Sorry for the length and for the fact that it is not on the main topic but answers a theme that has come up in several posts. I realise that most people won't read it. :lol:
Maybird wrote:
.. a high saturated fat diet is not recommended for anyone these days
Squire Fulford replied
In the interests of accuracy can you substantiate that statement?
Have you read the advice given by Dr. John Briffa and Dr. Dwight Lundell?
Are you aware of the work of Dr. Encel Keys who first "proved" the link between fat, cholesterol and heart disease? Trouble with his results was that he drew the graph first and only plotted the six results that supported it. He discarded the sixteen results that did not support it and no-one knows why he did that.
1) ANCEL KEYS
Have you actually read beyond the myth of Ancel Keys graph repeated ad finitum by the low carb internet echo chamber ?
When was that graph created? 1953
for what? To compare similar countries to the US ?
Why didn't he say why he picked them? He did, in some detail ( many countries didn't have good data systems and some had been recently otherwise occupied)
If all the countries even were included, was there a relevant correlation ? yes and it was statistically significant. But correlation isn't causation which is why Dr Keys performed many controlled experiments (first to warn about trans fats in 1965) and set up long term observational studies
What has that graph got to do with the Seven Countries Study ? very little since it was produced several years before that study. This started in 1958 and in one shape or form continued for over 50 years. It wasn't perfect in design but it was one of the first such studies. It's easier to see errors in retrospect.
What sort of diet did Ancel Keys advocate ? a Mediterranean diet, he lived out his retirement on one , dying just short of his century.
Fortunately there are people who have been prepared to go beyond repeating the story, to find the facts and the original papers: Denise Minger, a paleo blogger wrote this article which includes correlations of the data
http://rawfoodsos.com/2011/12/22/the-tr ... -it-wrong/
Plant Positive: who has a video about Keys's paper explaining the graph
(better to read the transcripts) and look at the screen shots, I find)
http://www.plantpositive.com/3-the-jour ... -taubes-3/
http://www.plantpositive.com/4-the-jour ... -taubes-4/
2) Metanalysis mentioned by fatbird
Earlier in this thread we're given a link to a meta-analysis of epidemiological studies but the caveats included by the authors aren't included ie that this analysis had nothing to do with randomised controlled trials (which is the type of evidence ranked first when authorities like NICE create guidance)
Following this meta analysis, a symposium of experts, including 2 authors of the mentioned metanalysis gathered together to discuss what the other forms of evidence that we have suggests.
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/93/4/684.full
It is too long to summarise and they noted gaps and places for further study. They felt that sat fat should not be replaced with
refined carbohydrates and that there was evidence that differing fats, including different sat fats may have different effects. You might note that the healthy diet pattern is described as
" primarily plant-based and low in SFAs, but can include lean meats and low-fat dairy products in small-to-modest amounts"
3) Recent evidence on the combination of lean protein (beef) and saturated fat (dairy)
Scientific investigation doesn't stand still:
Ron Krause (one of the meta-analyses authors went on to investigate the combination of fats and proteins. His first trial was reported in 2012 and looked at the difference between a diet high in beef with olive oil for the fat and another with beef and dairy. (ie a protein pus low sat fat and a protein plus high sat fat) He describes it as like a hamburger and a cheeseburger diet . These diets were relatively low in carbohydrate. Krause actually thought that this would mean that neither would raise CVD markers so was he admits, surprised by the result.
the high saturated fat diet caused very serious increases in all of the cholesterol related risk factors we had been measuring, including total particle numbers, small LDL, total LDL cholesterol, inflammation, whatever we looked at, we saw an adverse effect
short newsreport
http://ctsi.ucsf.edu/news/about-ctsi/li ... rt-disease
longer interview
http://www.meandmydiabetes.com/2012/04/ ... t-depends/
Both articles are worth reading because this study is the first attempting to go beyond saying this is good that is bad but towards defining a more nuanced approach.
4) Who recommends what? What expertise do they have ?
Neither, Dr Briffa (I can't find any papers of any sort written by him, just popular media) or Dwight Lundell ( see quackwatch) are experts in the field
Our doctors, and dietitians all over the world have to take their guidance from approved guidelines. These are often not completely up to date, it takes time to do this but they are evidence based and they take into account both the type and the quality of the evidence . That most of them are fairly similar is probably not surprising: the evidence is the same.
This. from Canada is the latest I know of. They don't seem to have discovered the evidence that suggests large amounts of saturated fat is always benign. I wonder why?
Perhaps they look beyond google and a few self publicists
The first link is to the summary on nutrition with the strength of evidence
. The second to the guidelines for patients.
http://guidelines.diabetes.ca/executivesummary/ch11
http://guidelines.diabetes.ca/CDACPG/me ... nglish.pdf
(but especially the low carbers) lol just kidding :lol:
