4 ms·

nah, saturated fats are not bad. that is the myth big ag wants you to believe. people will often look at old photos and wax poetic about how youthful and thin

nah, saturated fats are not bad. that is the myth big ag wants you to believe. people will often look at old photos and wax poetic about how youthful and thin everyone was. why? they were eating saturated fats and not seed oils.

gruez 3y ago
Are you confusing "fats" with "saturated fats"? Fats in general might have been vindicated, but the evidence for saturated fats being bad for you is still pretty strong[1]. Feel free to provide any sources to the contrary. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturated_fat#Association_with_diseases https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturated_fat#Association_with...
- whalesalad 3y ago
  Anything that I say will be misconstrued as conspiracy theory. Suffice to say this information is incorrect, and there is a growing snowball of evidence to suggest so. I for one do not trust the American Heart Association - they are a bunch of crooks funded by lobbyists, big agriculture and massive conglomerates. They got their start helping Proctor and Gamble market Crisco (poison in a tub) as being healthier than animal fats. In the 60s they got in bed with the tobacco industry to prove that cigarettes were not bad for you. A lot of the "studies" we have right now which paint saturated fats in a bad light are not true to the mission of science.
  - gruez 3y ago
    >Suffice to say this information is incorrect, and there is a growing snowball of evidence to suggest so. Can you present some examples of this "growing snowball of evidence"? >A lot of the "studies" we have right now which paint saturated fats in a bad light are not true to the mission of science. What makes you think that? Is it just based on funding/affiliations alone? Or do you have specific methodological concerns about the studies that they use, that your studies don't have?
    - hammock 3y ago
      There is an alternative rail of nutritional science, you might call it the alt-right of nutritional science, that is taking a second look at the research (or dearth of such) that was used to develop the current mainstream canon of saturated fats bad, statins good, etc.. and presenting a competing case - and cause(s) of obesity, metabolic syndrome, high cholesterol, CV disease, etc. If you read enough you sort of absorb it, someone else can cite some good reviews I'm sure. I will just drop a few names here if you want to investigate - Rhonda Patrick, Eric Berg, Peter Attia... Edit: here is a published review, just the tip of the iceberg https://www.jacc.org/doi/10.1016/j.jacc.2020.05.077 https://www.jacc.org/doi/10.1016/j.jacc.2020.05.077
      - whalesalad 3y ago
        Add Andrew Huberman to the list!
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - gruez 3y ago
        >Edit: here is a published review, just the tip of the iceberg https://www.jacc.org/doi/10.1016/j.jacc.2020.05.077 https://www.jacc.org/doi/10.1016/j.jacc.2020.05.077 I skimmed the review and the conclusion seems to be "saturated fat from certain sources probably isn't bad for you"[1]. If we take that at face value, and go back to the original question of whether to replace vegetable oil with oils high in saturated fats (eg. palm oil or ghee), I think the answer is still "no". The article talks specifically talks about foods like whole fat dairy (not pure butter), unprocessed red meat (not lard) and dark chocolate (not palm oil). [1] https://www.jacc.org/cms/asset/ee10bd12-77af-4f74-b725-7ba7717c7122/gr2.jpg https://www.jacc.org/cms/asset/ee10bd12-77af-4f74-b725-7ba77...
        hammock 3y ago
        “Just the tip of the iceberg” is the operative term there
  - vhcr 3y ago
    You like your bacon fat, we get it, you're still a quack.
    - whalesalad 3y ago
      https://www.zeroacre.com/blog/are-seed-oils-toxic https://www.zeroacre.com/blog/are-seed-oils-toxic
      - vhcr 3y ago
        https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/366301/9789240061668-eng.pdf https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/366301/9789...
        whalesalad 3y ago
        this is a meta-analysis of carefully selected studies.
        gruez 3y ago
        What makes you think this list of studies is "carefully selected"? What makes your studies not carefully selected? In other words, if anti-saturated fat people levy the same accusation against the pro-saturated fat studies, why should I believe the pro-saturated fat side over the anti-saturated fat side?
        whalesalad 3y ago
        sorry dawg at this point it is exhausting to argue with you. the facts are out there.
    - valval 3y ago
      We don’t - pigs are fed omega 6s and their fat is unfit for humans to eat because of that. Stick to ruminant fats, preferably grass fed and grass finished.

gruez 3y ago

Are you confusing "fats" with "saturated fats"? Fats in general might have been vindicated, but the evidence for saturated fats being bad for you is still pretty strong[1]. Feel free to provide any sources to the contrary. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturated_fat#Association_with_diseases https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturated_fat#Association_with...

whalesalad 3y ago
Anything that I say will be misconstrued as conspiracy theory. Suffice to say this information is incorrect, and there is a growing snowball of evidence to suggest so. I for one do not trust the American Heart Association - they are a bunch of crooks funded by lobbyists, big agriculture and massive conglomerates. They got their start helping Proctor and Gamble market Crisco (poison in a tub) as being healthier than animal fats. In the 60s they got in bed with the tobacco industry to prove that cigarettes were not bad for you. A lot of the "studies" we have right now which paint saturated fats in a bad light are not true to the mission of science.
- gruez 3y ago
  >Suffice to say this information is incorrect, and there is a growing snowball of evidence to suggest so. Can you present some examples of this "growing snowball of evidence"? >A lot of the "studies" we have right now which paint saturated fats in a bad light are not true to the mission of science. What makes you think that? Is it just based on funding/affiliations alone? Or do you have specific methodological concerns about the studies that they use, that your studies don't have?
  - hammock 3y ago
    There is an alternative rail of nutritional science, you might call it the alt-right of nutritional science, that is taking a second look at the research (or dearth of such) that was used to develop the current mainstream canon of saturated fats bad, statins good, etc.. and presenting a competing case - and cause(s) of obesity, metabolic syndrome, high cholesterol, CV disease, etc. If you read enough you sort of absorb it, someone else can cite some good reviews I'm sure. I will just drop a few names here if you want to investigate - Rhonda Patrick, Eric Berg, Peter Attia... Edit: here is a published review, just the tip of the iceberg https://www.jacc.org/doi/10.1016/j.jacc.2020.05.077 https://www.jacc.org/doi/10.1016/j.jacc.2020.05.077
    - whalesalad 3y ago
      Add Andrew Huberman to the list!
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - gruez 3y ago
      >Edit: here is a published review, just the tip of the iceberg https://www.jacc.org/doi/10.1016/j.jacc.2020.05.077 https://www.jacc.org/doi/10.1016/j.jacc.2020.05.077 I skimmed the review and the conclusion seems to be "saturated fat from certain sources probably isn't bad for you"[1]. If we take that at face value, and go back to the original question of whether to replace vegetable oil with oils high in saturated fats (eg. palm oil or ghee), I think the answer is still "no". The article talks specifically talks about foods like whole fat dairy (not pure butter), unprocessed red meat (not lard) and dark chocolate (not palm oil). [1] https://www.jacc.org/cms/asset/ee10bd12-77af-4f74-b725-7ba7717c7122/gr2.jpg https://www.jacc.org/cms/asset/ee10bd12-77af-4f74-b725-7ba77...
      - hammock 3y ago
        “Just the tip of the iceberg” is the operative term there
- vhcr 3y ago
  You like your bacon fat, we get it, you're still a quack.
  - whalesalad 3y ago
    https://www.zeroacre.com/blog/are-seed-oils-toxic https://www.zeroacre.com/blog/are-seed-oils-toxic
    - vhcr 3y ago
      https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/366301/9789240061668-eng.pdf https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/366301/9789...
      - whalesalad 3y ago
        this is a meta-analysis of carefully selected studies.
        gruez 3y ago
        What makes you think this list of studies is "carefully selected"? What makes your studies not carefully selected? In other words, if anti-saturated fat people levy the same accusation against the pro-saturated fat studies, why should I believe the pro-saturated fat side over the anti-saturated fat side?
        whalesalad 3y ago
        sorry dawg at this point it is exhausting to argue with you. the facts are out there.
  - valval 3y ago
    We don’t - pigs are fed omega 6s and their fat is unfit for humans to eat because of that. Stick to ruminant fats, preferably grass fed and grass finished.