It's Question Time Again ... Saturated Fats
I have a few questions, but will stick to two. Feel free to chime in with anything even remotely related!
Also, let me preface this by stating that I haven't had the time to deeply digest the various studies that have come down the pike lately exonerating saturated fats. Any summaries or links to summaries would be greatly appreciated in this regard. That said ...
1. Has there ever been an RCT -- or even an uncontrolled trial -- where saturated fat intake was increased on an absolute level (preferably on a weight stable diet) and improvements were seen in cardiometabolic risk factors (or other health measures)?
2. It is my understanding that mostly the effect (or lack thereof) of saturated fats have been assessed mostly in that 30-to-40% total fat range of the typical Western diet which usually puts sat fat in the 10-15% range. Would you say this is correct? If not, are there studies comparing a true low saturated fat diet to a high saturated fat diet? I'll take any context here though weight maintaining would be preferred for obvious reasons. Oh ... and coconut oil as major source of sat fat doesn't count since over half the fat is MCT. So basically I'm asking about if there are any 5% vs. 15% studies to be found.
Thanks!!
Comments
saturated fats have been assessed mostly in that 30-to-40% total fat
range of the typical Western diet which usually puts sat fat in the
10-15% range. Would you say this is correct?"
I actually looked at this a while ago, but only for trials evaluating hard endpoints. Based on 13 trials, total fat intake is roughly 25-40% and saturated fat intake roughly 8-12% in the experimental groups.
"So basically I'm asking about if there are any 5% vs. 15% studies to be found."
I'm not aware of any trials evaluating hard endpoints where the experimental group achieved intake lower than 7%. The one that came closest was one involving coconut oil, but does not count according to your criteria.
After 5 years, coronary events was 33 % lower in the intervention group, and deaths from CHD was 26 lower.
In the later Oslo Primary Prevention Trial by Hjermann et al., (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6118715 & http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3511692) the SFA intake was drastically reduced, 8,2 % in the intervention group vs. 18,3 % in the control group.
There were 47 % less non-fatal or fatal MI's in the intervention group. Quitting smoking was also part of the intervention, but very few actually quit, so the results have been attributed to the reduced cholesterol levels.
http://carbsanity.blogspot.com/2014/05/yet-another-lc-vs-low-fat-dietary-rct.html
It is indeed a significant difference, and unlike most trials, the LKD folks did actually increase sat fat by almost 3 grams per day. I'm interested in a reverse of the LA Vet study which would be to actually consume more -- as in a lot more -- saturated fat than at baseline.
Unfortunately the dietary reporting in this study was -- per usual -- not to be believed, especially for the MCCR group (where there was no monitoring for compliance)
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-0sH9D5doEis/U1w1_b6lMyI/AAAAAAAAGH4/cj8ylTSTEgQ/s1600/Phinney+LCK+diet+study+diets.jpg
I think it would be really interesting to see a study where normal weight people switch to a weight maintaining real foods diets where one is deliberately high in saturated fat and the other very low. I'd also like to see the very low diet NOT be vegan so you have animal protein from seafood, poultry and low fat dairy. Unfortunately this study probably can't be done.
Comparison of Weight Loss Among Named Diet Programs in Overweight and Obese Adults
A Meta-analysis
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Significant weight loss was observed with any low-carbohydrate or low-fat diet. Weight loss differences between individual named diets were small. This supports the practice of recommending any diet that a patient will adhere to in order to lose weight.
I'm pretty torqued at listening to RDs and MDs who are translating sat fat may not be harmful into this idea that it is then beneficial. So there's this move to eat more sat fat which is not the same thing as eating less of whatever they consider to be bad fats. The anecdotal evidence from places like Paleo Hacks is that eating very high fat and very high saturated fats sends some people's lipids soaring.
(#2)
I'm not familiar with the history of WAPF or when this happened, but this guy apparently died in his 40's of a stroke.
http://m.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2011/10/exposed-the-reason-saturated-fats-are-so-damaging-to-health/247027/#
Is there an obituary in the "papers"??
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s001250051620
Compares 17% of calories from Saturated Fat (SAFA diet) to 8% of calories from Saturated Fat (MUFA diet). Other than MUFA, all other macros are the same (calories, fat, protein, carb, PUFA). The participants were also given either a fish oil supplement, or a placebo supplement.
According to the study, insulin sensitivity decreased 10% on the SAFA diet. Total cholesterol and LDL increased on SAFA, decreased on MUFA (LDL was about 9% higher on SAFA than MUFA). There was a significant reduction in ApoB on MUFA. Lp(a) was unchanged on SAFA, but increased 12% on MUFA.
I think there are still a lot of such unknowns in nutitional science - given the huge biochemical complexity we deal with - and dazzled by the impressive amount of things we do know (or assume to know) we are all too prone to unduly overemphasize theoretic assumptions ever empirical reaearch and thereby tap in to the reductionist fallacy. What I would like to see is a human study comparing, for example, lard, butter, red and refined palm oil. Or canola oil with a mixture of olive and flax seed oil giving the same fatty acid profile. I doubt whether we will ever see such studies, though....
The meaning of this is that you actually get rid of fat by eating Coconut Fat (including coconut milk, coconut cream and coconut oil).
These 3 researches from big medicinal magazines are sure to turn the traditional nutrition world upside down!
Post a Comment
Comment Moderation is ON ... I will NOT be routinely reviewing or publishing comments at this time..