Can
Member
Peat oftentimes spoke positively about saturated fats, yet the mainstream health sphere still promotes the idea that saturated fats, by raising cholesterol, are among the main causes for cardiovascular disease. I don't buy into that idea, and yet this subject matter is over my head. I asked a person under a Youtube video to provide evidence for his assertion that safas cause cvd, and he says that most of the scientific evidence invariably points to that conclusion. He talks about safas raising AboP and that being a major risk factor for cvd - it's basically the same schtick that keeps being regurgitated, but I just don't have the physiological knowledge to respond to it in details.
How can it be that people on opposite sides of the spectrum draw juxtaposed conclusions out of the same scientific data (saturated fats are a good, non-inflammatory source of energy vs saturated fats are damaging and cause sickness), while all the while claiming that the evidence obviously and overwhelmingly supports their own view? As someone who is not (yet) confident in reading and interpreting scientific studies myself, I have to rely on other people interpreting the data for me, and this makes it somewhat confusing and hard to look through at times.
I know this conversation has been happening for some time, but even on this forum there are conflicting stances on this matter (although most are not dogmatically anti-safa per se, some do have negative things to say about them). I'll post the most important bits of his comments, and would kindly ask for your opinions on the matter.
~~~ His comments: ~~~
"Which study doesn't show the same thing?? "Low-density lipoproteins cause atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: pathophysiological, genetic, and therapeutic insights: a consensus statement from the European Atherosclerosis Society Consensus Panel"
It's a statement of experts based on many studies. Read the abstract and you will understand what it means. Probably the most convincing studies that show the cause are the Mendelian randomization studies. Those are people that due to genetic reasons have high LDL (or ApoB) and they have often heart problems much earlier than normal people. So they might have similar heart disease at 20 than a person without that gene defect at 75. [...]
There are different types of saturated fat and the one in chocolate for example doesn't seem to be as bad or at all bad for health(typical chocolate is bad due to the added sugar and extra calories, not because of the type of saturated fat in it). The other types of saturated fat though are not great for health because with the combination of dietary cholesterol they raise the ApoB levels in blood that are at least one of the major factors in heart disease. If one has no cholesterol problems and low ApoB, saturated fat might not be an issue but for someone with high heart disease risk it might be a good idea to try to avoid it. [...]
Besides raising Apob(LDL) in combination with dietary cholesterol there seems to be some evidence that saturated fat could also cause insulin resistance at least in some groups of people and therefore be a risk in diabetes. One study about that for example: "A high-fat, high-saturated fat diet decreases insulin sensitivity without changing intra-abdominal fat in weight-stable overweight and obese adults"."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Alternatively, are there resources and people talking about this in more detail? I know that some people respond to these claims of safas causing cvd by saying that they are basically nonsense and based on outdated models of the physiology of cholesterol, but that is somewhat superficial and I don't know anyone getting into the details of WHY it is nonsense. Is there like a person getting into the details of the argument and debunking it thoroughly, that you can recommend? It would help my understanding of the matter.
How can it be that people on opposite sides of the spectrum draw juxtaposed conclusions out of the same scientific data (saturated fats are a good, non-inflammatory source of energy vs saturated fats are damaging and cause sickness), while all the while claiming that the evidence obviously and overwhelmingly supports their own view? As someone who is not (yet) confident in reading and interpreting scientific studies myself, I have to rely on other people interpreting the data for me, and this makes it somewhat confusing and hard to look through at times.
I know this conversation has been happening for some time, but even on this forum there are conflicting stances on this matter (although most are not dogmatically anti-safa per se, some do have negative things to say about them). I'll post the most important bits of his comments, and would kindly ask for your opinions on the matter.
~~~ His comments: ~~~
"Which study doesn't show the same thing?? "Low-density lipoproteins cause atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: pathophysiological, genetic, and therapeutic insights: a consensus statement from the European Atherosclerosis Society Consensus Panel"
It's a statement of experts based on many studies. Read the abstract and you will understand what it means. Probably the most convincing studies that show the cause are the Mendelian randomization studies. Those are people that due to genetic reasons have high LDL (or ApoB) and they have often heart problems much earlier than normal people. So they might have similar heart disease at 20 than a person without that gene defect at 75. [...]
There are different types of saturated fat and the one in chocolate for example doesn't seem to be as bad or at all bad for health(typical chocolate is bad due to the added sugar and extra calories, not because of the type of saturated fat in it). The other types of saturated fat though are not great for health because with the combination of dietary cholesterol they raise the ApoB levels in blood that are at least one of the major factors in heart disease. If one has no cholesterol problems and low ApoB, saturated fat might not be an issue but for someone with high heart disease risk it might be a good idea to try to avoid it. [...]
Besides raising Apob(LDL) in combination with dietary cholesterol there seems to be some evidence that saturated fat could also cause insulin resistance at least in some groups of people and therefore be a risk in diabetes. One study about that for example: "A high-fat, high-saturated fat diet decreases insulin sensitivity without changing intra-abdominal fat in weight-stable overweight and obese adults"."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Alternatively, are there resources and people talking about this in more detail? I know that some people respond to these claims of safas causing cvd by saying that they are basically nonsense and based on outdated models of the physiology of cholesterol, but that is somewhat superficial and I don't know anyone getting into the details of WHY it is nonsense. Is there like a person getting into the details of the argument and debunking it thoroughly, that you can recommend? It would help my understanding of the matter.
Last edited: