/ck/ - Food & Cooking

>>20376383
>American Heart Associattion was paid off!
And every other major health institution in the world? They all say the same thing
>recent research reveals that the studies promoting these messages were heavily compromised
Ironically this kind of counter-research is often funded by the dairy or beef industry, and the paper linked in that article is written by a woman who sells diet books

>>16292973
>scientifically:
>healthiest is butter.

>>15384003
>He's literally presenting a lecture to physicians
To who, where? He's trying to give a from-the-ground-up understanding of nutrition that experts in the field reject and that the average practicing doctor has no education in either. It's your typical "trust me, I'm a doctor" youtube quackery with a link to buy his books in the description

>>9424399

Saturated fat is perfectly healthy! It's the sugar that you have to watch out for, that's the stuff that kills you!

t. meat industry

>>8796545
Eating a lot of fat causes heart disease. Keto diet causes heart disease and diabetes.

>>8155467
>mainstream health organizations and doctors are wrong and lying to you just like vaccines and fluoride
>edgy reddit teenagers and fad diet blogs are the real redpills and have the truth

>>7865148
You write your will yet?

Momscience is best science.

By the way, if you follow nutrition science at all, you've heard those names many times before, Dariush Mozaffarian and David Ludwig. They're both consistent pro-fat anti-carb shills whose entire careers revolve around trying to prove that animal fat is good for you and that everybody is wrong except for them.

If you follow nutrition science, you also know that PLOS One is a consistently pro-fat journal that requires you to pay over a thousand dollars to have a study published, and that allows you to select the people who are going to "peer-review" your study, while banning people you don't want to do that.

For details and another case from 2014, see https://carbsanity.blogspot.com/2014/11/that-new-volek-phinney-study-part-i.html

>>7707251
Enjoy your heart attack fatty

>>7677675
Shut up clown. Denying the saturated fat link is on one level with denying anthropogenic global warming.
It's just another one of those thing where people disagree with the majority opinion for one of two reasons only: To feel smarter than the majority of the world, or to horde shekels.

>>7673993
>studies more recent than 1980 have shown that animal fats from butter are healtier than vegetable fats, essentially disproving any correlation. The same is true for saturated fat.
There it is again

>>7635870
B-but muh cherry-picked studies

>>7614986
The myth is that the link between saturated fat and heart disease is a myth.

(And I never said that "dietary fats" cause heart disease - some fats even have a protective effect, especially DHA consumed in fish)

>>7557041
>The ideas that eating fat/saturated fat makes you obese or contributes to heart disease comes from 3 people back in the 50s, and have been largely unchallenged
Saturated fat causing heart disease, diabetes, metabolic syndrome and hypercholesterolemia is actually scientific consensus backed by thousands of papers from all over the world spanning many decades. Dietary cholesterol increasing blood cholesterol is also scientific consensus because the best evidence shows that to be the case, whereas the worst evidence does not. Sugar being bad for health is scientific consensus for decades and constantly repeated in the media. So this "conspiracy" doesn't even exist outside of the mind of this tool of an author.

Also Gary Taubes and Peter Lustig are/were morons and that article is written by a fucking clown who clearly knows nothing about the scientific process. Yeah, I always get my science news from marketing consultants who write pop science garbage for soccer moms, why the fuck not.

>>7484422
It's only what all the science and all the scientific bodies say and what all the evidence points to. "Saturated fat and cholesterol are not detrimental to health" is itself the biggest meme of the past couple years. I hope people realize that the only reason this meme exists is because it's excellent clickbait for shitty blogs fishing for fatass Americans who want to feel good about continuing their diet of garbage piled upon trash

>>6033479

Leave it to journalism to mislead people. The top link talks about this famous study

http://annals.org/article.aspx?articleid=1846638

Which was so badly designed that Walter Willett from Harvard felt the need to write an article about how misleading the conclusions are. The theme of the study is basically "if you replace saturated fat with trans fat, it's worse for people, so saturated fat is neutral" which of course is stupid.

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/2014/03/19/dietary-fat-and-heart-disease-study-is-seriously-misleading/

Also pic related, this prominent low-carb blogger recently died of heart disease and wrote an article referencing this paper as a reason why saturated fats are supposedly benign. If people would actually read the studies instead of just the conclusion text, there wouldn't be so much confusion about diet. Your article also says not too eat too much saturated fat because it can make you obese.

The harvard link I have to disagree on this point that I think is patronizing

>Low-fat diets have long been touted as the key to a healthy weight and to good health. But the evidence just isn’t there: Over the past 30 years in the U.S., the percentage of calories from fat in people’s diets has gone down, but obesity rates have skyrocketed.

If you really need me to go into it, I can show that Americans never followed anything close to a "low-fat diet," and that carbohydrate consumption is the same as it was 100 years ago, but fat consumption has increased about 60%.

And
>Part of the problem with low-fat diets is that they are often high in carbohydrate, especially from rapidly digested sources, such as white bread and white rice.

Which is another way of saying "because we know you're too dumb to eat healthy carb sources like barley, oats, beans, and fruit, just avoid carbs altogether and eat more fat" which may sound authoritative coming from harvard, but the World Health Organization gives the opposite advice

>>5919719
>>5919723

I ignored most of the rest of the thread, but this is some bullshit that needs addressing

>Since the USDA released the low-fat guidelines in 1977, Americans have reduced their heart disease rates, but obesity and diabetes rates have skyrocketed.

This idea that Americans began following a "low fat diet" after the guidelines came out needs to go away. See for yourself from government data

http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/USFoodSupply-1909-2010

Click the first xls. Americans aren't fat because they ate more carbs and less fat, they're fat because the guidelines said "eat less fat and sugar" and Americans instead increased their fat and sugar intake. Americans eat around the same amount of carbs now as they did in 1909, but they now eat 70 grams (630 calories) more fat, mostly from added oils. Don't blame the US guidelines for that when nobody followed the guidelines to begin with.

>Small, dense LDL cholesterol particles do increase heart risk. Large, fluffy LDL particles are NOT associated with elevated heart disease risk and are considered benign

That's blatantly false too. Large LDL may be slightly less atherogenic than small LDL, but calling it "fluffy" doesn't make it benign, as this video explains

http://nutritionfacts.org/video/does-cholesterol-size-matter/

And this article points out

http://www.clinchem.org/content/52/9/1643.long

>Because evidence clearly indicates that all Apo B–containing particles are atherogenic(8), this reasoning is akin to the argument that an Uzi submachine gun is more deadly than an M16 or an AK47.
>Subclass studies have proliferated over the last few years, but many of these studies were funded or subsidized either by suppliers of the assays as a method to expand their use and move them into mainstream practice, or by pharmaceutical companies in an attempt to claim some advantage over other therapeutic agents

It's cool that you found a diet you enjoy, but don't spread dangerous misinformation like that

>>5880193

Oops, got his name wrong. Seth Roberts, it was

>>5871113

>Most people in /ck/ seem to think that keto is just some fad diet with no science backing it up.

That's because it is, and you've simply been marketed to. If you want, I can start dumping dozens of threads from the Paleohacks forum of people posting about their concern over their high cholesterol numbers after adopting a low carb/ketogenic diet

>Why do you think colesterol is so bad? It has long been known that your blood levels are not related to its intake

There's some truth to that. Dietary cholesterol's blood cholesterol effects on serum cholesterol can be influenced hugely by the current serum cholesterol concentration of the person, as in people with lower cholesterol are more affected by it while people with already high cholesterol see less of a change. That's not all dietary cholesterol does though. Here's a paper written by 3 world leaders in cardiovascular research

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2989358/

>your LDL may increase slightly but its particle size increases, which is good as the problem is the low size LDL...

This is a common trick used in the low carb community to make you think your rising cholesterol isn't a problem. Any sized LDL particle is atherogenic.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVqiv_7qJaI

I know the people pushing these diets can sound convincing if you're not familiar with nutrition science to begin with, but there's a reason why the low carb/ketogenic diet is essentially the exact opposite of diet advice that every major health organization in the world gives