Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Low-Carb Studies & Research / Media Watch > LC Research/Media
User Name
Password
FAQ Members Calendar Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   ^
Old Mon, Dec-12-22, 00:30
Demi's Avatar
Demi Demi is offline
Posts: 26,764
 
Plan: Muscle Centric
Stats: 238/153/160 Female 5'10"
BF:
Progress: 109%
Location: UK
Default A short history of saturated fat: the making and unmaking of a scientific consensus

Quote:
A short history of saturated fat: the making and unmaking of a scientific consensus

Nina Teicholz



ABSTRACT

Purpose of review


This article recounts the history of the diet-heart hypothesis from the late 1950s up to the current day, with revelations that have never before been published in the scientific literature. These novel insights include the role of authorities in launching the diet-hypothesis, including a potential conflict of interest for the American Heart Association; a number of crucial details regarding studies considered influential to the hypothesis; irregularities in the scientific reviews on saturated fats, for both the 2015 and 2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans; and possible conflicts of interest on the relevant subcommittee reviewing saturated fats for the 2020 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee. Information obtained via the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) on emails from the 2015 process is published here for the first time. These findings are highly relevant to the 2025–2030 Dietary Guidelines process, now underway, which has plans for a new review on saturated fats.

Recent findings

Recent findings include shortcomings in the scientific review processes on saturated fats, for both the current 2020–2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans and the previous edition (2015–2020). Revelations include the fact that the publication of a book in the lay press triggered a new review of saturated fats for the 2015 Dietary Guidelines and that the Chair of the 2015 Advisory Committee acknowledged, in an e-mail, the lack of scientific justification for any specific numeric cap on these fats. Other, previously unpublished findings include significant potential financial conflicts on the relevant 2020 guidelines subcommittee, including the participation of plant-based advocates, an expert who promotes a plant-based diet for religious reasons, experts who had received extensive funding from industries, such as tree nuts and soy, whose products benefit from continued policy recommendations favoring polyunsaturated fats, and one expert who had spent more than 50 years of her career dedicated to ‘proving’ the diet-heart hypothesis.

Summary

The idea that saturated fats cause heart disease, called the diet-heart hypothesis, was introduced in the 1950s, based on weak, associational evidence. Subsequent clinical trials attempting to substantiate this hypothesis could never establish a causal link. However, these clinical-trial data were largely ignored for decades, until journalists brought them to light about a decade ago. Subsequent reexaminations of this evidence by nutrition experts have now been published in >20 review papers, which have largely concluded that saturated fats have no effect on cardiovascular disease, cardiovascular mortality or total mortality. The current challenge is for this new consensus on saturated fats to be recognized by policy makers, who, in the United States, have shown marked resistance to the introduction of the new evidence. In the case of the 2020 Dietary Guidelines, experts have been found even to deny their own evidence. The global re-evaluation of saturated fats that has occurred over the past decade implies that caps on these fats are not warranted and should no longer be part of national dietary guidelines. Conflicts of interest and longstanding biases stand in the way of updating dietary policy to reflect the current evidence.

KEY POINTS
  • The large clinical trials on saturated fats do not provide support for the idea that these fats cause heart disease.
  • The most rigorous evidence on saturated fats, showing they did not cause heart disease, was long suppressed or ignored.
  • The current 10% cap on saturated fats, as advised by the U.S. Dietary Guidelines for Americans, is not supported by the preponderance of evidence.

Read in full here:
https://journals.lww.com/co-endocri...ing_and.42.aspx
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Mon, Dec-12-22, 08:41
Dodger's Avatar
Dodger Dodger is offline
Posts: 8,765
 
Plan: Paleoish/Keto
Stats: 225/167/175 Male 71.5 inches
BF:18%
Progress: 116%
Location: Longmont, Colorado
Default

As long as the 'experts' chosen for the Dietary Guidelines generation aren't willing to consider major revisions, then nothing will change.
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Mon, Dec-12-22, 16:10
GRB5111's Avatar
GRB5111 GRB5111 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 4,044
 
Plan: Very LC, Higher Protein
Stats: 227/186/185 Male 6' 0"
BF:
Progress: 98%
Location: Herndon, VA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodger
As long as the 'experts' chosen for the Dietary Guidelines generation aren't willing to consider major revisions, then nothing will change.

True, true. And what makes anyone think the next version will be different? Changes, even when supported by research, are hard (impossible) to make considering the current revision process and those involved. It's better to label the DGAs as having zero credibility and move forward. Just another scam to set policy and award subsidies with a significant detrimental impact to the population. Nina is doing good work to expose this silly exercise for what it is.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 22:43.


Copyright © 2000-2024 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.