Dare I ask-saturated fat question?

[ladybird64]

This is not a question relation to low carb so I am posting it here.

There is much debate on here regarding saturated fat and whether it is safe to eat or not. Now there was a time that we all used to eat butter etc and that fat on meat ( :sick: ) was just a part of the meal, likewise suet etc.
So how (and when) did we get from not giving fat a second thought to demonising it? Surely there must have been something behind the change in thinking, evidence of some kind that it was linked to heart disease?

This is still a subject that i struggle with and I can't be the only one.

 

[Snodger]

yes, that's right - big randomised controlled trials that showed if you decrease your saturated fats, you lower your risk of heart disease. If you go to Google Scholar you can see pages and pages of academic articles about it:
http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?hl= ... 5&as_sdtp=

If you look at the first one on that page you will see that it's not all about saturated fats. Some nations seem to eat fat and not get heart disease. It's obviously just one factor in a whole complex range of factors.

 

[MaryJ]

Currently reading 'the great cholesterol con' by Malcolm Kendrick.

very interesting read and he dispells many 'proven' theory's and facts

Mary x

 

[Patch]

 

[xyzzy]

The issue is more what those fats are consumed with in my opinion. If you simply up your fat (of any kind) without compensating in other ways then it will undoubtedly cause you problems. If you do it right and lower your carbs when you up your fat then I don't see there is much of an issue except with trans fats.

I've come to the opinion that the argument between which is better between poly unsaturated and saturated fats is minor compared to the damage you do to yourself by eating highly sugared and highly processed carbohydrates or even just eating a high starchy carb regime. In many ways the argument over which fats are safe seems to be missing that far bigger problem.

I can only speak from experience. On the standard 5 a day cook from fresh high carb diet low fat diet I ate for 20 years before diagnosis it led me to a cholesterol level of 8 which reduced to 5.5 with the help of statins by the time I was diagnosed. Swapping to a low carb but high fat diet has reduced my cholesterol to below 4 without the need of statins in less than a year and I've lost the 4 stone I had put on over the last 20 years.

 

[phoenix]

Rather than plough through the history you might like to look at the last link first which summarises mainstream opinion in 2010 (there is of course more recent research but you have to stop somewhere!)
The role of reducing intakes of saturated fat in the prevention of cardiovascular disease: where does the evidence stand in 2010?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3138219/
As for history:
It's all bound up with the heart/lipid hypothesis and has a long history, there was not one trial and it was certainly not one man that influenced thinking about sat fats. Research on this side of the Atlantic and the US moved in sightly different directions and at different times (communication was slower in the mid 20th century) .
Incidentally guidelines are not for very low fat; fat is needed and everyone agrees with that (normally about 30% calories with not more than 10% sat fat)
These 2 article describe the research history in the UK and in the US
http://qjmed.oxfordjournals.org/content/102/2/81.long
This ones in 6 parts: this is the first
http://www.jlr.org/content/45/9/1583.full

By 1998-2000 leading researchers felt able to sign statements suggesting diets such as th Med diet as being protective
http://www.oldwayspt.org/sites/default/ ... ment_0.pdf

But science doesn't stand still, it's all about, developing, refining and indeed if necessary rejecting understanding
Scientists are now beginning to look more at one end of the spectrum at differing dietary patterns and the other end of the spectrum on the effects of individual types of fats (ie from a chemical composition view on the body )

 

[Grazer]

I'm with xyzzy. Since increasing my fat intake, my cholesterol has gone from 5.5 to 3.8, and I've lost four inches off my waist. Now, I don't know if fat is bad for me or not; what I DO know is that high BGs definitely are, and so I have reduced my carb intake. In doing that, something else has to go up to compensate (I wasn't overweight) so I eat more dairy. Simple choice. Only other option is higher protein (and there are arguments about that as well in terms of health) or more medication, which I don't want.

 

[xyzzy]

I'm with xyzzy. Since increasing my fat intake, my cholesterol has gone from 5.5 to 3.8, and I've lost four inches off my waist. Now, I don't know if fat is bad for me or not; what I DO know is that high BGs definitely are, and so I have reduced my carb intake. In doing that, something else has to go up to compensate (I wasn't overweight) so I eat more dairy. Simple choice. Only other option is higher protein (and there are arguments about that as well in terms of health) or more medication, which I don't want.

I agree for a T2 who wishes to control BG's largely through diet you have to start off by determining your carbohydrate tolerance. For many people this means dumping quite a lot of their starchy carbohydrates which will of course reduce how many calories you are eating a day. If you get to the point where you are eating to few calories to function then you have a stark choice. Either take more meds or go on insulin so that you can keep good BG's or if you don't want to go down the med route you have to eat more fat!. You can probably up your protein intake a bit but as with high BG's there are known risks associated with a long term high protein diet. If you do the low carb high fat regime correctly it works, if you cheat and up your fat while not lowering your sugar and carbs it will damage you and you will end up overweight with high BG's and a high chance of heart attacks and strokes.

 

[lucylocket61]

The problem is not animal fats.

The problem is trans-fats - which are labelled as saturated fats and lumped together with butter, lard, dripping and other natural animal fats as a danger to our health.

As you will see from the link, and Google, transfats are NOT the same as healthy saturated fats and to put them together with trans fats/hydrogenated fats/interesterated fats is a huge error.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/apr/16/ban-trans-fats-uk

PS In many shops now you will see labels saying "no hydrogenated fats". Do not be mislead. They have been replaced by ineresterated fats - which are even worse, but not yet banned.

http://www.drbriffa.com/2007/01/26/...-industry-appears-to-be-coming-to-our-rescue/

 

[librarising]

ladybird64 wrote
So how (and when) did we get from not giving fat a second thought to demonising it?

Worth a read
http://www.second-opinions.co.uk/taubes.html

The whole story is explained in The Diet Solution (aka Good Calories, Bad Calories) by Gary Taubes

Geoff

 

[AMBrennan]

On "The Great Cholesterol Con": (website

Unlike the drug companies, the food manufacturers, and the public and private health agencies that have intimate financial ties to these industries, I don't profit from cultivating cholesterol paranoia.
...
The primary force behind the anti-cholesterol paradigm is not public health, but greed. Drug companies, food companies, the medical profession, and health organizations all make billions in dollars of profit from the cholesterol theory.

See, that's what makes me hesitate; he's trying to sell his book so the claim that he does not have any conflict of interest is outright wrong, and the second one is absurd - the NHS (cynically assuming that they don't care about our health) pays for the complications whilst changing dietary advice would cost them nothing. What motive would they have to suppress evidence?

The other two don't work either - pharma doesn't care about cholesterol because they have to prove that their interventions work; for all they care, statins might as well be pills literally imbued with magic by fairies. As for the food industry, I can't see people carefully reading the nutritional labels of every food item benefiting sales - they'd much rather have us buy everything we like on impulse.

 

[xyzzy]

the NHS (cynically assuming that they don't care about our health) pays for the complications whilst changing dietary advice would cost them nothing. What motive would they have to suppress evidence?

The NHS itself none but the individuals working within it have loads of motives. A similar thing applies to T2 (and increasingly T1's) test strips. GP's don't want to fund them out of their budgets which effectively moves the retinopathy and neuropathy costs associated with people not getting good BG's onto the hospitals bills in terms of operations etc. I don't think it's that black and white.

On the vested interest bit. Yes I agree the author is a vested interest but that doesn't necessarily mean what the author has written is biased or wrong.

 

[viviennem]

My favourite "fascinating fact": -

When someone says "saturated fat" what image springs into your mind? A great big white block of lard? Uggh!

Lard contains:
45% monounsaturated fat;
39% saturated fat, of which 35% is stearic acid;
16% polyunsaturated fat.

(figures above from the USA national nutritional database: www.nal.usda.gov )

Okay, that's 39% saturated fat: but it's not that simple.

Stearic acid metabolises to oleic acid - which raises HDL and lowers LDL simultaneously;
Saturated fats raise both;
Polyunsaturated lowers LDL; no meaningful affect on HDL.

The above is from Mattson & Grundy 1985: Mattson, F H and Grundy S M 'Comparison of Effects of Dietary Saturated, Monounsaturated and olyunsaturated Fatty Acids on Plasma Lipids and Lipoproteins in Man' Journal of Lipid Research Feb 1985; 26(2): 194-202. This research is 27 years old and may have been completely reversed by now, of course!

Just to pop the cherry on the icing of confusion, olive oil contains 16% saturated fat! :shock: but I'm pretty sure this is in the form of oleic acid.

The fat of the human animal contains saturated fat; breast milk ditto. We lived for a very long time without processing food much beyond cooking or drying (or freezing in cold latitudes). We didn't know how to process oils from seeds and fruit (eg olives), so we would be eating mammal fat, fats from river- and sea-fish, and fruits, nuts and seeds mostly in season only, though some of those store well and others can be dried. This was the situation, at least in northern latitudes, as little as 12,000 years ago.

For me personally, eating fat in my diet, much of which is saturated, does not raise my blood lipids; in fact it improves them. If I add in too much carbohydrate, particularly from grains, and keep the fats high - disaster!

We are all different; the best diet for me is one which contains fresh, unprocessed, organic (when I can afford it) food, incorporating all food groups in different quantities but obtaining my few carbohydrates from fresh above-ground vegetables. This may well not suit everyone, but it suits me!

Sorry, Ladybird - I've strayed around the topic a bit. As to how we got to this point - maybe the early scientists analysed the content of both blood lipids and artherosclerotic (?? sp.) plaques, and put two and two together. Both contain saturated fat, therefore the first is responsible for the second, QED. All it needs is for that to become 'accepted' rather than queried for it to become a fact. Add in a good helping of the media misunderstanding press releases, and here we are!

Just my opinion, of course; therefore worthless. What do I know? :wink: A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

Viv 8)

 

[noblehead]

Unlike the drug companies, the food manufacturers, and the public and private health agencies that have intimate financial ties to these industries, I don't profit from cultivating cholesterol paranoia.

Does the proceeds from his book sales go to charity.........does anyone know?

 

[Defren]

Unlike the drug companies, the food manufacturers, and the public and private health agencies that have intimate financial ties to these industries, I don't profit from cultivating cholesterol paranoia.

Does the proceeds from his book sales go to charity.........does anyone know?

I don't know Nigel. but I can't say I am that bothered. My guess is the book was written to dispel myths around sat fat. There will be other sides of the fence views out there, it's all about reading things then going with what resonates best with you personally I guess.

 

[noblehead]

Unlike the drug companies, the food manufacturers, and the public and private health agencies that have intimate financial ties to these industries, I don't profit from cultivating cholesterol paranoia.

Does the proceeds from his book sales go to charity.........does anyone know?

I don't know Nigel. but I can't say I am that bothered. My guess is the book was written to dispel myths around sat fat. There will be other sides of the fence views out there, it's all about reading things then going with what resonates best with you personally I guess.

I agree Jo but I'd like to think that any proceeds from his work would go to a worthy cause given he says he doesn't 'profit from cholesterol paranoia'.

 

[Defren]

I agree Jo but I'd like to think that any proceeds from his work would go to a worthy cause given he says he doesn't 'profit from cholesterol paranoia'.

I would love to see many more of the wealthier people donate to charity. I honestly don't know if this particular author does, or even if he is wealthy. But, I have to say I do agree with his views. I think many of us have gone ahead believing all Ancel Keys said, even though to this day there is no hard science to back up many of his claims.

Personally I had high cholesterol, I changed my diet and eat lots of sat fat, my cholesterol is now well under the 'safe' range. There again, is low cholesterol safe for woman? Another question with many differing opinions.

 

[librarising]

noblehead wrote, quoting Kendrick
Unlike the drug companies, the food manufacturers, and the public and private health agencies that have intimate financial ties to these industries, I don't profit from cultivating cholesterol paranoia.


Does the proceeds from his book sales go to charity.........does anyone know?

I doubt it. Do you work for free ? Does that affect how well you do your job ? If you were paid more, would you do unethical things ? I would hope not.
Is it your turn to have a pop at someone who's written a book and to cast aspersions on his motives ?
He's done us a service in uncovering how money/reward-led the current obsession with cholesterol levels really is.

I initially borrowed the book from a library - for free.
I liked it so much I bought a second-hand copy. Someone made some money from me. No sweat.
Or are you against capitalism ?

Geoff (enjoying it while the ad hominem attacks had diminished)

 

[noblehead]

I would love to see many more of the wealthier people donate to charity.

Now wouldn't that be good, in these hard economic times it would be nice to see some worthy causes benefit from the rich

 

[Cobra3164]

Hello, I find this subject about saturated fats fascinating. The cause of my diabetes was pancreatitis, and some of the digestive enzymes are dedicated to breaking down fat (All types). After a big bout of this disease I was advised to take up a low fat diet. I have switched some of my eating habits like switching from butter and other high fat spreads to seed oil spreads and fry now in olive oil.

As for saturated fat (not to be mistaken with trans fats) the human body requires small amounts of saturated fat, I do this by just controlling what I eat once a week I will have a pork chop as my dinner which does contain saturated fat. I dont think it is a question of cutting out fats in diet its more about dietry balance and taking control of what you allow into your body, again a small amount of cholesterol is required to help the body function, the only time it becomes dangerous is when cholesterol and saturated are consumed too often causing the body to store it as fat and with cholesterol stays in the bloodstream for some time hence excess can cause a slow but sure buildup on the walls of bloodvessels, and could lead to heart disease. I do believe they key is trying to keep a healthy balance.

Thnx for reading

Simon aka Cobra3164