Dr. Malcom Kendrick On Saturated Fat

What a great article. @Tannith have a read of that.

Unfortunately the general public are so indoctrinated to think that cholesterol is bad, and cholesterol comes from eating fat, it will take years of re-education to break that link.

It will probably take the medical profession to stand together and hold their hands up and say that they have been wrong for 50 years................and that'll never happen.

Every time I try to explain it in the most basic terms to people they instantly tell me I'm talking nonsense, because "everyone knows....................................................."

Thank you for posting this an Interesting read worth having a look @DJC3 !

Aye, it's a shame that the indoctrination goes so deep and surprisingly so high.

Edited to add. As Kendrick says 'Why do eggs have a lot of cholesterol? Because it takes a lot of cholesterol to build a chicken'. And now, what happens when you artificially lower the cholesterol in a chicken? Death ensues, same with rabbits.
Cholesterol has roles that science doesn't fully cover yet.

Really interesting, thanks for tagging me @shelley262 I read it, and reread it and the pieces are finally starting to fit together.

Really great article - have bookmarked it and will re-read it whenever I start to worry that I am eating too much saturated fat.

Great Article, specially as i pile loads of coconut oil in my chicken curry

Why is this message not filtering to our gps though, my gp recently offered me a drug that blocks you digesting fat when i expressed concern about being prescribed a med that's known to cause weight gain.

When i asked her why would i take something that blocks me absorbing an essential nutrient she was flummoxed, and started on the heart heath hypothesis....can't believe it's still being spouted by medical professionals. i told her no to both prescriptions!

I found Dr Kendricks interpretation of how the endocrine system operates to be at odds with the papers I have read recently by other endocrinologists, especially those operating in Australia and South Africa. I feel he has perhaps bent some things to suit his opinion, and I raise a warning that what he has in this article may not be representative of what modern consensus is. Especially with reference to LDL which he has divorced from the chylomicrons completely as a not involved entity, which seems to be problematic in my opinion. He is saying LDL is NOT a form of cholesterol, and this is a new interpretation IMO,

I do love Dr Malcolm Kendrick - it's"...a long-winded way of saying that everything we have been told about saturated fat, its impact on LDL, and its impact on CVD is – frankly – complete ********. And if it is complete ********, the Keys equation – which has driven all research in this area for seventy years – is also ********."

Wonderful!

Cochrane Collaboration UK even tweeted a link to a blog reviewing evidence:

https://www.students4bestevidence.net/cholesterol-and-heart-disease-whats-the-evidence/

Dr Berg interviews Dave Feldman - in it Dave explains how you can 'game' a cholesterol test by eating lots of saturated fat for 3 days prior to the test which actually reduces LDL in the blood

AloeSvea said:

I do love Dr Malcolm Kendrick - it's"...a long-winded way of saying that everything we have been told about saturated fat, its impact on LDL, and its impact on CVD is – frankly – complete ********. And if it is complete ********, the Keys equation – which has driven all research in this area for seventy years – is also ********."

Wonderful!

Click to expand...

I agree that the Ancel Keys paradigm on fat and the terrible consequences that came from it are now being shown to be wrong. But I question the science Kendrick is using to justify his counter arguments, since this seems to be not what the new science is saying. He has a very different understanding of endocrine processes that others do not seem to support. He may be right, but then again he may be wrong when he states that LDL is not cholesterol hence this is why it is not contributing to CVD. It seems to be a simple explanation, but this does not make it correct. In other words one or other is talking B******s. I am no expert so cannot agree with either POV yet, only that the old ways seem to be wrong and fat is not the enemy we once thought it to be.

britishpub said:

Unfortunately the general public are so indoctrinated to think that cholesterol is bad, and cholesterol comes from eating fat, it will take years of re-education to break that link.

It will probably take the medical profession to stand together and hold their hands up and say that they have been wrong for 50 years................and that'll never happen.

Every time I try to explain it in the most basic terms to people they instantly tell me I'm talking nonsense, because "everyone knows....................................................."

Click to expand...

It's not the general public that's the problem; it's the medical community

Oldvatr said:

I agree that the Ancel Keys paradigm on fat and the terrible consequences that came from it are now being shown to be wrong. But I question the science Kendrick is using to justify his counter arguments, since this seems to be not what the new science is saying. He has a very different understanding of endocrine processes that others do not seem to support. He may be right, but then again he may be wrong when he states that LDL is not cholesterol hence this is why it is not contributing to CVD. It seems to be a simple explanation, but this does not make it correct. In other words one or other is talking B******s. I am no expert so cannot agree with either POV yet, only that the old ways seem to be wrong and fat is not the enemy we once thought it to be.

Click to expand...

To add to the problem, Dr Kendrick is correct that dietary fat is packaged into chylomicrons in the blood by the intestines, so a high fat diet will increase this particle in the blood, so there will be an increase in triglycerides in the blood within the chylomicrons. This fat is used by muscles in the body as controlled by the lipase enzyme. The chylomicrons get filtered out by the liver mainly by conversion into LDL for either storage or use in the bloodstream. So increased dietary fat will increase LDL eventually according to this alternate hypothesis. Fasting and keto diets and DP will all affect the amount of LDL released by the liver but this is not necessarily linked to mealtimes per se, so Kendrick is correct in that there is no direct link between fat intake to raising LDL, but it is still affected in the long term

The LDL that is deemed to be harmful to us is not the LDL produced by the liver, but is the remnants from LDL as it gets used up. The HDL normally hoovers this up for disposal or reuse in the liver, but there is a percentage that gets damaged, and which HDL cannot bind to. This is called LDL-C and is also referred to as small dense LDL or sLDL. This is the nasty stuff that we need to reduce if we can. Recent studies seem to show that a low carb higher fat diet creates larger fluffier LDL particles that are good, and reduces the LDL-C stuff A ketogenic diet also claims to burn up more LDL than a non keto diet and there are studies that seem to back this up. There are also other studies that show one can reduce LDL too low such that it becomes harmful to us and leads apparently to a reduced lifespan.

I think that if Kendrick had said that LDL-C is not cholesterol, then again he would be wrong, since LDL-C is mostly cholesterol that cannot be re-used or removed easily by the body, and so forms plaque. which is why furred up arteries are known to be blocked by cholesterol - true. But the source of that cholesterol is not directly related to food intake - it is self made by our own bodies not eggs or shellfish we eat. Smoking, radiation, pesticides'pollutants etc all damage LDL to cause LDL-C

There is also a worry that the chylomicron remnants also contribute to small particles that are as harmful as LDL-C, so the chylomicrons are not necessarily safe. When they are good, they are very very good, but when they go bad they are also horrid.

Adding to this confusion, the lab tests used to measure LDL do not actually do that. the LDL figure is a mathematical calculation that estimates LDL from the HDL and trig values, and the formula assumes that the trig/ cholesterol ratio remains constant, which in practice it does not. So LDL figure that the doc tells you is bad is a rough guess into what is going on and not really a strong measure at all.