Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New Study Credibility

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • New Study Credibility

    http://www.canada.com/health/Brain%2Bsc ... story.html

    Curious whether or not any of you have seen this and if so, whether or not you were privy to the types of fats fed to the rats. A freind of mine sent it to me. I have been trying to convince her not to fear fat...the right types of fat anyway and wanted to know if there was anyone who might be able to shed some light on this. If it clarified they were feeding them high amounts of Omega-6 fats, it would explain the inflammation and scarring observed, but it is pretty vague.

    Any insight would be appreciated.

    Thanks!

    cmac

  • #2
    The link doesn't work for me...

    Comment


    • #3
      oops...sorry about that. Try this...

      Brain scarring may help explain obesity battle

      Thanks!

      Comment


      • #4
        I would love to know the precise ingredients of that chow. Not only would I be curious as to the types of fatty acids, I would like to know the sugar content. I was listening to a lecture by Dr. Lustig a few months ago and he said one of the confounding issues in many studies of high fat diets was that they had to add sugar to the feed, often as much as 20% of the diet, to get animals to overeat.

        Comment


        • #5
          If it's like the high-fat chow used in other rat studies, it uses high-O6 vegetable oils that are already known to be damaging.
          “If I didn't define myself for myself, I would be crunched into other people's fantasies for me and eaten alive.” --Audre Lorde

          Owly's Journal

          Comment


          • #6
            Also, rats are not humans and have different nutritional needs.
            “If I didn't define myself for myself, I would be crunched into other people's fantasies for me and eaten alive.” --Audre Lorde

            Owly's Journal

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Owly View Post
              Also, rats are not humans and have different nutritional needs.
              This is what I came in here to say. Rat studies prove practically nothing.

              Comment


              • #8
                It all sounds like a "It's not our fault we're fat" excuse.
                There are two wolves fighting within a man's heart, one is Love, the other is Hate. The one that wins is the one you feed.

                My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - Jack Layton

                The Primal Adventures of Griffin - Huzzah!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Owly View Post
                  If it's like the high-fat chow used in other rat studies, it uses high-O6 vegetable oils that are already known to be damaging.
                  My thoughts exactly! Just curious if there was someone who might have more insight into the "high Fat, more palatable" diet...

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by DaisyEater View Post
                    I would love to know the precise ingredients of that chow. Not only would I be curious as to the types of fatty acids, I would like to know the sugar content. I was listening to a lecture by Dr. Lustig a few months ago and he said one of the confounding issues in many studies of high fat diets was that they had to add sugar to the feed, often as much as 20% of the diet, to get animals to overeat.
                    Yeah..."high-fat and highly palatable chow" makes me wonder what was in it in addition to the mysterious high fats that made it palatable...

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      the study? JCI - Obesity is associated with hypothalamic injury in rodents and humans

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Am I just missing it, or did they not provide any other information other than the fact that the HFD chow was 60% fat? That's just downright irresponsible. At least they provided the brand of the regular chow, so you could likely get the ingredients. How can you take their results seriously if you don't even know what the rats were fed? All you know is that the people that ran the study think the fat content was the significant factor.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          bingo.

                          Originally posted by DaisyEater View Post
                          Am I just missing it, or did they not provide any other information other than the fact that the HFD chow was 60% fat? That's just downright irresponsible. At least they provided the brand of the regular chow, so you could likely get the ingredients. How can you take their results seriously if you don't even know what the rats were fed? All you know is that the people that ran the study think the fat content was the significant factor.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Nope. Lard is the main fat in the "chow", and there is not too many carbs.

                            http://www.researchdiets.com/pdf/Dat...ets/D12492.pdf

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Here are a some of the many problems with drawing conclusions from this article:

                              1) The link is to a story about the study - not the study itself. And there is no link to the original study.
                              2) The author only tells us that the food was high-fat and highly palatable.
                              3) The author does not say what makes the food "highly palatable."
                              4) Insulin secretion levels are never mentioned (so we don't know if any sugars were added.)
                              5) We don't know if the foods were natural, or if they were significantly processed to come up with a high-fat, highly palatable "super" food.

                              Assuming they made the food highly palatable by increasing the carb-load (ie: adding sugar)- which I'm betting they did - it would actually also support the same thing that Primal people say. Primal people switch to high fat because they drop the much of the carbs and sugars. I'm sure that if we added sugar to our bacon fat, or ate highly processed fats we would no longer be able to achieve the results that we do. Our insulin levels would be out of whack, we'd keep on eating beyond when we were hungry...

                              If you actually read the article, they admit they don't even know cause and effect they just draw a correlation. And the correlation is - the fatter you are the harder it is for you to know when you are full. No s**t, Sherlock!! I think if we read the full study, it would support what Mark has been preaching all along. This author just chose to zone in on the "high-fat" part of it, because that the CW thing to think.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X