA in February. This is a colossal intervention designed to see if diets lower in fat and higher in fruits, vegetables and grains than is usual in high-income countries reduce the incidence of breast cancer, colorectal cancer, heart disease and other chronic diseases, in women aged 50-79 years. As interpreted by US government media releases, the results were unimpressive. As interpreted by a global media blitz, the results indicate that food and nutrition has little or nothing to do with health and disease. But the trial was in key respects not reaching its aims, was methodologically controversial, and in any case has not produced the reported null results. What should the public health nutrition profession do about such messes?",
author = "Agneta Yngve and Leif Hambraeus and Lauren Lissner and Majem, {Lluis Serra} and {De Almeida}, {Maria Daniel Vaz} and Christina Berg and Roger Hughes and Geoffrey Cannon and Inga Thorsdottir and John Kearney and Gustafsson, {Jan {\AA}ke} and Joseph Rafter and Ibrahim Elmadfa and Nick Kennedy",
note = "Funding Information: The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) of the US government. An NIH media release on 7 February announcing the results was downbeat. It stated: {\textquoteleft}News from the Women{\textquoteright}s Health Initiative: reducing total fat intake may have small effect on risk of breast cancer, no effect on risk of colorectal cancer, heart disease, or stroke{\textquoteright}4. On the same day, JAMA posted their media release with much the same tone but with a slight difference: {\textquoteleft}Large study shows low-fat diet has little effect on reducing risk of breast cancer, colorectal cancer, or cardiovascular disease in postmenopausal women{\textquoteright}. Funding Information: The WHI study is Big Science, no question about that. It has cost 415 million dollars so far, and the dietary modification followed 49 000 subjects for over 8 years. It was conceived and funded by NIH in 1991, to investigate the most common causes of death, disability and impaired quality of life in postmenopausal women. It was heralded as the biggest US prevention trial of its kind, with unique opportunities of supporting public health nutrition policies for and life choices of postmenopausal women. Copyright: Copyright 2011 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.",
year = "2006",
month = apr,
doi = "10.1079/PHN2006952",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "9",
pages = "269--272",
journal = "Public Health Nutrition",
issn = "1368-9800",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
number = "2",
}