Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Questionable Link Between Saturated Fat and Heart Disease

on.wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 61 posts

Re: The Questionable Link Between Saturated Fat and Heart Disease

#51

Post by jjoonathan »

anigbrowl wrote: post #48
TheLoneWolfling wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the same problem I have with the extreme push towards global warming mitigation. Half a century ago we were worried sick about global cooling . Sure, we know more now than we did then. But that is not a valid response: in any decade we know more than in decades before that. Most of the measures for global warming mitigation either directly cause massive economic costs (large taxes, etc, etc, which all end up…

This is a canard. There was certainly some thought given to the idea of global cooling but there was never anything even close to the modern consensus about climate change (a term which recognizes the non-uniform effects of warming). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling I get where you're coming from, but I do think you're being a touch disingenuous with questions like 'has anyone crunched the numbers?' Of cou…

Just this week there was an article in Science about plants/soil as a CO2 buffer:

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/344/6183/508.abstract

Re: The Questionable Link Between Saturated Fat and Heart Disease

#52

Post by kareemm »

jacques_chester wrote: post #31
kareemm wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks, hadn't seen this link. I'd like to see the specifics of what the errors are. Agree that observational and self-reporting are inaccurate, though unfortunately they're some of the best data we've got wrt nutrition. Also, looks like there were some random trials in the meta analysis. From your link: "These included trials in which participants were randomly assigned to different diets, as well as observational s…

> Also, looks like there were some random trials in the meta analysis. There were, but the statistical effect is drowned by the much larger pool of observational/self-reporting studies. Observational studies are a useful place to find potential leads, but they are nowhere near as reliable as RCTs for many reasons. Observational studies can tell you that the fall in piracy is causing global warming. Short of a randomi…

I agree with you about observational studies when I wrote in the grandparent:

> Agree that observational and self-reporting are inaccurate, though unfortunately they're some of the best data we've got wrt nutrition.

Re: The Questionable Link Between Saturated Fat and Heart Disease

#53

Post by base698 »

jacques_chester wrote: post #16
base698 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As opposed to selling "Healthy" fat free cookies, breads and meats laced with extra sugar? I think the point of all this new research is that you can't take out fat and expect your diet to be healthy--the real story is much more complex. Most educated people would realize eating lowfat cookies still isn't a good habit to have, but society seems to think it's ok.

You're conflating two things. "Eat less saturated fat" means ... eat less saturated fat. Not: eat more of everything else. And that advice is still sound. Calorie for calorie, gram for gram, saturated fat is worse for heart health than polyunsaturated fat. You're blaming the scientists and doctors for being (somewhat wilfully) misunderstood. You might as well blame physicists for plane crashes. After all, they lied t…

I'm making a practical argument about the effects of "fat is bad" mentality. It is much harder to avoid sugar and nutritionally void processed food at this point in time.

Ultimately people want to be healthy, and using the heuristic to avoid fats isn't the way to make healthy eating decisions by itself.

Re: The Questionable Link Between Saturated Fat and Heart Disease

#54

Post by smtddr »

a8da6b0c91d wrote: post #20
ams6110 wrote: post #6

Wait a minute... I thought the notion that saturated fat caused heart disease was settled science. That we had a consensus. Now we realize we're wrong? That scientists cherry-picked data, had inadequate controls? That "too much institutional energy and research money had already been spent ... A bias in its favor had grown so strong that the idea just started to seem like common sense." The tragedy is that after gene…

> raised on a diet of synthetic fats, sugar The anti-sugar hysteria a la Lustig is the other shoe to drop. The fear mongering is a bunch of baloney when you look into it.

The anti-sugar "hysteria" stems from the fact that everything seems to have some type of sugar added to it.

If you live in USA you probably have too much sugar in your diet if you're not taking any steps to reduce it. When my wife(and her mom) first came to USA from Nigeria, they both complained that everything tasted like sugar. Even dinner-type meals that are suppose to be savory. I also have a relative who doesn't need their medication to control their blood-sugar when they're in Nigeria instead of America.

Also, on my own quest[1] to be healthy and reduce my weight everything ultimately came down to reducing carbs and sugar in my diet. Lost nearly 40 lbs. People always say I look much younger than my age and I have trouble getting into Nightclubs sometimes since I don't look like my driver-license picture anymore.

1. http://smtddr.hatenablog.com/entry/2011/06/19/Wii_Fit_Plus%3...

Re: The Questionable Link Between Saturated Fat and Heart Disease

#55

Post by tim333 »

anigbrowl wrote: post #39
gojomo wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every day I find more evidence that the internet mainly serves to confirm for people what they already believe. Just like I always suspected.

Ha :) Seriously, this is a worry. When I was younger I thought the Internet would make the scientific method go mainstream, with Usenet and later the web functioning as a sort of intellectual meritocracy. Note to idealists: expect less and you won't be disappointed.

I'm an optimist and think it works a bit. Amongst all the rubbish there's some well thought out stuff out there on the interwebs and those that are interested may be able to find it. The people who like reading nonsense for entertainment don't matter that much. Except they vote. So maybe they do. Anyway...

Re: The Questionable Link Between Saturated Fat and Heart Disease

#57

Post by tim333 »

jacques_chester wrote: post #7

The most recent research still upholds that saturated fats, over and above their contribution to obesity, are a worse risk than polyunsaturated fats. A meta-analysis of 8 randomised controlled trials with 13 thousand subjects showed that a 5% total energy substitution from saturated to polyunsaturated fats reduced risk of coronary heart disease by 10%.[1] The point about substituting hydrogenated fats is good; but it…

The trouble with those sorts of studies is that they don't prove much - only that there's a weak correlation between thing A and thing B which is a good starting point for research but poor evidence for drawing conclusions from in itself. To follow up a scientist might say - ok lets look as people who eat basically nothing but saturated fat and people who eat basically none and see if one group drops dead quicker. This has been done, for example traditional eskimos live basically on saturated fat from the seal like stuff they eat and their health is fine. On the other hand some stuff like man made trans fats do kill you in a measurable manner - use them as your main diet and you'll drop some years earlier which is why they are being banned - eventually after many years of such evidence. The human body is pretty adaptable and can live OK on most foods that we have evolved with so switching from nuts to meat will probably not have a dramatic effect on life span as the body can deal ok with both on the whole.

Re: The Questionable Link Between Saturated Fat and Heart Disease

#58

Post by tim333 »

bikamonki wrote: post #34

Have we become stupid to the point that we need the Internet to tell us what to eat? What were we eating for millenia before we invented nutrition experts? Is this article of relevance/interest to HN?

Corporate advertising and marketing to a large extent. As an example a traditional breakfast might have been porridge or some bread or eggs. The the like of Kellogg's came along and I grew up with "Frosties - they are great" on TV all the time. Large heaps of carbs with sugar all over them are not healthy. The UK government wanted to ban advertising junk to kids but Kellogg's who spend ~us$100 million a year on ads here freaked out and hired lobbyists and the government backed down. So we need the internet to counter this. I don't know if this article is of relevance to HN. I find it quite interesting.

Re: The Questionable Link Between Saturated Fat and Heart Disease

#59

Post by ericxb »

Related:

Study Questions Fat Heart Disease Link http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/03/17/study-questions-fat...

A Lifelong Fight Against Trans Fats http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/17/health/a-lifelong-fight-ag...

The Oiling of America https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvKdYUCUca8

Re: The Questionable Link Between Saturated Fat and Heart Disease

#60

Post by jacques_chester »

newaccountfool wrote: post #38
jacques_chester wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're conflating two things. "Eat less saturated fat" means ... eat less saturated fat. Not: eat more of everything else. And that advice is still sound. Calorie for calorie, gram for gram, saturated fat is worse for heart health than polyunsaturated fat. You're blaming the scientists and doctors for being (somewhat wilfully) misunderstood. You might as well blame physicists for plane crashes. After all, they lied t…

"In contrast to current recommendations, this systematic review found no evidence that saturated fat increases the risk of coronary disease, or that polyunsaturated fats have a cardioprotective effect." http://www.nhs.uk/news/2014/03March/Pages/Saturated-fats-and...

As I noted below, that study was not focused on randomised controlled trials and has been criticised by sloppy work on the part of the authors.
Post reply on HN