Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: Saturated Fat Study Thoughts page

  1. #1
    GrokNRoller's Avatar
    GrokNRoller is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    16

    Question Saturated Fat Study Thoughts

    Shop Now
    Can anyone more intelligent than me respond to this?

    https://plus.google.com/109926473783...ts/8cZfL4Xn77F (post from an highly influential Vegan)

    More specifically:

    http://www.cochranejournalclub.com/r...f/CD002137.pdf

  2. #2
    jsa23's Avatar
    jsa23 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    347
    There was no clear effect of any dietary fat intervention compared to usual or control diet on mortality
    There was no clear effect of any dietary fat intervention compared to usual diet on cardiovascular mortality
    There was a reduction in cardiovascular events for any dietary fat intervention compared with usual diet

    but it is likely that a few small studies with more cardiovascular events in the intervention groups may be missing from the review
    I could quote more, but from the author directly:
    -No stastistically significant change in heart attack/stroke/cancer/diabetes.
    -Claimed reductions in LDL(we know the limitations there)
    -the "modified fat"(more mono/polyunsaturated) had lower triglycerides. Again, we know lower-carb/animal-heavy diets can do as well or better here.
    -generally doesn't effect blood pressure

    Basically, there's a correlated reduction in "cardiovascular events", and that's about it - overall mortality is unchanged, and for everything else the confidence intervals include the 0/1.0 point, meaning that there's a significant chance there was no meaningful(or the opposite) effect.

    And the bottom line is that the study ONLY looks at two things: relative fraction of calories from fat, and (loosely) fat breakdown - emphasis on unsaturated fats. The problems with this:

    -Doesn't separate monounsaturated from polyunsaturated, and certainly ignores n-3 to n-6 ratios (confounding factors)
    -While it ostensibly looks at fat calories versus carbohydrate calories, carbohydrate quality is not discussed

    Basically it shows that there may be some slight, situational risk reduction as a result of reducing fat intake, but it does nothing to establish any greater level of detail - was it really saturated fats? How did total PUFA's change? What kind of carbohydrates was the population consuming? It certainly didn't show a mammoth, colossal shift in health/mortality outcomes.

  3. #3
    GrokNRoller's Avatar
    GrokNRoller is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    16
    Wow - what a thorough answer. Thanks! I bow down to you. I may well cut-and-paste your response, Leo's vegan stance gets on my nerves...

  4. #4
    Paleobirdy's Avatar
    Paleobirdy is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    560
    The data on the relationship between saturated fat and heart disease are notoriously scant for women. Much of the research on diet seems to be centered around, and tailored towards male heart disease pts., and then that prescriptive diet has been extrapolated to everyone. The data are scant everywhere, from Ancel Keys all the way up to now. What we do know is that when LC/HSATFAT weight reduction diets are compared with LF/HC diets, the one with all that nasty SATFAT always wins. Weight loss is oftentimes a wash, but the improvement in lipid risk factors is incredibly clear and repeatable.
    IMO, the story is still out for people who eat SATFAT with carbs. I think many of the young, slender (mostly male) paleo/primals who eat satfat and have started eating lots of carbs are playing russian roulette.
    Leo's vegan stance is a outgrowth (dare I say cancer???) of his minimalist views. However, paleo (and not as much primal) living is really the simplest and most ecological of all, if it is really based on grass-fed/wild meats. Eating all plants is efficient only where there is fabulous soil, weather and rainfall. Any place where you have a deficit in any of these means you are relying on plenty of outside inputs and complications in order to do intensive agriculture, and a pastoral or wild animal way is more efficient. Dry-land farming is efficient, too, but we don't rely on many food crops within such a system, just grass for the animals and maybe things like cotton.
    Last edited by Paleobirdy; 11-11-2011 at 05:38 PM. Reason: added an H

  5. #5
    RitaRose's Avatar
    RitaRose is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    3,952
    Man, I just love the minds on these boards.

    Beautiful, beautiful things.
    My sorely neglected blog - http://ThatWriterBroad.com

  6. #6
    jimhensen's Avatar
    jimhensen is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    818
    2. The evidence isn't conclusive yet, but the best analysis of what we have so far indicates that replacing saturated fats with unsaturated fats reduces the risk of heart disease.

    3. Replacing saturated fats with carbohydrates (low-fat diets) is inconclusive so far.

    4. There is no good evidence to indicate that eating lots of saturated fats is healthy for your heart, regardless of the source of those saturated fats.



    From the research I have done these appear to be true, but it seems like replacing saturated fats with carbs has shown bad results while replacing saturated fats with pufas (vegetable oils and the like) has shown good results.

  7. #7
    jimhensen's Avatar
    jimhensen is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    818
    From a post a little bit down by leo:

    The definitive statement is: based on the evidence we have so far, it's best to reduce saturated fat intake and replace it with unsaturated fats (not carbs).

    From the research I have done this seems to be true.

  8. #8
    Knifegill's Avatar
    Knifegill is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Washington state
    Posts
    6,389
    Throw medium-chain triglycerides into this. All I eat for breakfast every day is a can of coconut milk. 765 calories, most of it saturated medium-chain triglyceride fat. I then go about four hours before digging into my sweet potatoes and apple, avocado and mackerel. Seems like that's long enough to prevent the storage, right?


    Turquoisepassion:
    Knifegill is christened to be high carb now!
    notontherug:
    the buttstuff...never interested.
    Tremendous worms of a swarthy nature pursue me across the sandy blank sky. I stop to think. What the devil AM I up to?!

    My pony picture thread http://www.marksdailyapple.com/forum/thread82786.html

  9. #9
    jsa23's Avatar
    jsa23 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    347
    Quote Originally Posted by Knifegill View Post
    Throw medium-chain triglycerides into this. All I eat for breakfast every day is a can of coconut milk. 765 calories, most of it saturated medium-chain triglyceride fat. I then go about four hours before digging into my sweet potatoes and apple, avocado and mackerel. Seems like that's long enough to prevent the storage, right?
    MCT's and other classifications of saturated fats is another interesting topic that almost never gets discussed. We draw distinctions between monounsaturated fats, and n-3 and n-6 polyunsaturated fats, but what about the different types of saturated fats? It's entirely possible that some of them are harmless or healthy, while others are quite bad. I've never seen any real research targeted at drawing any distinctions in this respect.

  10. #10
    Paleobirdy's Avatar
    Paleobirdy is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    560
    PrimalCon New York
    Quote Originally Posted by jimhensen View Post
    2. The evidence isn't conclusive yet, but the best analysis of what we have so far indicates that replacing saturated fats with unsaturated fats reduces the risk of heart disease.

    3. Replacing saturated fats with carbohydrates (low-fat diets) is inconclusive so far.

    4. There is no good evidence to indicate that eating lots of saturated fats is healthy for your heart, regardless of the source of those saturated fats.



    From the research I have done these appear to be true, but it seems like replacing saturated fats with carbs has shown bad results while replacing saturated fats with pufas (vegetable oils and the like) has shown good results.
    What research are you referring to? I thought there was a new study showing that adding in the carbs wasn't good, but don't remember the satfat-with-pufa part.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •