Straightforward facts on dietary fat and health

[Big Don]

Straightforward facts on dietary fat and health

It's actually an essential nutrient, and our obsession with dietary cholesterol is misguided, experts say

By David Feder


August 26, 2009 Chicago Tribune EXCERPT

We've become a culture where a serving of fettuccine Alfredo is nicknamed " heart attack on a plate" and french fries are frequently mentioned with the prefix "artery-clogging."

Rarely does an article about dietary fat inform us that fat is an essential nutrient without which we would surely die. However, for most of us, fretting over dietary fat and cholesterol is unnecessary.

For generations, experts have prescribed a set of rules for everyone based on risk factors of illness in only one segment of the population.

"The results of cholesterol and heart disease research was not meant to be applied to healthy people or the world at large," said Dr. Donald McNamara, a cholesterol research scientist and director of Eggs for Health Consulting in Laurel, Md. He compares such an approach to "prescribing the same pair of glasses to everyone."

Few experts argue that for those with cholesterol levels outside the norm, or with high risk factors for cardiovascular disease, dietary change often can be a valid intervention. But when it comes to high-fat foods such as burgers, cheese, butter and cream being liberally shunned by those bent on lowering their cholesterol intake, it's time to lard the conversation with a little straightforward science on dietary fat and health.

Your body knows how to handle dietary fat, and if you're not overweight and have no other high-risk conditions, your risk of heart disease is probably low. That means even if you occasionally eat several slices of pizza with a Haagen-Dazs chaser, you needn't punish yourself with guilt and worry. The stress will probably do more damage than the Super Bowl special you just ate. According to Mark Anthony, nutrition science instructor at St. Edward's University, Austin, Texas, and author of "Gut Instinct: Diet's Missing Link," analysis of the research into cholesterol and disease is bearing this out.<<SNIP>>

McNamara concurs: "No study published over the last 20 years has reported a relationship between dietary cholesterol intake and heart disease risk in the general population." He also points to data from the famous "Seven Countries Study" that analyzed subjects with the same levels of cholesterol, across different cultures. Absolute rates of heart disease varied widely. Another eye-opening statistic cited by McNamara is that roughly half the incidents of heart disease occur in people with normal cholesterol.
End Excerpt
Interesting.

 

[Makalakumu]

I think the real problem is that we live in an "expert" society where all of these people need jobs. When it comes to dietary needs, I have never been bombarded with more contradictory information...

 

[Carol]

I think the real problem is that we live in an "expert" society where all of these people need jobs. When it comes to dietary needs, I have never been bombarded with more contradictory information...

Couldn't agree more.

 

[Bruno@MT]

'Everything in moderation' seems to be the best dietary plan to date. People need fat as much as vitamins.

 

[Stac3y]

Salt is another food component that's been demonized. I get hollered at by family members regularly for salting my food--these are people with hypertension, who really shouldn't eat much salt. I, on the other hand, have very LOW blood pressure (and sweat a great deal), so salt is not a problem for me, per my physician. Because of all the hype, though, people don't believe me when I tell them this. Frustrating.

 

[girlbug2]

thanks for the article Don.

For anybody interested in looking at the subject further, read Gary Taubes' Good Calories, Bad Calories. It's a huge book--so just read the first chapter. After that, if you haven't come away with a healthy skepticism about what you've been told for the past 30 years about cholesterol and fat, you haven't been paying attention.

 

[Steve]

I think that the problem with articles like this is that people who eat poorly and who are unhealthy will use this article as rationalization. "Dude, you eat biscuits and gravy every morning... you're going to have a heart attack."

"No problem. Experts say that we need dietary fat. I'm fine."

While moderation is a good starting point, we're all different. I've had to adjust my eating habits into my 30's, because I was surely on a path to diabetes and heart disease. While I didn't eat terribly, I've had to begin eating with intent, thinking about what I shovel down as well as portion size.

Others on this site have posted similar messages, such as Bill Mattocks when he posted about his diabetes. That's a wake up call.

While we need some amount of fat, there's good fat and bad, just as there is good cholesterol and bad. A key to this article is that a healthy person who eats well needn't worry about the occasional pizza/haagen daz binge. The reality, however, is that there is a growing contingent of Americans (and I'm sure other countries fare little better) who are NOT healthy to begin with. A diet of pizza and microwaved hot pockets is unhealthy, even if the box says "healthy choice."

I can just picture fat Monica from Friends eating an entire pepperoni pizza while holding up a grease stained copy of this article as vindication.

 

[Steve]

thanks for the article Don.

For anybody interested in looking at the subject further, read Gary Taubes' Good Calories, Bad Calories. It's a huge book--so just read the first chapter. After that, if you haven't come away with a healthy skepticism about what you've been told for the past 30 years about cholesterol and fat, you haven't been paying attention.

Now, this genuinely surprises me. I didn't realize that this was revalatory information. When I began really looking into nutrition, this information was readily available. The concepts of good and bad fats, simple and complex carbs and similar lines of thought are inherent to most of the nutrition books and sites I've seen.

I guess what I'm saying is that, if you haven't heard these things, I can't believe you've been paying much attention. It's integral to everything from South Beach Diet to the Zone diet (which is great for athletes). I just read a great ebook called "The Grapplers Guide to Nutrition" which I would highly recommend to any athlete looking to build lean muscle. All of these (among many others) address good calories vs bad calories, good carbs, and workable diets.

 

[blindsage]

Steve you are totally right. If this information is news to you then you haven't really been paying much attention. And the article also makes the point, right at the end that,

It doesn't negate the value of eating a balanced diet, with the majority of calories coming from fruits, vegetables and whole-grain foods. But it does mean that, if we have been taking care of ourselves by maintaining a healthy weight and staying active, we don't have to seek penance every time we butter our toast.

So, I'm not really sure what the complaining is about.

 

[girlbug2]

The concepts of good and bad fats, simple and complex carbs and similar lines of thought are inherent to most of the nutrition books and sites I've seen.

I guess what I'm saying is that, if you haven't heard these things, I can't believe you've been paying much attention. It's integral to everything from South Beach Diet to the Zone diet (which is great for athletes)..

What I didn't go into detail about in my above post was that the Taubes book debunks a lot of the conventional wisdom that you are alluding to. Meaning, for instance, that even today, our popular notion of what's healthy to eat is based on erroneous interpretation of flawed studies (such as Ancel Keys' famous Seven Countries study and the subsequent widespread condemnation of animal fats, which persists today). It's very well explained to the lay person such as myself, but Taubes goes into quite a lot of detail in the process, so if you're short on time, that's why I suggest at least reading the first whole chapter to see the basis of Taubes' position on dietary fats and cholesterol.

 

[Steve]

What I didn't go into detail about in my above post was that the Taubes book debunks a lot of the conventional wisdom that you are alluding to. Meaning, for instance, that even today, our popular notion of what's healthy to eat is based on erroneous interpretation of flawed studies (such as Ancel Keys' famous Seven Countries study and the subsequent widespread condemnation of animal fats, which persists today). It's very well explained to the lay person such as myself, but Taubes goes into quite a lot of detail in the process, so if you're short on time, that's why I suggest at least reading the first whole chapter to see the basis of Taubes' position on dietary fats and cholesterol.

I will take a look, but from your description, it really doesn't sound much different than what underlays most of the nutritional plans out there. Thanks for the referral. In rereading my last post, I hope it didn't come off as counter to what you're saying. I agree, at least superficially until I've read the book, with what you were saying. I was only surprised that it is considered unheard of.