C
catherinecherub
Guest
Interesting article here about the effects of sugar and fat on cell destruction.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 123336.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 123336.htm
I'd be interested even more to read the details of the study... when I searched it looked like I'd have to pay for it. I'm wondering if the above quote can be directly translated to "eating large amounts of fats" and if so: are we talking about natural fats or industrially processed seed oils?"When these three RNAs are present, the cells die in response to metabolic stress, such as exposure to large amounts of fats," says cardiologist Jean E. Schaffer, MD, the Virginia Minnich Distinguished Professor of Medicine at Washington University. "But if these three RNAs are missing, the cells don't die."
pianoman said:Thanks for posting. An interesting read.
I'd be interested even more to read the details of the study... when I searched it looked like I'd have to pay for it. I'm wondering if the above quote can be directly translated to "eating large amounts of fats" and if so: are we talking about natural fats or industrially processed seed oils?"When these three RNAs are present, the cells die in response to metabolic stress, such as exposure to large amounts of fats," says cardiologist Jean E. Schaffer, MD, the Virginia Minnich Distinguished Professor of Medicine at Washington University. "But if these three RNAs are missing, the cells don't die."
viviennem said:I agree, Pianoman; I also wish they'd say just how high is "high"! And, apart from once in the first para, where they just refer to fat, they always say "fat and sugar", never "fat or sugar".
Sorry - nitpicking as usual! It's 'cos I'm a proofreader in another life.
Viv 8)
I don't read any advice to cut anything in this article (about a study performed on genetically modified mice), nor do I see any connection made between dietary fat of any kind and high levels in the blood -- that's why I was asking It may be a mistake to assume that one always leads to the other.Ka-Mon said:I believe they are talking about cutting both. When Cardiologists or others HCPs tell us to cut the fats they don't mean one or the other, they mean both. What would be the point in cutting out industrially processed seed oils if one replaces them with natural (saturated) fats?
pianoman said:I don't read any advice to cut anything in this article (about a study performed on genetically modified mice), nor do I see any connection made between dietary fat of any kind and high levels in the blood -- that's why I was asking It may be a mistake to assume that one always leads to the other.Ka-Mon said:I believe they are talking about cutting both. When Cardiologists or others HCPs tell us to cut the fats they don't mean one or the other, they mean both. What would be the point in cutting out industrially processed seed oils if one replaces them with natural (saturated) fats?
As a cardiologist who treats patients at Barnes-Jewish Hospital, Schaffer says a multifaceted approach is necessary to manage the complexities of metabolic diseases like diabetes and obesity. Encouraging patients to reduce the amount of fat and sugar in the diet might be a primary strategy for treatment
As for the rest: industrially processed seed oils are relatively new on the scene (only in recent decades) while natural fats (including saturated) have been around in our diet forever.
I see. I took that comment by Dr Schaffer as his general guidelines for the treatment of metabolic disorder. Again it may be a mistake to assume that the mouse study has any real bearing on that advice. I'm still trying to see the link between the study and the advice -- is he saying the mice have a metabolic disorder? In which case how is that related to their diet? And if so what exactly was their diet? And would that diet still make sense if applied to humans?Ka-Mon said:pianoman said:I don't read any advice to cut anything in this article (about a study performed on genetically modified mice), nor do I see any connection made between dietary fat of any kind and high levels in the blood -- that's why I was asking It may be a mistake to assume that one always leads to the other.Ka-Mon said:I believe they are talking about cutting both. When Cardiologists or others HCPs tell us to cut the fats they don't mean one or the other, they mean both. What would be the point in cutting out industrially processed seed oils if one replaces them with natural (saturated) fats?
From that article, the second from last paragraph Dr Schaffer talks about reducing both the fat and sugar. Also the whole article is all about "Excess nutrients such as fat and sugar," so I would assume that what they mean is cut down on sugar and fats if one is consuming to much of it.
As a cardiologist who treats patients at Barnes-Jewish Hospital, Schaffer says a multifaceted approach is necessary to manage the complexities of metabolic diseases like diabetes and obesity. Encouraging patients to reduce the amount of fat and sugar in the diet might be a primary strategy for treatment
As for the rest: industrially processed seed oils are relatively new on the scene (only in recent decades) while natural fats (including saturated) have been around in our diet forever.
yes, natural fats have been in our diet forever and hence scientists/Doctors have had a long time to look into it and find out what is "good" and what is "bad" fats. And with todays technology it is very easy for them to find out if any "bad" fats is included in any products very quickly.
pianoman said:I see. I took that comment by Dr Schaffer as his general guidelines for the treatment of metabolic disorder. Again it may be a mistake to assume that the mouse study has any real bearing on that advice. I'm still trying to see the link between the study and the advice -- is he saying the mice have a metabolic disorder? In which case how is that related to their diet? And if so what exactly was their diet? And would that diet still make sense if applied to humans?
"We have a genetically modified mouse that does not make these three RNAs," Schaffer says. "So will that mouse somehow be protected against cellular damage from diabetes complications? That's a very interesting question, and it's where our future work is headed."
I'm glad you have faith in modern science's ability to detect "bad" fats --
unfortunately I think too much of that knowledge has been overridden by economic considerations.
(linoleic acid is a polyunsaturated fat, 17 is margaric acid a very minor fatty acid and is found in dairy and in lamb and beef.)We are left with some advance in knowledge, but a number of uncertainties (see Fig. 1 for a summary of our view on the current state of knowledge regarding dietary factors and their influence on insulin sensitivity). This study makes it clear that we do not fully understand the origins of the individual fatty acids in adipose tissue. Only for linoleic acid is there a consistent and strong relationship with dietary intake [8]. For the minor saturated fatty acids, other than 17:0, which cannot be synthesised by humans, synthesis within the body may be more important than intake
Just that science can show us many things. This study has answered some questions, and raised some new ones (just as good science should). But I am not so confident that what "science knows" translates into an healthier food supply. Decisions about what appears on the supermarket shelves are influenced more by government policies, economic considerations, special interest groups and marketing concerns than by a desire to offer the "best and healthiest food" which nutritional science (still in it's infancy) can devise for us. I think it is up to ourselves to become educated and become our own best advocates in this area.Ka-Mon said:I'm not sure what you exactly mean here, can you expand a little more?unfortunately I think too much of that knowledge has been overridden by economic considerations.
PHoenix, on the sensitivity side of the seesaw, does "polyunsaturated" incorporate both omega 6 and 3? And were there other weak associations amongst the list? thanksphoenix said:He summarises his views in a seesaw diagram showing those dietary macronutrients and nutrients that may be implicated with insulin sensitiviy and those that may be implicated in resistance.
Senstivity : polyunsaturated, monounsaturated fats. fibre dairy products? VIt D,chromium, magnesium, zinc,
resistance : saturated fats (non dairy?) omega 3 polyunsaturated , simple sugars (fructose?)
(interesting about the omega 3, Fray actually says it was it was a weak association and :