3 ms·

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 de

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
  - gruez 3y ago
    "Tip of the iceberg" for what? That saturated fats isn't always bad for you? I think that was adequately proven in the original study. As for whether ingesting oils high in saturated fats is good for you, or whether you should be replacing your other fat consumption with them, those aren't even addressed by the study. If that's really "the tip of the iceberg", that doesn't bode well for the rest of the studies, unless for whatever reason you're withholding the strongest studies.
    - valval 3y ago
      What kind of fats do you think your ancestors have eaten for hundreds of thousands of years?

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
- gruez 3y ago
  "Tip of the iceberg" for what? That saturated fats isn't always bad for you? I think that was adequately proven in the original study. As for whether ingesting oils high in saturated fats is good for you, or whether you should be replacing your other fat consumption with them, those aren't even addressed by the study. If that's really "the tip of the iceberg", that doesn't bode well for the rest of the studies, unless for whatever reason you're withholding the strongest studies.
  - valval 3y ago
    What kind of fats do you think your ancestors have eaten for hundreds of thousands of years?