Meta-analyses are not a panacea, that's clear. As I suspect you know well, two further meta-analysis came to the same conclusion: Chowdhury 2014 [0], De Souza 2

Meta-analyses are not a panacea, that's clear. As I suspect you know well, two further meta-analysis came to the same conclusion: Chowdhury 2014 [0], De Souza 2015 [1]. More recently, Kang in 2018 [2] and Zhu in 2019 are also stating that they fail to find evidence of a clear association between SFA consumption and risk of CVD. Obviously, as science is what it is (and that's a good thing), those study are debatable and do have weak spots. [0] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24723079/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24723079/ [1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26268692/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26268692/ [2] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31791641/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31791641/ [3] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30954077/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30954077/