8 ms·

The science on why animal fat is good for humans

31 points by prmph 4y ago

bannedbybros 4y ago
[dead]
nonethewiser 4y ago
In a hunter-gatherer context, fat is surplus. And it virtually only comes from animals. Also true in the animal kingdom. Having fat means you're doing better than just surviving. If you drop someone into the woods and check on them later and they've amassed a bunch of fat (killed a moose, bear, etc). then they're clearly very competent. I guess what I'm saying is it's not surprising that our bodies like it.
- bannedbybros 4y ago
  [dead]
- throwaway48952 4y ago
  Wild game meat isn't nearly as fatty as domesticated meat, and the fat is much less saturated: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4975792/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4975792/
cpncrunch 4y ago
The article seems to just concentrate on debunking a single study about margarine which used cherrypicked data, but doesn't really discuss any of the other science into diet and health, so I'm wondering if this article itself is also cherrypicking the data.
pcurve 4y ago
This chart looked pretty striking. "Tokelau, Masai, and Inuit populations who consume “extremely” high percentages of saturated fat yet have extremely low rates of heart disease, cancer, stroke, and diabetes." So much conflicting studies on this, I'm at a loss to what to believe, including this study that points otherwise: https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/press-releases/saturated-fats-increased-heart-disease-risk/ https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/press-releases/saturated-f...
- christophilus 4y ago
  My guess is that there are genetic differences, and possibly environmental triggers that change how humans process foods. So, there’s probably no universal rule. Inuits almost certainly need the fats due to their environment. Sub Saharan Africans probably don’t.
  - Jorengarenar 4y ago
    I don't know how true it is, but I remember learning back in elementary school there were cases of Europeans dying from food poisoning after eating some Inuit dishes without proper "training".
    - Rury 4y ago
      Doesn't seem that farfetched. I mean there are well known genetic conditions which cause you to become mentally retarded, if not death, if you eat certain foods (eg PKU). Then there's protective genetic conditions like gilbert's syndrome, mutations which give lactose tolerance for life, hereditary haemochromatosis... It should be obvious by now that subtle genetic differences can hold a huge influence in regards to what a "healthy" diet for someone is. IMO, there isn't enough research being done on such matters.
  - pcurve 4y ago
    High-fat diet made Inuits healthier but shorter thanks to gene mutations, study finds https://www.ox.ac.uk/research/high-fat-diet-made-inuits-healthier-shorter-thanks-gene-mutations-study-finds https://www.ox.ac.uk/research/high-fat-diet-made-inuits-heal... There are other reasons, but Inuits also don't live long compare to others. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-inuit/inuit-lifespan-stagnates-while-canadas-rises-idUSN2362426520080123 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-inuit/inuit-lifespan-stag...
- andsoitis 4y ago
  > high percentages of saturated fat yet have extremely low rates of heart disease, cancer, stroke, and diabetes. They also move around much more, don't eat tons of refined carbs and sugars, live in more "sociable" societies, etc.
jcdavis 4y ago
I'm sure a "carnivore diet thought leader" is a great source of nuanced, unbiased discussion about saturated fat intake /s
- gadflyinyoureye 4y ago
  We should never listen to the arguments of the person making a positive case /s.
bubsie 4y ago
Hilarious, posting a cherry-picked, biased article of someone who sells a whole supplement line of dried animals organs.
AlbertCory 4y ago
Correlation does not imply causation, as we know. So the fact that fats have been demonized for the last 60 years, while obesity has skyrocketed, doesn't prove anything. It does make you wonder, though.
- someotherperson 4y ago
  Fats in products were gradually replaced with sugars, so it really is cut and dry. It doesn’t imply that fats are healthy but obesity is exclusively carb related in the overwhelming majority.
  - throwaway48952 4y ago
    Wrong. Americans are consuming more fat than ever, with the excess primarily coming from vegetable oils (soybean oil being #1): https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2017/2/2/14485226/americans-avocado-consumption-usda-report https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2017/2/2/14485226/ame... https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/charts/81355/December16_Finding_Rehkamp_fig01.png?v=1162.4 https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/charts/81355/December16_Fin... Many Americans actually get between 10-20% of their daily calories from soybean oil alone.
    - someotherperson 4y ago
      And I get at least 50% of my calories from olive oil, and maybe a further 20% from cheese. Given that people from the US make up a little over 4% of the global population they’re not the measuring stick.
  - AlbertCory 4y ago
    > Fats in products were gradually replaced with sugars Let's experiment with that statement. Perhaps what I'm hypothesizing here is new, perhaps it isn't. Don't take this as a position to argue with. I really don't have a dog in this fight. Suppose that people have always been after a certain feeling of fullness, and this feeling is largely a product of evolution. It's also very emotion-driven, not purely physical. When humans feel full, they stop eating. Of course it doesn't work perfectly, since we've always had fat people. It does happen to work for me and my extended family, since none of us have ever been obese. Suppose that animal fats, being highly calorie-dense, give a feeling both of being full and being emotionally satisfying. Every chef will tell you that people love fat. Now, if the food industry and nutrition scientists removed a lot of the animal fats, then both people's physical and emotional needs increased, and many searched for sugars and carbs to compensate. They are a poor substitute, though. If this were true, then humans are getting more calories than they were when animal fats were a bigger part of the diet. It's not that animal fats are good for you as much as "if you don't consume them, you'll consume other things that are even worse." Of course this is not a single factor to explain it all. A more sedentary lifestyle is also a big, big part of it.
tpush 4y ago
Can we please not post carnivore grifter garbage, thanks.
- throwaway48952 4y ago
  I don't like it being flagged, even though I don't agree, since too many HNers believe this nonsense. Ignore the evidence about the dangers of saturated fat (including plant saturated fat) at your peril.
throwaway48952 4y ago
Polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fats are fine, but saturated fat (plant or animal), besides increasing your risk of CVD, also decreases insulin sensitivity, something people who flock to faddish fat-heavy diets like keto should be concerned about: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5291812/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5291812/ BTW, your body can make all of the saturated fat it needs from the essential unsaturated (o3/o6) fats you consume. It's strange how people say things like "there's no such thing as an essential dietary carbohydrate," but don't acknowledge the same about saturated fat. Also wild game meat isn't nearly as fatty as domesticated meat, and the fat is much less saturated: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4975792/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4975792/
- jodrellblank 4y ago
  > "saturated fat (plant or animal), besides increasing your risk of CVD," From an earlier comment of mine referencing a video[1] several meta-analyses over several years and the most expensive study ever done on reducing dietary fat all find no evidence that saturated fat is harmful. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34016868 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34016868
  - throwaway48952 4y ago
    > several meta-analyses over several Meanwhile, the evidence causally linking elevated LDL cholesterol across a person's lifetime with the development of CVD is overwhelming, and every intervention that successfully lowers LDL has shown a reduction in CVD morbidity and mortality: by inhibiting synthesis (statins), accelerating clearance (PCSK9 inhibitors; go look at the FOURIER and ODYSSEY trials), or preventing re-absorption (Ezetimibe). Lower LDL just seems to be better. And btw, hunter-gathers have much lower LDL than westerners do--the Hadza for example have LDL in the 70-80 mg/dl even into old age (probably because they're more active, leaner, and don't eat much saturated fat). Saturated fat downregulates LDL receptors (and in some people, profoundly so), meaning delayed clearance of LDL, and an elevated risk of CVD. Some people aren't as susceptible to this, while others are so-called "hyper-responders." Likewise, some people are "hyper-absorpers" of cholesterol (about 1/5), meaning dietary cholesterol has a major effect on their blood lipids, while it only has a modest effect in most others.
gardenfelder 4y ago
My favorite game is to google the titles of some of his references, often to find out they were retracted and should have been noted. I chose his #10 and found a rebuttal to key points [1]. I'd suggest going to a plant-based website, one for which advertising does not sell pills or foods, but, instead, supports the non-profit foundation and put "animal" in the search bar [2] or study this clustered search at PubMed [3] [1] https://www.alineanutrition.com/2020/07/28/how-state-of-the-art-is-the-jacc-review/ https://www.alineanutrition.com/2020/07/28/how-state-of-the-... [2] https://nutritionfacts.org/?s=animal%20fat https://nutritionfacts.org/?s=animal%20fat [3] https://search.carrot2.org/#/search/pubmed/animal%20fat/treemap https://search.carrot2.org/#/search/pubmed/animal%20fat/tree...
gardenfelder 4y ago
Same author did this: Forks Over Knives Documentary: Debunked with Real Science [1] [1] https://www.doctorkiltz.com/forks-over-knives-debunked/ https://www.doctorkiltz.com/forks-over-knives-debunked/ Actually, just put this in google: Liam McAuliffe site:doctorkiltz.com

31 points by prmph 4y ago

[dead]

In a hunter-gatherer context, fat is surplus. And it virtually only comes from animals. Also true in the animal kingdom. Having fat means you're doing better than just surviving. If you drop someone into the woods and check on them later and they've amassed a bunch of fat (killed a moose, bear, etc). then they're clearly very competent. I guess what I'm saying is it's not surprising that our bodies like it.

bannedbybros 4y ago
[dead]
throwaway48952 4y ago
Wild game meat isn't nearly as fatty as domesticated meat, and the fat is much less saturated: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4975792/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4975792/

cpncrunch 4y ago

The article seems to just concentrate on debunking a single study about margarine which used cherrypicked data, but doesn't really discuss any of the other science into diet and health, so I'm wondering if this article itself is also cherrypicking the data.

pcurve 4y ago

This chart looked pretty striking. "Tokelau, Masai, and Inuit populations who consume “extremely” high percentages of saturated fat yet have extremely low rates of heart disease, cancer, stroke, and diabetes." So much conflicting studies on this, I'm at a loss to what to believe, including this study that points otherwise: https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/press-releases/saturated-fats-increased-heart-disease-risk/ https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/press-releases/saturated-f...

christophilus 4y ago
My guess is that there are genetic differences, and possibly environmental triggers that change how humans process foods. So, there’s probably no universal rule. Inuits almost certainly need the fats due to their environment. Sub Saharan Africans probably don’t.
- Jorengarenar 4y ago
  I don't know how true it is, but I remember learning back in elementary school there were cases of Europeans dying from food poisoning after eating some Inuit dishes without proper "training".
  - Rury 4y ago
    Doesn't seem that farfetched. I mean there are well known genetic conditions which cause you to become mentally retarded, if not death, if you eat certain foods (eg PKU). Then there's protective genetic conditions like gilbert's syndrome, mutations which give lactose tolerance for life, hereditary haemochromatosis... It should be obvious by now that subtle genetic differences can hold a huge influence in regards to what a "healthy" diet for someone is. IMO, there isn't enough research being done on such matters.
- pcurve 4y ago
  High-fat diet made Inuits healthier but shorter thanks to gene mutations, study finds https://www.ox.ac.uk/research/high-fat-diet-made-inuits-healthier-shorter-thanks-gene-mutations-study-finds https://www.ox.ac.uk/research/high-fat-diet-made-inuits-heal... There are other reasons, but Inuits also don't live long compare to others. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-inuit/inuit-lifespan-stagnates-while-canadas-rises-idUSN2362426520080123 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-inuit/inuit-lifespan-stag...
andsoitis 4y ago
> high percentages of saturated fat yet have extremely low rates of heart disease, cancer, stroke, and diabetes. They also move around much more, don't eat tons of refined carbs and sugars, live in more "sociable" societies, etc.

jcdavis 4y ago

I'm sure a "carnivore diet thought leader" is a great source of nuanced, unbiased discussion about saturated fat intake /s

gadflyinyoureye 4y ago
We should never listen to the arguments of the person making a positive case /s.

bubsie 4y ago

Hilarious, posting a cherry-picked, biased article of someone who sells a whole supplement line of dried animals organs.

AlbertCory 4y ago

Correlation does not imply causation, as we know. So the fact that fats have been demonized for the last 60 years, while obesity has skyrocketed, doesn't prove anything. It does make you wonder, though.

someotherperson 4y ago
Fats in products were gradually replaced with sugars, so it really is cut and dry. It doesn’t imply that fats are healthy but obesity is exclusively carb related in the overwhelming majority.
- throwaway48952 4y ago
  Wrong. Americans are consuming more fat than ever, with the excess primarily coming from vegetable oils (soybean oil being #1): https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2017/2/2/14485226/americans-avocado-consumption-usda-report https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2017/2/2/14485226/ame... https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/charts/81355/December16_Finding_Rehkamp_fig01.png?v=1162.4 https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/charts/81355/December16_Fin... Many Americans actually get between 10-20% of their daily calories from soybean oil alone.
  - someotherperson 4y ago
    And I get at least 50% of my calories from olive oil, and maybe a further 20% from cheese. Given that people from the US make up a little over 4% of the global population they’re not the measuring stick.
- AlbertCory 4y ago
  > Fats in products were gradually replaced with sugars Let's experiment with that statement. Perhaps what I'm hypothesizing here is new, perhaps it isn't. Don't take this as a position to argue with. I really don't have a dog in this fight. Suppose that people have always been after a certain feeling of fullness, and this feeling is largely a product of evolution. It's also very emotion-driven, not purely physical. When humans feel full, they stop eating. Of course it doesn't work perfectly, since we've always had fat people. It does happen to work for me and my extended family, since none of us have ever been obese. Suppose that animal fats, being highly calorie-dense, give a feeling both of being full and being emotionally satisfying. Every chef will tell you that people love fat. Now, if the food industry and nutrition scientists removed a lot of the animal fats, then both people's physical and emotional needs increased, and many searched for sugars and carbs to compensate. They are a poor substitute, though. If this were true, then humans are getting more calories than they were when animal fats were a bigger part of the diet. It's not that animal fats are good for you as much as "if you don't consume them, you'll consume other things that are even worse." Of course this is not a single factor to explain it all. A more sedentary lifestyle is also a big, big part of it.

tpush 4y ago

Can we please not post carnivore grifter garbage, thanks.

throwaway48952 4y ago
I don't like it being flagged, even though I don't agree, since too many HNers believe this nonsense. Ignore the evidence about the dangers of saturated fat (including plant saturated fat) at your peril.

throwaway48952 4y ago

Polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fats are fine, but saturated fat (plant or animal), besides increasing your risk of CVD, also decreases insulin sensitivity, something people who flock to faddish fat-heavy diets like keto should be concerned about: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5291812/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5291812/ BTW, your body can make all of the saturated fat it needs from the essential unsaturated (o3/o6) fats you consume. It's strange how people say things like "there's no such thing as an essential dietary carbohydrate," but don't acknowledge the same about saturated fat. Also wild game meat isn't nearly as fatty as domesticated meat, and the fat is much less saturated: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4975792/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4975792/

jodrellblank 4y ago
> "saturated fat (plant or animal), besides increasing your risk of CVD," From an earlier comment of mine referencing a video[1] several meta-analyses over several years and the most expensive study ever done on reducing dietary fat all find no evidence that saturated fat is harmful. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34016868 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34016868
- throwaway48952 4y ago
  > several meta-analyses over several Meanwhile, the evidence causally linking elevated LDL cholesterol across a person's lifetime with the development of CVD is overwhelming, and every intervention that successfully lowers LDL has shown a reduction in CVD morbidity and mortality: by inhibiting synthesis (statins), accelerating clearance (PCSK9 inhibitors; go look at the FOURIER and ODYSSEY trials), or preventing re-absorption (Ezetimibe). Lower LDL just seems to be better. And btw, hunter-gathers have much lower LDL than westerners do--the Hadza for example have LDL in the 70-80 mg/dl even into old age (probably because they're more active, leaner, and don't eat much saturated fat). Saturated fat downregulates LDL receptors (and in some people, profoundly so), meaning delayed clearance of LDL, and an elevated risk of CVD. Some people aren't as susceptible to this, while others are so-called "hyper-responders." Likewise, some people are "hyper-absorpers" of cholesterol (about 1/5), meaning dietary cholesterol has a major effect on their blood lipids, while it only has a modest effect in most others.

gardenfelder 4y ago

My favorite game is to google the titles of some of his references, often to find out they were retracted and should have been noted. I chose his #10 and found a rebuttal to key points [1]. I'd suggest going to a plant-based website, one for which advertising does not sell pills or foods, but, instead, supports the non-profit foundation and put "animal" in the search bar [2] or study this clustered search at PubMed [3] [1] https://www.alineanutrition.com/2020/07/28/how-state-of-the-art-is-the-jacc-review/ https://www.alineanutrition.com/2020/07/28/how-state-of-the-... [2] https://nutritionfacts.org/?s=animal%20fat https://nutritionfacts.org/?s=animal%20fat [3] https://search.carrot2.org/#/search/pubmed/animal%20fat/treemap https://search.carrot2.org/#/search/pubmed/animal%20fat/tree...

gardenfelder 4y ago

Same author did this: Forks Over Knives Documentary: Debunked with Real Science [1] [1] https://www.doctorkiltz.com/forks-over-knives-debunked/ https://www.doctorkiltz.com/forks-over-knives-debunked/ Actually, just put this in google: Liam McAuliffe site:doctorkiltz.com