Fats and Health

Other discussions not related to the Permanent Portfolio

Moderator: Global Moderator

Post Reply
User avatar
Benko
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1833
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 9:40 am

Fats and Health

Post by Benko » Sun Oct 26, 2014 7:30 pm

99% of doctors specializing in heart disease believe that eating saturated fat is harmful and causes heart disease.  It is settled.
It was good being the party of Robin Hood. Until they morphed into the Sheriff of Nottingham
FarmerD
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 458
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 10:37 pm

Re: Fats and Health

Post by FarmerD » Mon Oct 27, 2014 6:34 pm

Benko wrote: 99% of doctors specializing in heart disease believe that eating saturated fat is harmful and causes heart disease.  It is settled.
Google "Lipid Hypothesis" and you see:

In 1978, 211 prominent researchers in the field were questioned about plasma cholesterol and the advisability of changing dietary habits.[16] 90% responded, giving the following answers:

Question

Yes

No

Uncertain

Do you think there is a connection between plasma cholesterol level and the development of coronary heart disease? 189 2 2
Do you think that our knowledge about diet and coronary heart disease is sufficient to recommend a moderate change in the diet for the population of an affluent society? 176 16 1

The National Institute of Health held a consensus development conference reviewing the scientific evidence in 1984, during which a panel of 14 experts unanimously voted "yes" on the questions of whether blood cholesterol was causal and whether reducing it would help to prevent heart disease.[2] The panel concluded:


It has been established beyond a reasonable doubt that lowering definitely elevated blood cholesterol levels (specifically, blood levels of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol) will reduce the risk of heart attacks caused by coronary heart disease...

—[17]

By the end of the 1980s, there were widespread academic statements that the lipid hypothesis was proven beyond reasonable doubt,[18][19][20] or, as one article stated, "universally recognized as a law."[21][22][23][24][
User avatar
Benko
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1833
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 9:40 am

Re: Fats and Health

Post by Benko » Mon Oct 27, 2014 6:48 pm

The problem is models and taking them for reality.  Or perhaps  just the egos of scientists.  Well and doctors who fur shure ain't scientists.

"A scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."
Max Planck

I know almost nothing about particle physics other then string theory is the(a?)  current "model" but I gather it may all turn out to be BS down the road.

The wording of the rebuttal article to Krugman posted in the other thread has some good and valid points about models and reality. 
It was good being the party of Robin Hood. Until they morphed into the Sheriff of Nottingham
Reub
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3158
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2011 5:44 pm

Re: Fats and Health

Post by Reub » Mon Oct 27, 2014 7:29 pm

Funny but I raised my saturated fat intake and my cholesterol fell precipitously.  Why must I always be such a renegade?
User avatar
Benko
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1833
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 9:40 am

Re: Fats and Health

Post by Benko » Mon Oct 27, 2014 7:53 pm

Reub wrote: Funny but I raised my saturated fat intake and my cholesterol fell precipitously.  Why must I always be such a renegade?
It is sad that reality so often gets in the way of good theories.
It was good being the party of Robin Hood. Until they morphed into the Sheriff of Nottingham
flyingpylon
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 653
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:04 am

Re: Fats and Health

Post by flyingpylon » Tue Oct 28, 2014 7:43 am

I just finished a good book called Big Fat Surprise that details how the supposed benefits of a low fat diet eventually became "settled science". There's no reason to believe the same thing couldn't happen in virtually any other area.
User avatar
pugchief
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4011
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2012 2:41 pm
Location: suburbs of Chicago, IL

Re: Fats and Health

Post by pugchief » Tue Oct 28, 2014 11:32 am

The debate over which is worse, sugar and white flour or saturated fat, has been percolating for years. But the pot boiled over in March, when an “exhaustive new analysis”? (as The New York Times put it) was published in the Annals of Internal Medicine.

The meta-analysis reported that people had the same risk of heart disease whether they ate a diet high in saturated fat (in meat, dairy, and tropical oils) or one high in polyunsaturated fats (in foods like soybean oil, mayo, salad dressing, and fish). Newspapers, magazines, and talk shows just couldn’t resist a man-bites-dog story line like that.

Since then—and you haven’t read about it in TIME or the Times—that study has been blasted by leading heart disease researchers.

In a letter published in the Annals, these researchers and CSPI’s Bonnie Liebman pointed out a crucial flaw in the meta-analysis, which combined the results of clinical trials that replaced saturated fat with polyunsaturated fat: it included a trial in which some of the saturated fat was replaced with high-trans margarine. Trans fat increases the risk of heart disease. (The authors buried the trans detail in a supplement to the article available only online.)

Removing that one trial from the meta-analysis reverses the results and shows that people who replaced saturated fat with polyunsaturated fats had a lower risk of heart disease.


my emphasis
http://www.nutritionaction.com/daily/fa ... t-in-food/
"Congressmen should wear uniforms, you know, like NASCAR drivers, so we could identify their corporate sponsors."
Reub
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3158
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2011 5:44 pm

Re: Fats and Health

Post by Reub » Tue Oct 28, 2014 3:21 pm

Wasn't this thread about the fact that so called settled science is not really settled at all? Weren't we using saturated fat's changing role in heart disease as an example to show that the settled science of global warming should not be considered as settled? What's the point of turning this into a discussion of lipid theory when it was actually a discussion about not accepting the religion of global warming?
User avatar
Benko
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1833
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 9:40 am

Re: Fats and Health

Post by Benko » Tue Oct 28, 2014 4:11 pm

Reub wrote: Wasn't this thread about the fact that so called settled science is not really settled at all? Weren't we using saturated fat's changing role in heart disease as an example to show that the settled science of global warming should not be considered as settled? What's the point of turning this into a discussion of lipid theory when it was actually a discussion about not accepting the religion of global warming?
Yes.

Moving this to a separate thread is either an easily understood mistake, or another example of people conveniently remove "distracting evidence"  ;-)

Oh and PUG, I make no claims to absolute truth, but 1. You'd have to go through all the studies that make up the meta study to properly evaluate its validity and 2.  replacing saturated fats with polyunsaturates  is way out of favor with anyone who's opinion I respect.  Why?  Firstly getting more omega 6s is not something most people need more of.  2nd polyunsaturates are easily oxidized. 
It was good being the party of Robin Hood. Until they morphed into the Sheriff of Nottingham
tennpaga
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 3126
Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 1:44 pm

Re: Fats and Health

Post by tennpaga » Tue Oct 28, 2014 4:18 pm

Benko wrote:
Reub wrote: Wasn't this thread about the fact that so called settled science is not really settled at all? Weren't we using saturated fat's changing role in heart disease as an example to show that the settled science of global warming should not be considered as settled? What's the point of turning this into a discussion of lipid theory when it was actually a discussion about not accepting the religion of global warming?
Yes.

Moving this to a separate thread is either an easily understood mistake, or another example of people conveniently remove "distracting evidence"  ;-)

Oh and PUG, I make no claims to absolute truth, but 1. You'd have to go through all the studies that make up the meta study to properly evaluate its validity and 2.  replacing saturated fats with polyunsaturates  is way out of favor with anyone who's opinion I respect.  Why?  Firstly getting more omega 6s is not something most people need more of.  2nd polyunsaturates are easily oxidized.
It seemed to me that the fats discussion was taking on a life of its own, and was not being related back to the AGW discussion.

I'd be happy to move it back.
* Gresham's Law: Bad behavior drives out good.
* Gresham's corollary: Avoid participating in systems where good behavior cannot win.

https://fs.blog/2009/12/mental-model-greshams-law/
User avatar
Benko
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1833
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 9:40 am

Re: Fats and Health

Post by Benko » Tue Oct 28, 2014 4:27 pm

It is OK TEnn.  I couldn't resist the joke.

It did take on a life of its own especially when Pug posted.
It was good being the party of Robin Hood. Until they morphed into the Sheriff of Nottingham
User avatar
pugchief
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4011
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2012 2:41 pm
Location: suburbs of Chicago, IL

Re: Fats and Health

Post by pugchief » Tue Oct 28, 2014 4:38 pm

Benko wrote:
replacing saturated fats with polyunsaturates  is way out of favor with anyone who's opinion I respect.  Why?  Firstly getting more omega 6s is not something most people need more of.  2nd polyunsaturates are easily oxidized.
I don't disagree with either statement. However, do you dispute that increasing saturated fat in your diet causes a rise in unhealthy LDLs?
"Congressmen should wear uniforms, you know, like NASCAR drivers, so we could identify their corporate sponsors."
Post Reply