In the SST today (and various other publications last week):
Researchers pulled the plug on [a] decade-long American study this month after finding a rigorous exercise and diet regime made no difference to the risk of a person with type 2 diabetes developing heart disease.
I always feel a vague stirring of hope on reading stories like this, that epidemiologists might finally devote some thought to why it could be that evidence for their diet/heart-disease hypothesis resolutely refuses to appear, but such hopes are usually dashed. When the Cochrane Collaboration did a systematic review of the evidence for saturated fat in the diet contributing to heart disease and found nothing significant, epidemiologists either pretended it hadn't happened or said that well if the studies had carried on for longer or pushed saturated fat intake even lower they would surely have come up with something more conclusive. This instance of the hypothesis being shown to be wrong is likely to go the same way - in the NYT article about it, researchers involved are already trying to play up other benefits of exercise and diet for diabetics.
And you can always rely on a nutritionist academic to come up with a stupid quote. From the SST article:
...AUT University (aside: I love the name AUT University - it stands for Auckland University of Technology University. Short man syndrome, much?) nutrition professor Elaine Rush said this is no free pass to quit the gym and healthy food.
Adopting a healthier lifestyle could potentially reduce the risk of heart disease for certain ethnic groups or lower-socio-economic groups, she said.
Yeah, right. Although a well-funded, high-quality, large-scale and lengthy study showed no evidence whatsoever for this view, it could "potentially" still be correct because the study involved Americans, not Polynesians or proletarians. Excuse me while I bang my head on the desk for a minute.
She's not finished, though:
People with diabetes also have a responsibility to their community and family to set an example...
You couldn't really ask for a better illustration of how nutritionists' approach to diet tends to be a moral rather than a scientific one.
The public web site for the study is here. Just to twist the knife, having read the Study Protocol, I can assure you that for the intervention group they scrupulously followed the calorie-restricted, low-fat, high-carb diet recommended by epidemiologists and nutritionists as being likely to reduce your risk of heart disease.