Coconut oil isn't healthy and it's never been healthy • Hacker News Board

Re: Coconut oil isn't healthy and it's never been healthy

#71

Post by maxharris » Sat, Jun 17, 2017, 1:09 AM UTC

If this article is correct, please explain why my blood pressure and cholesterol figures go through the roof when my diet includes fructose.

Please also explain how and why everything goes back to normal when I cut fructose out entirely. I am an quite serious - I do not allow even trace amounts in sauces and mayo and the like, nor in hidden sources such as "agave nectar" (which is 50-90% fructose).

Oh and BTW, I eat TONS of pasta, saturated fat (including butter), plants, and a really nice steak every month. I pour heavy whipping cream into my coffee every morning (not the usual trash, but the fancy expensive stuff free of polysorbate 80 and carrageenan.)

Unless you're eating a fresh strawberry that hasn't been mutilated in a blender (and even then, not too many all at once), fructose makes you fat because it messes with your appetite regulation in the bad direction. Even a little fructose makes you hungry.

Dietary fat (saturated or otherwise) does the exact opposite: all other things being equal, it makes you feel sated.

Don't just take my experience over the last ten years into account - here's a leading endocrinologist that's overturning decades of dogma. He'll set you right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM

Re: Coconut oil isn't healthy and it's never been healthy

#72

Post by rollingpebbles » Sat, Jun 17, 2017, 1:56 AM UTC

I'm vegan. "Plant-based" is not a panacea and not automatically healthy. This article is one-dimensional when there are multiple health considerations including both cholesterol effects, cancerous compounds in cooking vapors and cancerous compounds like aldehydes generated depending on the amount and time of heating.

In general, olive oil is the healthiest oil to use for frying, both in terms of cholesterol effects and aldehydes. Furthermore, oil consumption can be greatly reduced by good cooking and minimal frying techniques.

The graph in this news report probably started the coconut oil cargo cult, which overlooked its inherent unhealthiness:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/11981884/Cooking...

Re: Coconut oil isn't healthy and it's never been healthy

#73

Post by maxharris » Sat, Jun 17, 2017, 4:31 AM UTC

undersuit wrote: post #62

bokglobule wrote: post #37

It's precisely the fact that Coconut oil is 100% plant-based, saturated fat that it IS healthy. The notion that saturated fat causes heart disease has been thoroughly debunked as sham science. It's the inflammation in the arteries stimulated by excess sugar consumption (refined carbs, table sugar, soda, etc) that causes the problem. The body sends cholesterol to the scene to patch the damage. Reference: http://www.ny…

>Finally, I can show you cultures, such as the Inuit, who's diet is almost exclusively saturated fat and protein and which are healthy (as long as they stick to their native diet). I challenge anyone to show me a culture who's diet is primarily sugar-based which has comparable health. Eating fresh raw meat you actually do consume copious sugars in the form of the raw glycogen stores of the now dead animal. >For insta…

Glycogen isn't made out of fructose. Fructose is the molecule that disregates appetite and is now considered by many to be at the root of the obesity epidemic.

Re: Coconut oil isn't healthy and it's never been healthy

#74

Post by mf2hd » Sat, Jun 17, 2017, 6:57 AM UTC

dogma1138 wrote: post #70

mf2hd wrote: post #69

Bullshit, the problem is not fat, it's the carbs. Watch this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vr-c8GeT34 David Diamond, Ph.D., of the University of South Florida College of Arts and Sciences shares his personal story about his battle with obesity. Diamond shows how he lost weight and reduced his triglycerides by eating red meat, eggs and butter. This one is not heart problem related, but still interesting: htt…

And what was his caloric intake? Virtually every eat only X diet is based on the fact that the portions combined with the limitation on ingredients limit the caloric intake by as much as half. These diets work pretty well on overweight people since their BMR tends to be quite high due to their body mass. I would really like to see the person that eats 3-4 500g rib eyes with a sunny side up on the side topped with hal…

I don't think he was fat. Anyway, obviously it doesn't mean that you can eat as much as you want, it's never healthy.

I can only speak for myself, my calorie intake is restricted by about 20%. Most of it has to come from fat, not protein and your biggest problem is how can you eat that much fat. So lean meat is fine, but bacon, pork, steak is better :) And whole eggs, butter, cheese, avocados, carb free peanut butter, mayo. I measure everything, and it's still a lot of food. Since your blood sugar is basically constant during the day you don't feel hunger.

Yeah, you need fiber, but not a ton, just a teaspoon of psyllium husk powder daily, I mix it with my protein shake. Works.

Go to reddit /r/keto, there is a faq there.

Re: Coconut oil isn't healthy and it's never been healthy

#75

Post by astrodust » Sat, Jun 17, 2017, 9:26 AM UTC

pm90 wrote: post #42

astrodust wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you're talking about India, 34 million people is a rounding error. It's also a country with unusually high population diversity which means that genetically speaking you could be talking about a group of people that are naturally immune to the effects of whatever they're consuming. You'd have to take a broader sample to find out.

> When you're talking about India, 34 million people is a rounding error. I don't understand your point. Sure its a rounding error when compared to the rest of India. But for the purposes of observing the effects of a certain foodstuff, that is certainly a large enough sample size of humans. > It's also a country with unusually high population diversity which means that genetically speaking you could be talking about…

What I mean is you may need to have a broader group in order to draw actual conclusions.

Medical research has been heavily damaged by not including enough diversity in the sample groups. One region of India is not necessarily proof of anything other than that particular group of people does not suffer any ill-effects.

For example, millions of Europeans have been consuming dairy products for generations and suffer no ill-effects but this is only because they have a mutation that allows them to process lactose in adulthood.

Re: Coconut oil isn't healthy and it's never been healthy

#76

Post by knowThySelfx » Mon, Jun 19, 2017, 6:52 AM UTC

bokglobule wrote: post #37

It's precisely the fact that Coconut oil is 100% plant-based, saturated fat that it IS healthy. The notion that saturated fat causes heart disease has been thoroughly debunked as sham science. It's the inflammation in the arteries stimulated by excess sugar consumption (refined carbs, table sugar, soda, etc) that causes the problem. The body sends cholesterol to the scene to patch the damage. Reference: http://www.ny…

We've been happily using coconut oil for centuries. Its the staple. Let those who disagree use their "refined" canola oil ;). Check out which oils are good for high heat cooking.

Re: Coconut oil isn't healthy and it's never been healthy

#77

Post by knowThySelfx » Mon, Jun 19, 2017, 7:02 AM UTC

astrodust wrote: post #75

pm90 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When you're talking about India, 34 million people is a rounding error. I don't understand your point. Sure its a rounding error when compared to the rest of India. But for the purposes of observing the effects of a certain foodstuff, that is certainly a large enough sample size of humans. > It's also a country with unusually high population diversity which means that genetically speaking you could be talking about…

What I mean is you may need to have a broader group in order to draw actual conclusions. Medical research has been heavily damaged by not including enough diversity in the sample groups. One region of India is not necessarily proof of anything other than that particular group of people does not suffer any ill-effects. For example, millions of Europeans have been consuming dairy products for generations and suffer no…

Yup. I wonder which one gives a better result: AHA taking a 10 person sample or millions of people over generations?

Sedentary life style has more to contribute than oils I think. Our lifestyle has changed dramatically over 50 years.

About 30 years ago people of Kerala almost exclusively used coconut oil. Then came advertisements and "studies" claiming coconut oil is bad and promoted other oils like sunflower etc. Since then heart disease has increased. This is general observation.