Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Install the app
Install
Reply to Thread
Guest, we'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the
Diabetes Forum Survey 2024 »
Home
Forums
Food and Nutrition
Food, Nutrition and Recipes
Just hold on there, fat is now bad again....
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Oldvatr" data-source="post: 1201091" data-attributes="member: 196898"><p>Actually there is a report on fat intake and CHD for this study. Here it is</p><p><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15781956" target="_blank">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15781956</a></p><p>Again it does not support the JAMA findings/</p><p></p><p>Interestingly others have also analysed the same data. One in particular is</p><p><a href="http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/161/7/672.full.pdf" target="_blank">http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/161/7/672.full.pdf</a></p><p>I extract the following from their conclusions</p><p><strong><em><<When we incorporated all</em></strong></p><p><strong><em>types of fat, including n-3 fatty acids, in the same model, so</em></strong></p><p><strong><em>that the relative risks represent substitution of <span style="color: #ff0000">carbohydrate</span></em></strong></p><p><strong><em>with the same percentage of energy from each type of</em></strong></p><p><strong><em>fat, greater polyunsaturated fat intake was significantly</em></strong></p><p><strong><em>associated with lower risk of CHD ......>></em></strong></p><p>Note the different wording that substitutes carbohydrate for/with each fat in turn. Different methodology. This report also finds transfats to be the bogeyman, and does not really make any conclusion on saturated fat. Polyunsaturates reduce CHD when used instead of carbs....... As reported by the Nurses Health Report.</p><p>I think it is more than a simple semantic error being made by JAMA.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Oldvatr, post: 1201091, member: 196898"] Actually there is a report on fat intake and CHD for this study. Here it is [URL]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15781956[/URL] Again it does not support the JAMA findings/ Interestingly others have also analysed the same data. One in particular is [URL]http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/161/7/672.full.pdf[/URL] I extract the following from their conclusions [B][I]<<When we incorporated all types of fat, including n-3 fatty acids, in the same model, so that the relative risks represent substitution of [COLOR=#ff0000]carbohydrate[/COLOR] with the same percentage of energy from each type of fat, greater polyunsaturated fat intake was significantly associated with lower risk of CHD ......>>[/I][/B] Note the different wording that substitutes carbohydrate for/with each fat in turn. Different methodology. This report also finds transfats to be the bogeyman, and does not really make any conclusion on saturated fat. Polyunsaturates reduce CHD when used instead of carbs....... As reported by the Nurses Health Report. I think it is more than a simple semantic error being made by JAMA. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post Reply
Home
Forums
Food and Nutrition
Food, Nutrition and Recipes
Just hold on there, fat is now bad again....
Top
Bottom
Find support, ask questions and share your experiences. Ad free.
Join the community »
This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn More.…