fat myths finally put to rest?

Discussion in 'Food and nutrition' started by TC, Feb 13, 2006.

  1. TC

    TC Guest

    Two major myths successfully propagated by the carb food industry for
    the past century:

    1) fats make you fat..... except that low fat diets fail in most if not
    all cases, at least 95% fail. And low carb has been shown to work
    better, faster, and with better improvements in generally accepted
    health markers like cholesterol and blood sugars.

    2) fats are unhealthy..... except that a newly published study
    examining 49,000 people over 8 years showed NO BENEFIT from eating a
    low fat diet. And we all know about the various "paradoxes" like the
    french "paradox" where a population that eats a notoriously high amount
    of animals fats has much much fewer chronic disease than the US
    population that eats much less "bad" fats, more "good" fats and tons of
    refined carbs.

    Can we now bury these myths and all agree that animal fats from healthy
    well-fed animals is healthy food and the consumption of these healthy
    fats are necessary for good health and necessary for maintaining a thin
    healthy body and weight management?

    Huh?????

    TC
     
    Tags:


  2. Mirek Fidler

    Mirek Fidler Guest

    > 1) fats make you fat..... except that low fat diets fail in most if not
    > all cases, at least 95% fail.


    As do low-carb dieters (I am still struggling to be in the those 5% of
    them ;)

    > 2) fats are unhealthy..... except that a newly published study
    > examining 49,000 people over 8 years showed NO BENEFIT from eating a
    > low fat diet. And we all know about the various "paradoxes" like the
    >
    > well-fed animals is healthy food and the consumption of these healthy
    > fats are necessary for good health and necessary for maintaining a thin
    > healthy body and weight management?


    Well, have you some study to support that "necessary for good health" claim?

    Note that in above "NO BENEFIT" study, no disadvantage of low-fat regime
    was found as well.

    Mirek
     
  3. TC

    TC Guest

    Mirek Fidler wrote:
    > > 1) fats make you fat..... except that low fat diets fail in most if not
    > > all cases, at least 95% fail.

    >
    > As do low-carb dieters (I am still struggling to be in the those 5% of
    > them ;)


    Studies have not shown that to be the case. They've been spun to give
    that impression but none have shown it to be the case.

    >
    > > 2) fats are unhealthy..... except that a newly published study
    > > examining 49,000 people over 8 years showed NO BENEFIT from eating a
    > > low fat diet. And we all know about the various "paradoxes" like the
    > >
    > > well-fed animals is healthy food and the consumption of these healthy
    > > fats are necessary for good health and necessary for maintaining a thin
    > > healthy body and weight management?

    >
    > Well, have you some study to support that "necessary for good health" claim?


    Not necessary. It was proposed that animal fats were the cause of heart
    disease and obesity as early as the 1950's by Ancel Keys et al. And
    they have failed to show any science to support their contentions. And
    the study referenced above is the last nail in their "evil animal fats"
    myth. They said it was bad for health and they could not prove it. The
    onus is on them to show that a given food item, that has been in the
    human diet for millions of years, is unhealthy.

    Good fats from healthy animals has been the corberstone of human diet
    for millions of years. Grains, on the other hand, has only been in our
    diets for about 12,000 years, and in morthern european diets for about
    2000 years and only in large amounts of highly refined flour for about
    100 years and large amounts of high fructose corn syrup in the last 30
    years. Heart disease and diabetes and other such chronic diseases have
    exploded in number of incidences in the last 30 years. What has
    changed? Less "bad" animal fats, more "good" vegetable fats and way
    more refined carbs.

    >
    > Note that in above "NO BENEFIT" study, no disadvantage of low-fat regime
    > was found as well.
    >
    > Mirek
     
  4. TC wrote:
    > Two major myths successfully propagated by the carb food industry for
    > the past century:

    [snip]
    > 2) fats are unhealthy..... except that a newly published study
    > examining 49,000 people over 8 years showed NO BENEFIT from eating a
    > low fat diet.

    [snip]
    > Can we now bury these myths and all agree that animal fats from healthy
    > well-fed animals is healthy food and the consumption of these healthy
    > fats are necessary for good health and necessary for maintaining a thin
    > healthy body and weight management?
    >


    No.

    The study did not differentiate between saturated and unsaturated fats,
    or any kinds of fats for that matter. I saw one study participant
    interviewed, and she talked about how she had tried to watch her fats
    even before the study, but once on the study she realized how much fat
    she was still consuming in things like salad dressing, etc. So what
    she did was cut out the good fats along with the bad fats.

    In order to draw any conclusion from a study, you have to address which
    variables were controlled. It was not a study of a diet high in animal
    fats vs a diet low in animal fats with no other changes. There is no
    reason to conclude anything about animal fats, positive or negative,
    based on this study.

    There's also no reason to conclude that unsaturated fats are beneficial
    based on this study. But there are other studies that show their
    benefits.

    Since different fats affect the body differently, it makes no sense to
    study them as a group and expect the conclusion to apply to individual
    types of fat. Fats are not only beneficial, but are also necessary for
    normal human growth and cognitive function. That does not mean that
    unlimited amounts of saturated fats are beneficial or that they should
    be avoided completely.

    Likewise, condemning all carbs is equally pointless. If a person goes
    on a low carb diet and sees some benefits, it could be that the carbs
    were the problem. Or it could be that the refined grains were the
    problem. Or it could theoretically mean that the whole grains were the
    problem. Or it could have been a particular carbohydrate source that
    was the culprit. If you want to show that refined grains are a
    problem, study people who have diets rich in whole grains compared to
    people whose diets are rich in refined grains but otherwise comparable.
    If the results were consistent among people whose diets consisted of
    specific grains with no overlap, then it could be generalized to apply
    to the class. Otherwise, it would be yet another case of somebody
    listening to the headline and ignoring the meat of the study.
     
  5. Mirek Fidler

    Mirek Fidler Guest

    TC wrote:
    > Mirek Fidler wrote:
    >
    >>>1) fats make you fat..... except that low fat diets fail in most if not
    >>>all cases, at least 95% fail.

    >>
    >>As do low-carb dieters (I am still struggling to be in the those 5% of
    >>them ;)

    >
    >
    > Studies have not shown that to be the case. They've been spun to give
    > that impression but none have shown it to be the case.


    Let me translate: They have found it, but you know it is conspiracy?

    From my personal exprience, just watching forums and people around, I
    have seen as many low-carbers fail as any other dieters.

    >>>well-fed animals is healthy food and the consumption of these healthy
    >>>fats are necessary for good health and necessary for maintaining a thin
    >>>healthy body and weight management?

    >>
    >>Well, have you some study to support that "necessary for good health" claim?

    >
    >
    > Not necessary.


    Quote from your post: "consumption of these healthy fats are necessary
    for good health". So are they necessary or not?

    > It was proposed that animal fats were the cause of heart
    > disease and obesity as early as the 1950's by Ancel Keys et al. And
    > they have failed to show any science to support their contentions. And
    > the study referenced above is the last nail in their "evil animal fats"
    > myth. They said it was bad for health and they could not prove it. The
    > onus is on them to show that a given food item, that has been in the
    > human diet for millions of years, is unhealthy.
    >
    > Good fats from healthy animals has been the corberstone of human diet
    > for millions of years. Grains, on the other hand, has only been in our
    > diets for about 12,000 years, and in morthern european diets for about
    > 2000 years and only in large amounts of highly refined flour for about
    > 100 years and large amounts of high fructose corn syrup in the last 30
    > years.


    You do not have to cite Weston Price website content all over again.

    > Heart disease and diabetes and other such chronic diseases have
    > exploded in number of incidences in the last 30 years. What has
    > changed? Less "bad" animal fats, more "good" vegetable fats and way
    > more refined carbs.


    I have no problem with this, I just want you to make more precise
    claims. People may even start listening to you then... :)

    Mirek
     
  6. TC

    TC Guest

    Mirek Fidler wrote:
    > TC wrote:
    > > Mirek Fidler wrote:
    > >
    > >>>1) fats make you fat..... except that low fat diets fail in most if not
    > >>>all cases, at least 95% fail.
    > >>
    > >>As do low-carb dieters (I am still struggling to be in the those 5% of
    > >>them ;)

    > >
    > >
    > > Studies have not shown that to be the case. They've been spun to give
    > > that impression but none have shown it to be the case.

    >
    > Let me translate: They have found it, but you know it is conspiracy?


    No. Let me be clear. There is no study that says that low carb fails
    like low fat. But there are plenty of mainstream medical people who
    have said that low carb fails like low fat.

    If I am wrong, feel free to reference any study that is good science
    and wasn't blatantly funded by industry that supports your contention
    that low carb has a similar failure rate as low fat.

    >
    > From my personal exprience, just watching forums and people around, I
    > have seen as many low-carbers fail as any other dieters.


    Many do. Then again, many join every "fad" because it gets media
    attention, then they go on the the next fad. But many more people who
    make low carb a way of eating succeed spectacularly in their weight
    management, long term and with great improvemenst in their health.

    >
    > >>>well-fed animals is healthy food and the consumption of these healthy
    > >>>fats are necessary for good health and necessary for maintaining a thin
    > >>>healthy body and weight management?
    > >>
    > >>Well, have you some study to support that "necessary for good health" claim?

    > >
    > >
    > > Not necessary.

    >
    > Quote from your post: "consumption of these healthy fats are necessary
    > for good health". So are they necessary or not?


    Absolutely. Several nutrients, including fatty acids, from animal
    sources are essential in the scientific sense of the word. Thus they
    are necessary for good health and their absence from ones diet will
    lead to a nutrient deficiency.

    You should know that by now.

    And one could also conclude that if some animal source fatty acids are
    essential for health, then many other animal source fatty acids must be
    necessary to round out a healthy diet. They may not be essential, but
    there is nothing in the literature that shows that they are not healthy
    fats and useful and , to at least some degree, necessary for optimum
    health.

    >
    > > It was proposed that animal fats were the cause of heart
    > > disease and obesity as early as the 1950's by Ancel Keys et al. And
    > > they have failed to show any science to support their contentions. And
    > > the study referenced above is the last nail in their "evil animal fats"
    > > myth. They said it was bad for health and they could not prove it. The
    > > onus is on them to show that a given food item, that has been in the
    > > human diet for millions of years, is unhealthy.
    > >
    > > Good fats from healthy animals has been the corberstone of human diet
    > > for millions of years. Grains, on the other hand, has only been in our
    > > diets for about 12,000 years, and in morthern european diets for about
    > > 2000 years and only in large amounts of highly refined flour for about
    > > 100 years and large amounts of high fructose corn syrup in the last 30
    > > years.

    >
    > You do not have to cite Weston Price website content all over again.


    Nope, just some simple well known historical facts. Are you disputing
    the accuracy of these historical facts?

    >
    > > Heart disease and diabetes and other such chronic diseases have
    > > exploded in number of incidences in the last 30 years. What has
    > > changed? Less "bad" animal fats, more "good" vegetable fats and way
    > > more refined carbs.

    >
    > I have no problem with this, I just want you to make more precise
    > claims. People may even start listening to you then... :)
    >
    > Mirek


    Here are is a couple of precise statements.

    Real food, as we've evolved on for millions of years, is healthy food.
    Meat and animal fat is part of what is real food.

    New, refined and highly processed food is very unhealthy. Margarine,
    sugar, white flour, hfcs are all fake food. They will kill us yet.

    TC
     
  7. TC

    TC Guest

    Mirek Fidler wrote:
    > > If I am wrong, feel free to reference any study that is good science
    > > and wasn't blatantly funded by industry that supports your contention
    > > that low carb has a similar failure rate as low fat.

    >
    > Actually, I am afraid that you can apply above to anything that is
    > referenced.
    >
    >
    > >>Quote from your post: "consumption of these healthy fats are necessary
    > >>for good health". So are they necessary or not?

    > >
    > >
    > > Absolutely. Several nutrients, including fatty acids, from animal
    > > sources are essential in the scientific sense of the word. Thus they
    > > are necessary for good health and their absence from ones diet will
    > > lead to a nutrient deficiency.

    >
    > I guess you are creating smoke barrier now.
    >
    > My (and I believe that most readers in this group) understanding of your
    > claim was that "healthy fat" is in your interpretaion "saturated fat".


    Not necessarily. Animal fats are not all 100% saturated. Don't
    misrepresent my statements.

    >
    > Do you claim that consumption of saturated fat (say, 12:0, 14:0 and 16:0
    > acids) is necessary for our health ?


    Nope, I said healthy animal fats from healthy animals. They are not all
    100% saturated.

    >
    > (Note that I am not speaking anything about it being harmful either).
    >
    > Mirek


    There is nothing unhealthy about animal fats from healthy animals.
    Ancel Keys et al. never showed it scientifically. It was a theory that
    was never proven. Ever.

    TC
     
  8. <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    >
    > TC wrote:
    >> Two major myths successfully propagated by the carb food industry for
    >> the past century:

    > [snip]
    >> 2) fats are unhealthy..... except that a newly published study
    >> examining 49,000 people over 8 years showed NO BENEFIT from eating a
    >> low fat diet.

    > [snip]
    >> Can we now bury these myths and all agree that animal fats from healthy
    >> well-fed animals is healthy food and the consumption of these healthy
    >> fats are necessary for good health and necessary for maintaining a thin
    >> healthy body and weight management?
    >>

    >
    > No.
    >
    > The study did not differentiate between saturated and unsaturated fats,
    > or any kinds of fats for that matter. I saw one study participant
    > interviewed, and she talked about how she had tried to watch her fats
    > even before the study, but once on the study she realized how much fat
    > she was still consuming in things like salad dressing, etc. So what
    > she did was cut out the good fats along with the bad fats.
    >
    > In order to draw any conclusion from a study, you have to address which
    > variables were controlled. It was not a study of a diet high in animal
    > fats vs a diet low in animal fats with no other changes. There is no
    > reason to conclude anything about animal fats, positive or negative,
    > based on this study.
    >
    > There's also no reason to conclude that unsaturated fats are beneficial
    > based on this study. But there are other studies that show their
    > benefits.
    >
    > Since different fats affect the body differently, it makes no sense to
    > study them as a group and expect the conclusion to apply to individual
    > types of fat. Fats are not only beneficial, but are also necessary for
    > normal human growth and cognitive function. That does not mean that
    > unlimited amounts of saturated fats are beneficial or that they should
    > be avoided completely.
    >
    > Likewise, condemning all carbs is equally pointless. If a person goes
    > on a low carb diet and sees some benefits, it could be that the carbs
    > were the problem. Or it could be that the refined grains were the
    > problem. Or it could theoretically mean that the whole grains were the
    > problem. Or it could have been a particular carbohydrate source that
    > was the culprit. If you want to show that refined grains are a
    > problem, study people who have diets rich in whole grains compared to
    > people whose diets are rich in refined grains but otherwise comparable.
    > If the results were consistent among people whose diets consisted of
    > specific grains with no overlap, then it could be generalized to apply
    > to the class. Otherwise, it would be yet another case of somebody
    > listening to the headline and ignoring the meat of the study.


    I believe I read somewhere that if you look at the data the intervention
    group did cut saturated fat.
     
  9. "Mirek Fidler" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > TC wrote:
    >> Mirek Fidler wrote:
    >>
    >>>>1) fats make you fat..... except that low fat diets fail in most if not
    >>>>all cases, at least 95% fail.
    >>>
    >>>As do low-carb dieters (I am still struggling to be in the those 5% of
    >>>them ;)

    >>
    >>
    >> Studies have not shown that to be the case. They've been spun to give
    >> that impression but none have shown it to be the case.

    >
    > Let me translate: They have found it, but you know it is conspiracy?
    >
    > From my personal exprience, just watching forums and people around, I have
    > seen as many low-carbers fail as any other dieters.


    Anecdotally, I'd say that while low-carb *dieting* is more successful than
    low-fat dieting, keeping the weight off is just as hard. This is just from
    what I've seen. So low-carb will enable to take the weight off with relative
    ease, but it will not by any means prevent you from gaining it back without
    long-term behavioral changes.
     
  10. Mirek Fidler

    Mirek Fidler Guest

    >>My (and I believe that most readers in this group) understanding of your
    >>claim was that "healthy fat" is in your interpretaion "saturated fat".

    >
    >
    > Not necessarily. Animal fats are not all 100% saturated. Don't
    > misrepresent my statements.
    >
    >
    >>Do you claim that consumption of saturated fat (say, 12:0, 14:0 and 16:0
    >>acids) is necessary for our health ?

    >
    >
    > Nope, I said healthy animal fats from healthy animals. They are not all
    > 100% saturated.


    OK then. So the "necessary for our health" is non-saturated fats? E.g.
    omega3 and omega6?

    Mirek
     
Loading...