• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

American Diabetes Association On Low Carb Diets

Tannith said:
The DASH diet recommends no more than 6% of calories from sat fat. The pritikin diet red meat no more than once a month and zero dairy, American heart association and British Heart Foundation and other reputable diets 10% cals from sat fats. They can't ALL be wrong.
Click to expand...
And yet the rates of CVD and CHD continue to rise....
 
Tannith said:
The DASH diet recommends no more than 6% of calories from sat fat. The pritikin diet red meat no more than once a month and zero dairy, American heart association and British Heart Foundation and other reputable diets 10% cals from sat fats. They can't ALL be wrong.
Click to expand...
Did you see what I posted for you today?
Edit to add.. Oh yes they can..
 
bulkbiker said:
Did you see what I posted for you today?
Edit to add.. Oh yes they can..
Click to expand...
With the best of intentions its nigh on impossible to get enough people to eat a consistent diet of either high or low saturated fat for three decades and then compare the two groups.You can do it with rodents because they have to eat what they're given and can't sneak off to Maccy Ds for a double cheesburger (unless they escape). But then the argument will always be "but they're rodents not humans".So how can you know whether saturated fat has suddenly become safe for us? You would need epidemiological evidence over many decades and that, so far, shows the opposite.As fat became available in the UK after the war, cardiovascular problems increased. Later, towards the turn of the century they began to decrease again with the advent of statins. (with or without side effects.) I take my cue from the Blue Zones which have very little sat fat in their diets and very little diabetes or cardiovascular disease. Anyway I am not about to become a guinea pig for some tenuous unproven theory. Sat fat contains no essential nutrients not widely available so why eat it? 80% of diabetics die of cardiovascular disease. I see that as a reason to be extra careful.
 
Tannith said:
With the best of intentions its nigh on impossible to get enough people to eat a consistent diet of either high or low saturated fat for three decades and then compare the two groups.You can do it with rodents because they have to eat what they're given and can't sneak off to Maccy Ds for a double cheesburger (unless they escape). But then the argument will always be "but they're rodents not humans".So how can you know whether saturated fat has suddenly become safe for us? You would need epidemiological evidence over many decades and that, so far, shows the opposite.As fat became available in the UK after the war, cardiovascular problems increased. Later, towards the turn of the century they began to decrease again with the advent of statins. (with or without side effects.) I take my cue from the Blue Zones which have very little sat fat in their diets and very little diabetes or cardiovascular disease. Anyway I am not about to become a guinea pig for some tenuous unproven theory. Sat fat contains no essential nutrients not widely available so why eat it? 80% of diabetics die of cardiovascular disease. I see that as a reason to be extra careful.
Click to expand...

The same could be said, with regard to epidemiological studies and with human studies, about the low fat high carbohydrate diet and indeed a diet higher in monounsaturated fats. What we do know is that rates of heart disease have risen year on year with a slight approach toward a plateau in very recent years. One cannot attribute this very slight fall in the rise of cvd/chd to statin use because of the shennagigans of Big Pharma and its dodgy data.
 
Tannith said:
80% of diabetics die of cardiovascular disease. I see that as a reason to be extra careful.
Click to expand...

But you no longer have diabetes? The ND cured you remember?
The PURE study is exactly what you are looking for I have linked to it for you before.
Whatever you do please don't go down the seed oil route in your desire to avoid sat fat (which is of course impossible as anything with fat in it contains Sat, Mono and Poly thy are a trinity). I think you'll find there is plenty of evidence that those are not good for us whatever the WFPB advocates may say.
 
bulkbiker said:
But you no longer have diabetes? The ND cured you remember?
The PURE study is exactly what you are looking for I have linked to it for you before.
Whatever you do please don't go down the seed oil route in your desire to avoid sat fat (which is of course impossible as anything with fat in it contains Sat, Mono and Poly thy are a trinity). I think you'll find there is plenty of evidence that those are not good for us whatever the WFPB advocates may say.
Click to expand...
The damage done by diabetes to the cardiovascular system remains, as does the damage done by smoking. This is one of the reasons imo to be extra careful and also one of the reasons to doubt this "new" information about LDL and cardiovascular mortality. The damage done by high LDL is done over a period of about 30 years so there is not much point in looking at people's LDL levels immediately before death and drawing conclusions from that.
 
Tannith said:
So how can you know whether saturated fat has suddenly become safe for us? You would need epidemiological evidence over many decades and that, so far, shows the opposite
Click to expand...
I would argue that it shows nothing of the sort. But as you say no-one knows.. its all "associations" and "mays" as I say I prefer to think that a food that mankind has eaten for millennia is probably not harmful whereas seed oils introduced over the past few decades are far more likely to be culprits in the avalanche of CVD and diabetes. You pays yer money and takes a guess like everyone else.
 
Back
Top