Americans Eating More Fat, Risking Health - Experts

By Maggie Fox, Health and Science Correspondent

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...h_heart_diet_dc

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Americans are eating more fat and cholesterol as "low-carb" diets grow in popularity, but people do not seem to be losing weight and they are putting their health at risk, U.S. researchers said on Friday.

If the trend continues toward more fat and fewer vegetables and grains, Americans could suffer more heart disease, already the No. 1 killer in the country, they warned.

"It is pretty clear from marketing data ... that over the past two years there have been specific trends toward more fat intake in the diet. If that is true, that would then suggest that there are tough times ahead with regard to disease risk," said Dr. Randal Thomas of the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota.

Several studies being presented at an American Heart Association (news - web sites) meeting on nutrition and heart disease showed the same thing -- Americans eat too much overall, they eat too much fat, and they do not eat enough fruits, vegetables and high-fiber foods. Reporters were briefed on the San Francisco meeting in a telephone news conference.

Thomas and colleagues at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, found that fat and especially cholesterol intake has gone up over the past five years among 1,200 area residents surveyed for the study.

In 1999, 70 percent of those surveyed were trying to eat less fat in their diets. The share fell to 65 percent in 2003. Daily cholesterol intake rose from 294 milligrams a day in 1999 to 331 in 2003.

Only 29 percent of the residents -- whom Thomas says are representative of the U.S. public -- met government recommendations of getting no more than 30 percent of calories from fat.

"Reasons for this trend are unclear but may include the aggressive marketing of dietary plans that recommend the liberal use of saturated fat and cholesterol in the diet," Thomas said in a report to the meeting.

FAT-RICH DIETS

Such fat-rich plans are led by the Atkins diet, which recommends overloading on protein and fat to cause a metabolic condition called ketosis, in which the body sheds water.

While some of these diets have been shown over the short term to help some people lose weight and to lower cholesterol, the Heart Association says there are no long-term studies and it does not recommend the diets.

On the other hand, greater intake of fat and cholesterol is known to worsen heart disease, Thomas said.

"What this (study) shows is some troubling trends," he told reporters in a telephone briefing.

"I think any diet that recommends increasing the amount of saturated fat poses a risk. There may be good things about the diet ... but any diet that recommends increases in saturated fat could be increasing the risk in the population."

And they may not help people lose weight, suggested a study by Linda van Horn of Northwestern University in Chicago and colleagues.

The study assessed more than 4,000 people in the United States, Britain, Japan and China, asking them to write down everything they had eaten over two 24-hour periods.

"Lo and behold, what we did find is that without exception, a high complex-carbohydrate, high-fiber, high vegetable-protein diet was associated with low body-mass index (the standard measure of healthy weight)," Van Horn said.

The more animal protein a person ate, the higher his or her weight, she said.

Dr. Robert Eckel of the University of Colorado, the Heart Association's spokesman on nutrition, said people should aim to eat plenty of fruits, vegetables and high-fiber grain foods, reduce fat consumption, and exercise.

"There are no good foods and bad foods. It is the overall diet that we are interested in," he said.

It looks like Ms. Maggie Fox needs to brush up on her research technique.

Well....there's one thing that's almost right:

Several studies being presented at an American Heart Association (news - web sites) meeting on nutrition and heart disease showed the same thing -- Americans eat too much overall, they eat too much fat, and they do not eat enough fruits, vegetables and high-fiber foods. Reporters were briefed on the San Francisco meeting in a telephone news conference.

Now....This is more accurate:

Several studies being presented at an American Heart Association (news - web sites) meeting on nutrition and heart disease showed the same thing -- Americans eat too much overall, they eat too much unnatural fat, and they do not eat enough natural fruits, natural vegetables and natural high-fiber foods. Reporters were briefed on the San Francisco meeting in a telephone news conference.

That's better!

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -" Americans are eating more fat and cholesterol as "low-carb" diets grow in popularity, but people do not seem to be losing weight and they are putting their health at risk, U.S. researchers said on Friday.

If the trend continues toward more fat and fewer vegetables and grains, Americans could suffer more heart disease, already the No. 1 killer in the country, they warned. "

People do not seem to be losing weight? Haven't they seen the studies where people doing low carb loose more weight than people doing low fat? As for eating fewer vegetables and grains, I am personally eating more veggies than I ever have before. Fewer grains, yes. But most grains are mostly starch, with little nutritional value.

They're twisting the numbers...If enough people LC, average Fat intake will go up. In fact, average fat intake was already increasing. Fat intake reached an all time low in the 1980s [< 90g,] and rebounded slightly in the 90s and early 20th century [to around 100g.] For the first half of the century, it was about 139g. But, just because there's enough people to effect the average percentage of fat, does NOT mean there's enough people to effect the Obesity rate.

The number of folks who the daily intake percentages are based on remains realtively steady, so any change in even a small number will effect the percentages of the larger population. OTOH, more and more people become Overweight and Obese every year, so even if hundreds or thousands of LCers lose their excess weight, it won't show up as a decrease in Obesity rates. For that to happen, we'd have to slow or halt the rate of new cases of Obesity.

BTW, its a myth that we are eating more than before. Current Caloric intake is about the same as it was in the 60s/70s, and slightly lower in some cases. The differences are in composition [Fat and Protein intake decreased, and Carbs increased to fill the void] and physical activity [we don't get as much.] A common trick used by LFers is to compare present intakes to those of the 1980s or late 1970s...when Fat and Caloric Intakes were at an all time low. Then, they claim we are getting fatter because we're eating more Calories and Fat. They never mention that our parents ate 38g more Fat and the just as many Calories as we did, but didn't have such high rates of Obesity, Heart Disease, Diabetes, and Cancer. If fat really caused these maldies, the incidence of each should've decreased from the 70s-80s, and increased slightly during the 90s. Instead, we saw a steady increase for the entire period, even when Fat Intake was decreasing, rates of these maladies were INCREASING. The only things that increased during the entire period were consumption of Carbohydrates [especially refined] and Hydrogenated Oils [which replaced Animal Fats.]

Another myth is that we're eating less Fruits and Vegetables. From the 1970s to the 1990s...intake of both Fruits and Veggies increased. Unfortunately, the increase was mostly Juice and Potatoes. But, according to the LFers, those count. Currently, potato consumption is declining...But, as of a few years ago the intakes were still much higher than they were a few decades ago. I haven't found many stats [other than the Potatoes] newer than 1999. So, I can't say how consumption of other Fruits and veggies have changed.

In fact, over the last few decades consumption of Frozen Potatoes doubled, while consumption of fresh potatoes declined slightly. Recently, consumption of both has declined slightly. But, it would take years or even decades of such declines for frozen potato consumption and total potato consumption to return to Pre-70s levels. I can't say whether or not Grain consumption is decreasing. But, Grain is another case of a food that has gotten a free ride for the last 3 decades. In some cases (Corn and Rice) consumption went up 100-200% over the last 3 decades. Short of 90% of the population giving up Grains tomorrow, t would take years of steady declines to undo such an increase.

Wow, that's an interesting chart: look at what happened to sucrose vs corn sweeteners.

"""Such fat-rich plans are led by the Atkins diet, which recommends overloading on protein and fat to cause a metabolic condition called ketosis, in which the body sheds water. """""


That dosent seem accurate. It casues fat loss, not water loss

Quote:

We've lost: 624,890 lbs! Live members counter

That is one heck of a lot of water!

Good point. But, let me put it this way...IF I REALLY WAS retaining 120 pounds of excess water, and this diet helped me get rid of it, then it still helped me. But, as we all know, it was mostly fat. In the beginning, everyone loses several pounds of water. Partly because Glycogen is stored with a massive amount of water. Also, at least for me...going on Atkins meant cutting my Sodium Intake by 59% (from 5,800mg to 2,400mg,) because I could no longer eat as many foods obscenely high in sodium...such as Bread, Potatoes, and Subway (12" Subway Club on Bread WITHOUT Olives = 3,648mg)*.

So, a good percentage of Induction Weight Loss IS water. The rest is usually Starch (Liver Glycogen) and Fat. After induction, most weight lost is Fat, unless you're eating very few Calories [Inadaquete Protein.] Unfortunately, there's a tendency among these folks to extrapolate Induction out to the rest of the diet. So, they test for let's say ONE week and find 50% of weight lost during that first week is water. Then, they announce that 50% of weight loss on Atkins is water. They don't bother to wait several weeks or months to find out what the weight loss is composed of AFTER the first week or two.

*I still eat Subway on occassion now that they have their new LC Wraps, but I never eat more than ONE wrap in a given day, and only the Roast Beef Wraps because of the Sodium Content (729mg WITHOUT Pickles, Olives, or Parmesan Cheese. A Club Wrap has 1,577mg WITHOUT Olives.) Plus, they don't list Nitrites on their ingredients list for Roast Beef, while they do for Ham and Turkey. I notice alot of Deli Roast Beefs don't have Nitrites, though a few do.

Every time I've gone on a diet.....regardless of what kind, I lost lots of water weight the first few days to a week.

This is just another false claim by people who don't know what they're talking about.

"The study assessed more than 4,000 people in the United States, Britain, Japan and China, asking them to write down everything they had eaten over two 24-hour periods.

"Lo and behold, what we did find is that without exception, a high complex-carbohydrate, high-fiber, high vegetable-protein diet was associated with low body-mass index (the standard measure of healthy weight)," Van Horn said.

The more animal protein a person ate, the higher his or her weight, she said. "


I was interested in their comment that increased protein intake also meant increased weight gain. It is unlikely that their study isolated people who cut out starchy carbs with their protein so as to be able to speak of protein as a factor in isolation! What they need is data from people who have followed a low carb higher protein diet for over two years. If the eaters studied ate rice and/or potatoes with their increased protein, then the higher weight is not surprising. Its just a question of you juggle the figures.

Val

Commenters give these folks a lot more credit on this article than I do. I think this whole article is actively distorted/mis-information by the .gov failed LF diet pushers and vegetarianistas.

And, also, let's not forget a couple of things about epidemiology and dietary recalls:

First, the study was based on 2 24-HOUR dietary recalls. How can you determine what someone eats everyday throughout the year, with only 2 days' worth of info?

Second, an ASSOCIATION never, ever, proves CAUSATION. This is the basic rule of epidemiology, yet epidemiologists routinely try to imply causation from associations!