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 Wed, Sep-13-06, 10:27
KarenJ's Avatar
KarenJ KarenJ is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,564
 
Plan: tasty animals with butter
Stats: 170/115/110 Female 60"
BF:maintaining
Progress: 92%
Location: Northeastern Illinois
Default Saturated Fat Stops Atherosclerosis

I was reading the brilliant Enig/Fallon letter at the Weston A. Price foundation splash page , and discovered this wonderful 2004 study.

What a gem!

Not sure if I'm reading it correctly, but even the smokers had less progression of CA???
All the women were on pretty low-fat diets. I wonder what the results would have been if the fat intake was higher, and the carb intake lower?

Was this on Regina Wilshire's Great Big List Of Studies?
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Wed, Sep-13-06, 11:35
K Walt K Walt is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 606
 
Plan: PP
Stats: 210/170/170
BF:
Progress: 100%
Location: NJ
Default

Yeah, great stuff. This made the rounds once before.

From Table 1, those with the highest saturated fat intake averaged 10.6% to 16.0% of calories from saturated fat.

Well ABOVE the AHA's 'official' limit of 7% of energy. Ooops.

Also, note that the cholesterol ratios AND the LDL were lowest in the high-satfat group. Wonder how the AHA gets around that?

And HDL was the highest.

Oddly this study was done about two years ago, and was quickly ignored, mainly because it challenged some deeply held beliefs.

But let one cockamamie study about carrot cake and milkshakes proclaim 'Sat fat kills', and it hits every newspaper in the country.
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Wed, Sep-13-06, 13:08
mike_d's Avatar
mike_d mike_d is offline
Grease is the word!
Posts: 8,475
 
Plan: PSMF/IF
Stats: 236/181/180 Male 72 inches
BF:disappearing!
Progress: 98%
Location: Alamo city, Texas
Default

Quote:
Conclusion: In postmenopausal women with relatively low total fat intake, a greater saturated fat intake is associated with less progression of coronary atherosclerosis, whereas carbohydrate intake is associated with a greater progression. Am J Clin Nutr 2004;80:1175–84.
OK, well they are getting close. The problem with statistical history studies and LC is its hard to find enough subjects without doing an emperical study and those are often too small.

The inuit population study already indicates that high fat consumption doesn't cause heart disease. Also the survey taken for this LC forum shows a high % of correlation to that effect. The mainstream is very much opposed to studies that refute their dogma. One of these days the dominos must fall and heads will roll.
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Wed, Sep-13-06, 13:45
ReginaW's Avatar
ReginaW ReginaW is offline
Contrarian
Posts: 2,759
 
Plan: Atkins/Controlled Carb
Stats: 275/190/190 Female 72
BF:Not a clue!
Progress: 100%
Location: Missouri
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KarenJ
I was reading the brilliant Enig/Fallon letter at the Weston A. Price foundation splash page , and discovered this wonderful 2004 study.

What a gem!

Was this on Regina Wilshire's Great Big List Of Studies?


That's on my list of low-fat studies that findings show negative effects of low-fat, low saturated fat, high carbohydrate, protein deficient, blah, blah, blah.....it's great when their own data is useful to prove them wrong!
Reply With Quote
  #5   ^
Old Wed, Sep-13-06, 13:59
LC FP LC FP is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,162
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 228/195/188 Male 72 inches
BF:
Progress: 83%
Location: Erie PA
Default

If you're interested, Dr. Mozaffarian wrote a letter to JAMA about the WHI study about low fat diets. In it he referred to this article. If you check PubMEd this article has been quoted about 3 times (in 2 years), and this was one of them. The other ones were a dismissive editorial and one by Jeff Volek I think.

Quote:
Low-Fat Diet and Cardiovascular Disease
To the Editor: In the report of the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) Dietary Modification Trial by Dr Howard and colleagues,1 reduced consumption of total fat and increased consumption of fruits, vegetables, and grains did not significantly affect the incidence of coronary heart disease or stroke among postmenopausal women during 8.1 years of follow-up. The authors' primary explanation for the negative results was that the magnitude of dietary changes may have been insufficient to significantly alter risk.

A second plausible explanation is that the dietary intervention may have failed to influence risk because it balanced beneficial effects of some dietary changes with harmful effects of other changes. Modest benefits from small increases in fruit and vegetable intake (+1.1 servings/d) and whole grain intake (+0.2 servings/d) and decreases in trans fatty acid intake (–0.6% of energy) may have been counterbalanced by modest harms from small decreases in nut consumption (–0.8 servings/wk) and monounsaturated fat intake (–3.3% of energy) and increases in intake of refined grains (+0.3 servings/d). This counterbalancing of divergent dietary effects could also account for the lack of changes in triglyceride levels, insulin sensitivity, and the ratio of total to high-density lipoprotein cholesterol.

Clinical benefit did not occur, even given slightly greater physical activity in the intervention group (+0.39 metabolic equivalent tasks/wk), suggesting that the net effect of the dietary changes may have been slightly harmful. The dietary intervention was associated with increased rates of cardiovascular events among women with established cardiovascular disease (P=.006 for interaction); while this finding may have been due to chance, it is consistent with observations that lower intake of saturated fat and possibly monounsaturated fat and greater intake of refined grains is associated with greater progression of coronary atherosclerosis among postmenopausal women with established coronary disease.2 Evaluation of changes in risk factors in this subgroup—particularly high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels3—would be informative.

Post hoc analyses of associations of specific dietary changes with incidence of cardiovascular events would be interesting, although they may not be able to disentangle competing effects of the various dietary changes, given the strong propensity toward improved outcomes among more adherent participants in randomized trials.

Financial Disclosures: None reported.

Dariush Mozaffarian, MD, MPH
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 16:37.


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