This is funny. Says he likes science, but only refers to the "authorities" while ignoring science. OK
If anyone actually wants my stance on the issue it is this:
~ Saturated fatty acids have been show to have very little effect if a small net positive on CVD risk.
~ PUFAs have been show to have a good net positive effect on CVD risk.
I do not refer to the wiki link because it presents misleading information. In comparison of SFA and PUFAs you'll see that PUFAs have a neutral to slightly positive effect compared to SFAs on decreasing CVD risk.
This does not support the conclusion that SFAs cause CVD as these people who are ignoring the science are claiming. It only shows that PUFAs are a bit better than SFAs at preventing heart disease, which I agree with given the literature and my statements above. SFAs in the diet are for the most part neutral, and are actually needed for steroid hormone reproduction as well as energy during exercise.
It is clear in the study I presented and those in the OP that SFAs do not cause heart disease.
Bad fat is bad. Bad fat is trans fat. Refined carbohydrates are also terrible, as are a specific type of PUFAs specifically pro-inflammatory linoleic acid (Omega 6s) which are prevalent in modern diets because of mass industrial seed oil processing such as safflower and other seed oils:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23386268
-------------------
In any case, given the other people who decry meat and "Paleo"
I wonder what people would say the Paleo studies done so far. This could be funny also.
-------------------
http://www.nature.com/ejcn/journal/v63/n8/abs/ejcn20094a.html
Metabolic and physiologic improvements from consuming a paleolithic, hunter-gatherer type diet
Results: Compared with the baseline (usual) diet, we observed (a) significant reductions in BP associated with improved arterial distensibility (−3.1±2.9, P=0.01 and +0.19±0.23, P=0.05);(b) significant reduction in plasma insulin vs time AUC, during the OGTT (P=0.006); and (c) large significant reductions in total cholesterol, low-density lipoproteins (LDL) and triglycerides (−0.8±0.6 (P=0.007), −0.7±0.5 (P=0.003) and −0.3±0.3 (P=0.01) mmol/l respectively). In all these measured variables, either eight or all nine participants had identical directional responses when switched to paleolithic type diet, that is, near consistently improved status of circulatory, carbohydrate and lipid metabolism/physiology.
Conclusions: Even short-term consumption of a paleolithic type diet improves BP and glucose tolerance, decreases insulin secretion, increases insulin sensitivity and improves lipid profiles without weight loss in healthy sedentary humans.
Improves all blood markers including BP and lipid profiles.
-------------------
http://www.cardiab.com/content/8/1/35
Beneficial effects of a Paleolithic diet on cardiovascular risk factors in type 2 diabetes: a randomized cross-over pilot study
Results: Study participants had on average a diabetes duration of 9 years, a mean HbA1c of 6,6% units by Mono-S standard and were usually treated with metformin alone (3 subjects) or metformin in combination with a sulfonylurea (3 subjects) or a thiazolidinedione (3 subjects). Mean average dose of metformin was 1031 mg per day. Compared to the diabetes diet, the Paleolithic diet resulted in lower mean values of HbA1c (-0.4% units, p = 0.01), triacylglycerol (-0.4 mmol/L, p = 0.003), diastolic blood pressure (-4 mmHg, p = 0.03), weight (-3 kg, p = 0.01), BMI (-1 kg/m2, p = 0.04) and waist circumference (-4 cm, p = 0.02), and higher mean values of high density lipoprotein cholesterol (+0.08 mmol/L, p = 0.03). The Paleolithic diet was mainly lower in cereals and dairy products, and higher in fruits, vegetables, meat and eggs, as compared with the Diabetes diet. Further, the Paleolithic diet was lower in total energy, energy density, carbohydrate, dietary glycemic load, saturated fatty acids and calcium, and higher in unsaturated fatty acids, dietary cholesterol and several vitamins. Dietary GI was slightly lower in the Paleolithic diet (GI = 50) than in the Diabetic diet (GI = 55).
Conclusion: Over a 3-month study period, a Paleolithic diet improved glycemic control and several cardiovascular risk factors compared to a Diabetes diet in patients with type 2 diabetes.
Yes, the Paleo diet is BETTER than the diabetes diet at improving blood markers in diabetics. LOL
-------------------
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17583796
A Palaeolithic diet improves glucose tolerance more than a Mediterranean-like diet in individuals with ischaemic heart disease.
RESULTS: Over 12 weeks, there was a 26% decrease of AUC Glucose(0-120) (p = 0.0001) in the Palaeolithic group and a 7% decrease (p = 0.08) in the Consensus group. The larger (p = 0.001) improvement in the Palaeolithic group was independent (p = 0.0008) of change in waist circumference (-5.6 cm in the Palaeolithic group, -2.9 cm in the Consensus group; p = 0.03). In the study population as a whole, there was no relationship between change in AUC Glucose(0-120) and changes in weight (r = -0.06, p = 0.9) or waist circumference (r = 0.01, p = 1.0). There was a tendency for a larger decrease of AUC Insulin(0-120) in the Palaeolithic group, but because of the strong association between change in AUC Insulin(0-120) and change in waist circumference (r = 0.64, p = 0.0003), this did not remain after multivariate analysis.
CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION:
A Palaeolithic diet may improve glucose tolerance independently of decreased waist circumference.
Paleo outperforms the "heart healthy" Mediterrean diet.
----------------------
http://www.nature.com/ejcn/journal/v62/n5/abs/1602790a.html
Effects of a short-term intervention with a paleolithic diet in healthy volunteers
Results: Mean weight decreased by 2.3 kg (P<0.001), body mass index by 0.8 (P<0.001), waist circumference by 0.5 cm (P=0.001), systolic blood pressure by 3 mm Hg (P=0.03) and plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 by 72% (P=0.020). Regarding nutrient intake, intake of energy decreased by 36%, and other effects were also observed, both favourable (fat composition, antioxidants, potassium-sodium rate) and unfavourable (calcium).
Conclusion: This short-term intervention showed some favourable effects by the diet, but further studies, including control group, are needed.
Good results + recommendation for more studies. I hope so.
---------------------
http://www.jbc.org/content/87/3/651.full.pdf
XLV. PROLONGED MEAT DIETS WITH A STUDY OF KIDNEY
FUNCTION AND KETOSIS.*
Two normal men volunteered to live solely on meat for one
year, which gave us an unusual opportunity of studying the
effects of this diet. The term “meat,” as used by us, included
both the lean and the fat portions of animals. The subjects
derived most of their calories from fat and the diet was quite
different from what one, who uses the term “meat” as including
chiefly lean muscle, would expect.
Conclusion and Summary
1. Two men lived on an exclusive meat diet for 1 year and a
third man for 10 days. The relative amounts of lean and fat,
meat ingested were left to the instinctive choice of the individuals.
2. The protein content varied from 100 to 140 gm., the fat from
by guest on June 26, 2013
http://www.jbc.org/ Downloaded from
W. S. McClellan and E. F. Du Bois 667
200 to 300 gm., the carbohydrate, derived entirely from the meat,
from 7 to 12 gm., and the fuel value from 2000 to 3100 calories.
3. At the end of the year, the subjects were mentally alert,
physically active, and showed no specific physical changes in any
system of the body.
4. During the 1st week, all three men lost weight, due to a
shift in the water content of the body while adjusting itself to the
low carbohydrate diet. Thereafter, their weights remained
practically constant.
5. In the prolonged test, the blood pressure of one man re-
mained constant; the systolic pressure of the other decreased 20
mm. and the diastolic pressure remained uniform.
6. The control of the bowels was not disturbed while the sub-
jects were on prescribed meat diet. In one instance, when the
proportion of protein calories in the diet exceeded 40 per cent,
a diarrhea developed.
7. Vitamin deficiencies did not appear.
8. The total acidity of the urine during the meat diet was in-
creased to 2 or 3 times that of the acidity on mixed diets and ace-
tonuria was present throughout the periods of exclusive meat.
9. Urine examinations, determinations of the nitrogenous
constituents of the blood, and kidney function tests revealed no
evidence of kidney damage.
10. While on the meat diet, the men metabolized foodstuffs with
FA: G ratios between 1.9 and 3.0 and excreted from 0.4 to 7.2 gm.
of acetone bodies per day.
11. In these trained subjects, the clinical observations and
laboratory studies gave no evidence that any ill effects had
occurred from the prolonged use of the exclusive meat diet.
No adverse effects from eating only meat and animal fat for a year.
EPT
I want the optimal diet.
