Ravnskov U
J Clin Epidemiol. 1995 May;48(5):713-9. doi: 10.1016/0895-4356(94)00222-c.
Criticism of the diet-heart idea is often met with the argument that consensus committees have settled the issue unanimously. To see how these committees have explained discordant results, quotations from papers with such findings were sought in three recent authoritative reviews. Only two of twelve groups of controversial papers were quoted correctly, and only in one of the reviews. About half of the papers were ignored. The rest were quoted irrelevantly; or insignificant findings in favour of the hypothesis were inflated; or unsupportive results were quoted as if they were supportive. Only one of six randomized cholesterol-lowering trials with a negative outcome were cited and only in one of the reviews. In contrast, each review cited two, four, and six non-randomized trials with a positive outcome, respectively. It appears as if fundamental parts of the diet-heart idea are based on biased quotation.
对饮食与心脏关系观点的批评常常遭到这样的反驳，即共识委员会已一致解决了这个问题。为了了解这些委员会是如何解释不一致的结果，我们在最近的三篇权威综述中查找了有此类研究结果的论文中的引文。在十二组有争议的论文中，只有两组被正确引用，而且只在其中一篇综述中。大约一半的论文被忽视了。其余的要么被不相关地引用；要么支持该假说的无足轻重的研究结果被夸大；要么不支持的结果被当作支持性结果引用。六项降胆固醇随机试验中有五项结果为阴性，但只有一项被引用，而且只在其中一篇综述中。相比之下，每篇综述分别引用了两项、四项和六项结果为阳性的非随机试验。看起来饮食与心脏关系观点的一些基本部分是基于有偏见的引用。
