The Truth About Saturated Fats - Mary Enig, PhD

The truth about saturated fats

by Mary Enig, PhD, and Sally Fallon

Fats from animal and vegetable sources provide a concentrated source of energy in the diet; they also provide the building blocks for cell membranes and a variety of hormones and hormonelike substances. Fats as part of a meal slow down absorption so that we can go longer without feeling hungry. In addition, they act as carriers for important fat-soluble vitamins A, D, E and K. Dietary fats are needed for the conversion of carotene to vitamin A, for mineral absorption and for a host of other processes.

Politically Correct Nutrition is based on the assumption that we should reduce our intake of fats, particularly saturated fats from animal sources. Fats from animal sources also contain cholesterol, presented as the twin villain of the civilized diet.

The Lipid Hypothesis

The theory—called the lipid hypothesis—that there is a direct relationship between the amount of saturated fat and cholesterol in the diet and the incidence of coronary heart disease was proposed by a researcher named Ancel Keys in the late 1950’s. Numerous subsequent studies have questioned his data and conclusions [etc]

Rebutal of saturated fat diets - Dr Joel Fuhrman

The Misinformation of Barry Groves and Weston Price : Disease Proof

Posted on April 24, 2006 by Dr Joel Fuhrman
 

I am glad Barry Groves (an electronic engineer, and honorary board member of the Weston Price Foundation) returned and chimed in again. (This is a continuation of an earlier conversation--if you haven't already please read the whole thing.) Now that his name has been mentioned many times here at DiseaseProof.com when people search for it on the web, hopefully they will be able to read his comments and my responses and see that his nutritional viewpoints are illogical and dangerous.

Hopefully this will have some effect from anyone dying needlessly from his writings elsewhere and some book publisher will have second thoughts about publishing anything he puts together.
Barry Groves doesn't get the idea that I am not defending the American diet or the almost worthless recommendations of the American Heart Association. However, I am claiming that my dietary and nutritional recommendations are dramatically protective and can enable people to heart-attack-proof their bodies.

Barry Groves obviously did not read Disease-Proof Your Child or Eat To Live, but maybe others too, are not clear that I clearly explain that processed foods, sugar, white flour, and other low-fat, low-nutrient foods promote heart disease. Saturated fat is only one causative factor; but one I do not ignore.

Dangerous Advice

I realize the web allows a forum for people with potentially dangerous advice, but I think most intelligent people can see through his straw arguments, so I welcome the opportunity to comment again to his skewed nutritional viewpoints and unsubstantiated claims. Each time Barry Groves reports on a medical study he gave a different conclusion to the data than the researchers do, and the studies are usually some poorly done old study. It is typical stuff for the Atkins crowd and the Weston Price Foundation to find one research paper they can claim makes their argument legitimate, but even when they hand pick one study, they typically don't report the research accurately.

Fortunately we have a comprehensive body of knowledge today with over 15,000 articles written since the 1950's documenting the link between a diet high in saturated fat and low in fresh fruits, nuts, seeds, vegetable and beans and the increase risk of cancer and heart disease. Thousands of research scientists don't agree with Barry Groves' meat-centered diet recommendations and the platform of the Weston Price Foundation.

see also:

TierneyLab: Nutrition Science and Gary Taubes : Disease Proof

The Meat and Butter Diet : Disease Proof

Journal article - detailed history of the lipid hypothesis and cholesterol controversy

A 5-part history of the lipid hypothesis and the "cholesterol controversy" by Daniel Steinberg, published in the Journal of Lipid Research in 2004–2006. These are condensed from his The Cholesterol Wars. Academic Press, 2007. ISBN 0-12373-979-9.

• An interpretive history of the cholesterol controversy: part I. PMID 15102877.
• An interpretive history of the cholesterol controversy: part II: the early evidence linking hypercholesterolemia to coronary disease in humans. PMID 15547293.
• An interpretive history of the cholesterol controversy, part III: mechanistically defining the role of hyperlipidemia. PMID 15995167.
• An interpretive history of the cholesterol controversy, part IV: The 1984 Coronary Primary Prevention Trial ends it—almost. PMID 16227628.
• An interpretive history of the cholesterol controversy, part V: The discovery of the statins and the end of the controversy. PMID 16585781

Lipid hypothesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Lipid hypothesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Lipid hypothesis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:

The lipid hypothesis was one of two hypotheses (the other being the chronic endothelial injury hypothesis) developed in the 1850s to explain the pathogenesis of atherosclerosis. It proposes a connection between plasma cholesterol level and the development of coronary heart disease.
It was proposed by the German pathologist Rudolf Virchow in 1856 and suggested that blood lipid accumulation in arterial walls causes atherosclerosis.^[1] Since the emergence of cardiovascular disease as a major cause of death in the Western world in the middle of the 20th century, the lipid hypothesis received greater attention. An accumulation of evidence has led to the acceptance of the lipid hypothesis as scientific fact by the medical community;^[2] however, a small but vocal minority contend that it has not yet been properly validated, and that vascular inflammatory mechanisms prevail independent of blood cholesterol levels.

Lipid Hypothesis - Educational Resources in Atherosclerosis and Coronary Heart Disease

Lipids Online - Educational Resources in Atherosclerosis and Coronary Heart Disease

"Great Cholesterol Con" by Anthony Colpo - Book review

Amazon.com: The Great Cholesterol Con (9781430309338): Anthony Colpo: Books

book review by Joel M. Kauffman Phd -  http://www.usciences.edu/academics/collegesDepts/chemistry/Faculty/Kauffman.aspx

By Joel M. Kauffman (Berwyn, PA United States) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME) This review is from: The Great Cholesterol Con (Paperback) The definitive book on the non-dangers of dietary cholesterol and saturated fat was The Cholesterol Myths by Uffe Ravnskov, 2000. Anthony Colpo's book (GCC) has the advantage of being 6 years newer, thus much recent research has been included with individual citations in academic style. GCC also has the advantage that some more likely causes of heart disease are given, then constructive suggestions on lifestyle are given, and these are backed up by excellent references -- over 1400 of them (p xi). It is significant that the first forward is written by Ravnskov, MD, PhD, and a second forward by Duane Graveline, MD, MPH, who wrote Statin Drug Side-Effects, 2004. In its 368 pages, 78 are references, and about 102 discuss why eating cholesterol and saturated fat do not cause heart disease. This leads to why the statin drugs such as Zocor and Lipitor are overpromoted and do not have a benefit because, even tho they can lower cholesterol levels, such lowering is shown not to be a benefit. About 73 more discuss what might actually cause heart disease. Another Section addresses overblown claims about other drugs to fight heart disease, better diets than low-fat, stress, supplements, alcohol and exercise. Appendices cover other interesting topics, such as lowering homocysteine levels and the false health claims of vegetarians, and of those who perform coronary angioplasty and bypass operations. The actual evidence from studies in original peer-reviewed papers is presented, with clearly designed tables when the results of multiple trials were given. Colpo wrote the most detailed descriptions of the fraudulent work of Ancel Keys, MD, on the supposed toxicity of staturated fats, as well as on the misguided claims of Dean Ornish, MD, and Nathan Pritikin on low-fat diets I have seen. The unhealthy recommendations of several government agencies and NGOs are brought out. The instigation of Big Pharma is duly noted. On these topics, including recommending low-carb high-fat diets, and certain supplements, The Great Cholesterol Con is in good agreement with similar parts of my own recent book, Malignant Medical Myths (MMM), 2006, and gives much greater detail, and is easier to read, despite smaller print. There is no index. There is no biographical data. Anthony Colpo is a medical writer and Physical Fitness Trainer who lives in Australia. Most of Colpo's book is extremely well-researched, and worthwhile for almost anyone to read. Some possible exceptions: His recommendation for the supplement selenium (p195) did not mention that the study he quotes found a tripling of breast cancer (MMM, p239). Granted the p = 0.09 and the SU.VI.MAX study showed no such thing, but it made use of 4 supplements besides selenium in the intervention group. His use of relative risks (RRs) instead of absolute risks, despite showing how misleading RRs can be, is disappointing, but can be accepted when the direction of an intervention is shown to be opposite of the conventional expectation. There are some problems with the chemistry of unsaturated fats (p145). His description of blood alcohol levels and chance of collisions while driving did not mention that people unused to alcohol will drive poorly with much lower concentrations than the USA's vaunted 0.08%, while long-term alcoholics will only perform their best driving with much higher concentrations (p234ff). Colpo is more sanguine about exercise than I (MMM, pp144-161), but is careful not to recommend extreme exercise. None of this really detracts from a generally accurate work. Colpo is very direct, working up finally to this Conclusion (p254): "There is every reason in the world to encourage people to exercise frequently, stop smoking, eat minimally processed foods, and find ways to get a handle on the stresses of modern life. The evidence for low-fat diets, on the other hand, is based on a mixture of erroneous assumptions, half-truths and downright lies." Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report abuse | Permalink Comment Comments (2) Customer Reviews 50 Reviews 5 star: (43) 4 star: (3) 3 star: (3) 2 star: (1) 1 star: (0) Average Customer Review 4.8 out of 5 stars (50 customer reviews) Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review Most Helpful Customer Reviews 165 of 167 people found the following review helpful: 5.0 out of 5 stars The Right Stuff, July 3, 2006

Rebuttal of - "The Cholesterol Wars: Steinberg Strikes Back"

The Cholesterol Wars: Steinberg Strikes Back

The Cholesterol Wars: Steinberg Strikes Back

A Review of The Cholesterol Wars: The Skeptics vs. the Preponderance of the Evidence by Daniel Steinberg, MD, PhD.

Academic Press, 2007

January 16, 2008

Book Review by Chris Masterjohn

Daniel Steinberg can be called nothing short of a true expert on cholesterol. He started his medical training in 1941 and spent over forty years researching atherosclerosis and producing hundreds of publications on the topic. He is one of the prime architects of the lipid hypothesis -- the idea that elevated levels of cholesterol and especially LDL in the blood cause heart disease.

In his new book, The Cholesterol Wars: The Skeptics vs. The Preponderance of the Evidence, Dr. Steinberg argues that cholesterol and lipoproteins have been "indicted, tried, and ultimately found guilty" of causing atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease. He takes us through the entire history of this century-long trial and tells it from the perspective of one who was intimately involved in shaping it.


The majority of the science in the book is solid, and the arguments are generally well reasoned. So how is it that this conclusion can seem so far off?

Study (2009) - saturated fat doesn't increase heart disease

New evidence reveals that saturated fat does not increase the risk of cardiovascular disease - Experts' Summaries - Scientific Evidence | Dairy Nutrition

Highlights

1. Present evidence suggests that saturated fat does not increase the risk of cardiovascular disease.
2. No causal relationship has been established between milk products and cardiovascular risk.
3. Factors associated with an increased risk of coronary heart disease include trans fatty acids and high glycemic-index foods.
   

New evidence reveals that saturated fat does not increase the risk of cardiovascular disease

In light of new scientific data, it appears that saturated fat is not associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD).
Andrew Mente, PhD
Assistant Professor, Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University