General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Re: Good Fat?

Started by Email address hidden · · Last activity · 10 posts · 422 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
24 August 2004
Last activity
2 September 2004
Original author
Email address hidden
Posts
10
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
422
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–10 of 10
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. For idiot it is not, as a good survey of current science in language
    easily understood:

    http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/fats.html

    Quoted message said:

    Hi
    - this has probably been covered a thousand times but after looking around
    on the net I can't seem to find 'an idiots guide' to fat. - from what I've
    read and hopefully understood saturated fats are the worst (to be avoided as
    much as possible?) - but some other types are ?essential.
    - long story short i didn't used to care about my diet (god forbid i was
    still a smoker 7ish months ago) but i'm a dad now so it's not just me i'm
    responsible for.................
    -trying to improve my diet but finding it all very confusing - any
    recomended books web sites?

    - thanks for your time and any information, regards

  2. <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:


    For idiot it is not, as a good survey of current science in language
    easily understood:

    http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/fats.html

    Thanks for that, exactly what i was looking for nice simple PLAIN English -
    the book 'Eat, Drink and Be Healthy: The Harvard Medical School Guide to
    Healthy Eating' - is cited a lot - would anyone recomend it as further
    reading?

  3. "njb1978" <[email hidden]> pí¹e v diskusním pøíspìvku
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:


    <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:


    For idiot it is not, as a good survey of current science in language
    easily understood:

    http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/fats.html

    Thanks for that, exactly what i was looking for nice simple PLAIN


    English -

    Just be warned that Harvard's idea of polyunsaturated fat being a good
    fat _might_ not be correct one...

    Mirek

  4. "njb1978" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:


    For idiot it is not, as a good survey of current science in language
    easily understood:

    http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/fats.html

    Thanks for that, exactly what i was looking for nice simple PLAIN English -
    the book 'Eat, Drink and Be Healthy: The Harvard Medical School Guide to
    Healthy Eating' - is cited a lot - would anyone recomend it as further
    reading?

    Yes, it is worth of reading. I gives very sound and solid information
    about healthy nutrition. Every claim made by Willett, the author, is
    backed by nutritional research.

    Jan

  5. "njb1978" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:


    For idiot it is not, as a good survey of current science in language
    easily understood:

    http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/fats.html

    Thanks for that, exactly what i was looking for nice simple PLAIN English -
    the book 'Eat, Drink and Be Healthy: The Harvard Medical School Guide to
    Healthy Eating' - is cited a lot - would anyone recomend it as further
    reading?

    No I would not. Once again I would point out this kind of information
    is loaded with distortions and lies. I strongly recommend you get
    some alternative sources of information before you make up your mind.

    Here is a reveiw on that book

    http://www.westonaprice.org/book_reviews/eatdrinkbehealthy.html

  6. "Mirek Fidler" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    "njb1978" <[email hidden]> pí¹e v diskusním pøíspìvku
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:


    <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:


    For idiot it is not, as a good survey of current science in language
    easily understood:

    http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/fats.html

    Thanks for that, exactly what i was looking for nice simple PLAIN


    English -

    Just be warned that Harvard's idea of polyunsaturated fat being a good
    fat _might_ not be correct one...

    Mirek

    Heh now there is an understatement if I ever heard one. I would use a
    much stronger statement than that considering how absolutely absurd
    the notion that such fats are good for you is. Polyunsaturated fat
    from refined liquid vegetable oils is probably the single most
    destructive factor of the modern diet along with their hydrogenated
    versions. The lies spouted by Harvard are nothing less than CRIMINAL.
    The lies stem from the influence of their corporate pay masters like
    the edible oils industry and their cronies who infiltrate medical and
    government health institutes and regulatory agencies to become top
    policy making officials and have resulted in countless deaths and
    suffering. Anyone who thinks otherwise is just a fool. The facts
    simply do not support the outright lies Harvard spouts. What is even
    worse is that many of these facts are so plain and simple that it is
    almost unbelievable how they get away with such things.

    Do people not understand that these so called healthy polyunsaturated
    vegetable oils DO NOT EXIST IN NATURE in the form and amounts we
    consume them now and did not exist in the human diet at all until very
    recently. To claim they are good for us is INSANE. From less than 1
    pound per person per year in 1900 to over 30 pounds per person per
    year today. Consider also that heart disease, diabetes and most other
    modern degenerative conditions were RARE 100 years ago. The increase
    of these toxic oils is a direct cause of the epidemic levels of
    degenerative health conditions today. Consider also that the so
    called dangerous "artery clogging" saturated animal fats and tropical
    oils(regarding their use in cooking) have gone from over 20 pounds per
    person per year to almost 0 and butter has gone from 18 pounds to 4
    pounds per person per year, replaced by hydrogenated vegetable
    shortenings and margarine. To ignore such definitive facts is beyond
    unacceptable. To condemn animal fats as dangerous and PROMOTE the
    fake man made fats as healthy while knowing these simple undeniable
    facts is either incompetence or deliberate criminality. That is the
    simple truth.

    It is all summed up nicely in this great quote by the world renown Dr.
    Paul Dudley White, a leading authority on heart disease as well as a
    pioneer in the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of diseases of the
    heart and circulatory system. Personal physician to president Dwight
    Eisenhower and founder of the AHA, serving as its president for 2
    years. Not too shabby. Makes that hack Willet look like [censored].

    When confronting proponents of the flawed and dangerous low saturated
    fat low cholesterol "prudent diet" he said:

    "See here, I began my practice as a cardiologist in 1921 and I never
    saw an myocardial infarction patent until 1928. Back in the MI free
    days before 1920, the fats were butter and lard and I think that we
    would all benefit from the kind of diet that we had at a time when no
    one had ever heard the word corn oil."

  7. "Wolfbrother" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Do people not understand that these so called healthy polyunsaturated
    vegetable oils DO NOT EXIST IN NATURE in the form and amounts we
    consume them now and did not exist in the human diet at all until very
    recently.

    It's true that walnuts have never existed, and that the half the
    mediterranea has only used walnut oil (along with olive oil and mutton fat
    and butter) for a mere few millenia. Anyway, it's not like these people eat
    a large quantity of walnuts, they barely ever approach the things. It's also
    true that India has only used home-pressed colza oil (thankfully, American
    companies have explained to their government how unhealthy this was, they
    are now using industrial-grade canola instead) for the past few millenia.
    All that is so very recent...

    Quoted message said:

    To claim they are good for us is INSANE. From less than 1
    pound per person per year in 1900 to over 30 pounds per person per
    year today.

    That's speaking for the USA. The rest of the world has been at much more
    stable numbers for a long while. It's also mostly in the USA that oils mean
    highly processed ones. Just compare the daily trans fat intake in the USA to
    the rest of the western world... You're making generalizations based on your
    own hyper-industrialized food industry. You can't compare hydrogenated
    canola and cold-extracted walnut oil that is kept in the fridge and eaten
    within a couple of months.

    Quoted message said:

    Consider also that heart disease, diabetes and most other
    modern degenerative conditions were RARE 100 years ago.

    Living longer tends to cause this kind of disease. Being the most obese
    nation in the world doesn't help either. Eating tons of highly processed
    food and corn syrup is probably not helping much too. No need to blame that
    on oils.

    Quoted message said:

    Consider also that the so
    called dangerous "artery clogging" saturated animal fats and tropical
    oils(regarding their use in cooking) have gone from over 20 pounds per
    person per year to almost 0 and butter has gone from 18 pounds to 4
    pounds per person per year, replaced by hydrogenated vegetable
    shortenings and margarine.

    Trans fats are still saturated fats, they're certainly not polyunsaturated
    ones... The consumption of saturated fat has not gone to 0 in the USA, it
    has *increased* because everything is loaded with trans fats.
    Natural animal fat is not that saturated, just check the values for farm
    ducks or traditionnal pork that is fed with acorns (like old style Spanish
    black pork) or even the industrial porks that are fed with flax (usually
    they have a balanced 1/3 from SF,MUF and PUF along with high omega-3
    content). The animal fat you have nowadays has nothing to do with the one we
    had a couple of centuries ago or that traditionnal cultures still have.
    Maybe it was healthy back then, but I doubt getting 100% of your fat from
    modern animal fat is healthy.
    Margarine replacing butter is also a very American phenomenon. Same for
    using shortenings instead of plain old peanut oil to fry things.
    It's not a problem with the fats, it's a problem with how you use them.
    Butter is for spreading/cooking, olive oil or eventually peanut is for
    cooking/seasonning/frying and walnut/colza is for seasonning (or slow
    cooking in the case of colza). That's how these fats have been used for
    millenia.

  8. Lictor said:
    Quoted message said:

    Consider also that the so
    called dangerous "artery clogging" saturated animal fats and tropical
    oils(regarding their use in cooking) have gone from over 20 pounds per
    person per year to almost 0 and butter has gone from 18 pounds to 4
    pounds per person per year, replaced by hydrogenated vegetable
    shortenings and margarine.

    Trans fats are still saturated fats,

    No they're not. If they're trans they have a double bond. If they have a
    double bond they're unsaturated.

    Quoted message said:

    they're certainly not polyunsaturated
    ones...

    They probably are. If not they're monounsaturated.

    MattLB

  9. "MattLB" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    No they're not. If they're trans they have a double bond. If they have a
    double bond they're unsaturated.

    Most studies put the health effects of trans fats under "saturated fats",
    even if they are not chemically the same. Most nutritionnal labels also fill
    them under the saturated fats category.
    Saying that people moved from saturated fats to trans fat and claiming that
    this is a proof that pufa are evil is completely distorted.

    Quoted message said:

    They probably are. If not they're monounsaturated.

    They certainly do not behave like these as far as your health is concerned.
    Or are you suggesting that eating olive oil or walnut oil is exactly the
    same as eating hydrogenated colza oil? Do you think they have the same
    action on your cholesterol levels?

  10. "Lictor" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    "MattLB" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    No they're not. If they're trans they have a double bond. If they have a
    double bond they're unsaturated.

    Most studies put the health effects of trans fats under "saturated fats",
    even if they are not chemically the same.

    I find that hard to believe, since manufactured trans fats have no
    positive health effects.

    Quoted message said:

    Most nutritionnal labels also fill
    them under the saturated fats category.

    Maybe so, but nutritional labelling is often used to deceive.

    Quoted message said:

    Saying that people moved from saturated fats to trans fat and claiming that
    this is a proof that pufa are evil is completely distorted.

    Any evil effects of PUFA are shared by the trans versions of them. The
    evil presumably being the free radical chain reactions they propagate.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    They probably are. If not they're monounsaturated.

    They certainly do not behave like these as far as your health is concerned.
    Or are you suggesting that eating olive oil or walnut oil is exactly the
    same as eating hydrogenated colza oil? Do you think they have the same
    action on your cholesterol levels?

    I'm not suggesting any of the above. You're overreacting to a simple
    correction.

    MattLB

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.