\n<\/a>
\nTrans fats (which are created when vegetable oils are chemically altered to solidify them), on the other hand, should be avoided based on recent research. You\u2019re far better off eating butter than margarine, which is loaded with trans fats. But what about butter\u2019s high cholesterol content? As it turns out, consuming cholesterol does not appreciably increase one\u2019s blood cholesterol; blood cholesterol is manufactured by the body, not taken in through food consumption.<\/p>\n
Another important thing to note in the few \u201cobservational studies\u201d typically cited to show eating animal fats (or animal products in general) to be unhealthy are usually conducted by (or sponsored by) people or groups who have an ideological commitment to vegetarianism for other reasons, giving reason to suspect the motives behind these less-than-scientific observational studies. Aside from trans fats, which fat sources should be avoided, based on the best research? Vegetable oils rich in Omega-6 fatty acids should generally be avoided; these oils include regular vegetable oil, corn oil, safflower oil, soybean oil, and cottonseed oil. Ironically, these are the oils often marketed as \u201chealthy\u201d alternatives.<\/p>\n
Of course, any talk about the value of fat must be taken within the context of people\u2019s general caloric needs. It\u2019s easier to ingest excessive calories when eating fat, because fat packs more calories into a given volume of food (9 kcal per gram of fat, compared to 4 kcal per gram of carbohydrate or protein).<\/p>\n
Still, studies show that it\u2019s actually easier to ingest excessive calories when eating carbohydrates (despite their being less-calorie-dense) because of the body\u2019s hormonal responses to each. So it\u2019s true that excessive calories are \u201ceasier\u201d with fat consumption, but they\u2019re also \u201cless likely.\u201d It\u2019s a dietary paradox, but one that makes sense given basic endocrinology.
\nBasically, this happens because simple (processed) carbs are quickly digested and absorbed into the bloodstream (especially if eaten without much protein or fat) and thus more quickly stored as fat if your body doesn\u2019t immediately need to use that excess blood sugar. Excess blood sugar causes insulin to rise, which causes that excess blood sugar to be stored as fat. And since the digestive system has made quick work of those calories, you feel hungry again quickly, and may just eat more as a result.<\/p>\n
Also, moderation in type of fats is still important, as the body uses different fatty acids for different nutritional tasks, and there are some fatty acids termed \u201cessential\u201d (EFA\u2019s) because our body cannot produce them.<\/p>\n
The Links:<\/b><\/p>\n
New York Times Magazine: \u201cWhat If It\u2019s All Been a Big Fat Lie?<\/a>\u201c WebMD: \u201cThe Truth About Fats<\/a>\u201c Brad Pilon \u201cIs it time to give up on Low-fat foods?<\/a>\u201c Tim Ferriss: \u201c7 Reasons to Eat More Saturated Fat<\/a>\u201c Men\u2019s Health: \u201cWhat if bad fat isn\u2019t so bad? No one\u2019s ever proved that saturated fat clogs arteries, causes heart disease<\/a>\u201c (New York Times) \u201cGood News on Saturated Fat<\/a>\u201c (Michael Eades) \u201cAnother China Study<\/a>\u201c Studies related to dietary fat:<\/b><\/p>\n Dietary predictors of 5-year changes in waist circumference<\/a>\u00a0(J Am Diet Assoc.<\/a><\/span>\u00a02009 Aug;109(8):1356-66.) Obesity, insulin resistance, and cancer prognosis: implications for practice for providing care among cancer survivors<\/a>\u00a0(J Am Diet Assoc.<\/a><\/span>\u00a02009 Aug;109(8):1346-53.)
\nThis lengthy article looks at the recent work showing weight\/fat gain to be closely tied to endocrine responses to sugars, etc., than fat consumption, which seems to help keep people slimmer. It also explores the origins of the \u201cfat is bad for you\u201d myth, tracing things back to a single poorly-constructed observational study by Ancel Keys in the 1950s. It also addresses the impact of all the low-fat diets encouraged from 80s on, suggesting that this dietary experiment may have had a large impact on current obesity problems. It\u2019s a great primer for understanding how popular dietary ideas got so twisted for so long, with a good amount of attention paid to the politics behind the scenes.<\/p>\n
\nA good look at different types of fats, summarizing much of the recent work done in the field. It still takes a bit of a conservative route with respect to saturated fat, observing that it has never been shown to be \u201cbad\u201d (and saying there\u2019s no reason to avoid it) while still encouraging the reader to focus more on the fats that have been\u00a0proven<\/i>\u00a0to have positive impacts by recent research.<\/p>\n
\nA brief but good summary of why the low-fat diet trend was a bad idea.<\/p>\n
\nJust what the title says: why saturated fat is healthy.<\/p>\n
\nThis piece starts with Ancel Keys\u2019 observational study and shows that the studies since then have contradicted his \u201cevidence.\u201d It also looks at the latest data on various saturated fats, showing that at worst they have a net neutral influence on blood cholesterol levels. It also explores the various political forces studies showing saturated fat to be healthy have had to deal with\u2014scientific publication is a notoriously political process.<\/p>\n
\nGary Taubes explains the results of recent studies intending to link saturated fat to higher cholesterol and poor heart health, showing that they show no such link.<\/p>\n
\nThis is a very useful analysis of recent observational data from China that contradicts the famous \u201cChina Study\u201d (a poorly-constructed observational study often cited to show that saturated fat is \u201cbad\u201d). The study looks at the growing obesity epidemic in China, and Eades shows that the researchers massaged the data to fit their preconceived notions, despite the data contradicting what they were trying to prove. This is a great example of how \u201cscience\u201d is not the great objective end to all arguments but is itself controlled by politics and human subjectivity.<\/p>\n
\nThis study by the Danish Cancer Society Institute of Cancer Epidemiology ties diets higher in saturated fat consumption (red meat consumption as well) to lower waist sizes, suggesting such a diet would lower the risk of heart disease.<\/p>\n
\nThis study, from the Department of Nutrition, Food Studies, and Public Health at New York University, \u201clays out a compelling and detailed map showing how obesity\u00a0and insulin resistance interact to promote the growth of cancerous tumors. The authors argue that weight loss (if appropriate) should be a central feature of cancer prevention and treatment. Going a step further, the journal\u2019s editors suggest\u00a0that obesity (and insulin resistance) is the common culprit in all\u00a0of\u00a0the Dreaded Three: cancer, diabetes and heart disease\u201d (summary taken from\u00a0here<\/a>). combined with the Danish study above, it seems that cancer, diabetes, and heart disease risk can all be reduced by a diet higher in saturated fats and red meat.<\/p>\n
![\"Enhanced](\"http:\/\/img.zemanta.com\/zemified_e.png?x-id=b112dc15-bf93-41f2-9882-f497d2ced426\")
<\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"