Medical Forum / General / Nutrition / June 2006
Sat fat proven dangerous (explain this)
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Davide - 18 Jun 2006 04:29 GMT I just found this and I'd like to know what people who believe saturated fats are healthy and necessary for health think of this study. I too believed that it wasn't proven that sat fat caused cardiocircolatory disease, there was just a correlation but a correlation can be interpreted in many different ways. But this study seems to prove once and for all that does exist a mechanism which makes saturated fat unhealthy
Scientists have identified a molecular mechanism in the liver that explains how consuming foods rich in saturated fats and trans-fatty acids can send blood levels of cholesterol and triglycerides soaring.
US researchers report that the harmful effects of saturated and trans fats are set in motion by a biochemical switch, or co-activator, in liver cells called PGC-1beta.
Their findings shed light on the ongoing dilemma in scientific circles as to how saturated and trans fats cause an increase in blood cholesterol and triglycerides, while diets high in unsaturated and polyunsaturated fats do not.
"What we have found is a missing link, a mechanism by which saturated fats and trans fats can do their dirty work," said Bruce Spiegelman, involved in the research at the US Dana-Farber institute.
Their findings could open up opportunities for food scientists currently working on technologies to slice out harmful trans fats from their food formulations.
Trans fatty acids (TFAs) are formed when liquid vegetable oils go through a chemical process called hydrogenation. Hydrogenated vegetable fat is used by food processors because it is solid at room temperature and has a longer shelf life.
But mounting evidence suggests the TFAs raise LDL (bad) cholesterol levels, causing the arteries to become more rigid and clogged. An increase in LDL cholesterol levels can lead to heart disease.
Demand for trans fat free food products is pushing new product developments, particularly in the US where incoming rules mean that by 1 January 2006 all trans fats in food products will have to be labelled on the nutritional panel.
Europe has yet to introduce a similar rule, but consumer organisations are pressing for such transparency and food makers are feeling market pressure to slice TFAs from their products.
In 2003 Denmark became the first country in the world to introduce restrictions on the use of industrially produced trans fatty acids. Oils and fat are now forbidden on the Danish market if they contain trans fatty acids exceeding 2 per cent.
Reporting their findings in Cell, the researchers report that when activated by harmful fats, PGC-1beta alters liver metabolism through a cascade of biochemical signals.
The result is an upsurge in the liver's production of very low-density lipoprotein (VLDL) cholesterol, the precursor of low-density lipoprotein (LDL), or 'bad' cholesterol and triglycerides - another fatty substance - that are secreted into the bloodstream.
PGC-1beta belongs to a specific family of co-activators, proteins that interact with other proteins to turn genes on and off and adjust their activity, like a dimmer switch that varies the brightness of a light, say the scientists.
Co-activators join with other regulatory proteins called transcription factors in controlling the expression of genes.
The Dana-Farber researchers made the discovery in searching for the function of PGC-1beta co-activator that was isolated in 2002.
Experiments including the measurement of gene activity by microarrays showed that saturated and trans fats caused greater activity of the gene that makes PGC-1beta co-activator than did unsaturated fats.
The research also showed that when the fats triggered PGC-1beta, the co-activator interacted physically and turned up the function of sterol responsive element binding proteins.
These important parts of the mechanism activate many key genes of lipid biosynthesis involving the pathways of cholesterol and triglycerides; these genes directed the liver to manufacture more cholesterol, which it does in the form of very low-density lipoproteins.
The investigators noted that in mice fed high-fat diets, the PCG-1beta mechanism actually decreased cholesterol in the liver while increasing it in the bloodstream.
Full findings are published in the 28 January issue of Cell.
Joining other ingredients firms reaching out to target trans fat free formulations, US firm Cargill and Germany's Bayer CropScience announced a link up this week to bring a new speciality oil to market. The oil will not require hydrogenation, stated the two firms, that have combined their technologies on seed development to create the product.
Last year US firms Dow AgroSciences, Bunge and DuPont all launched their various brands of zero or low trans fat oils, joining ADM's NovoLipid. -----
Thanks Davide
monty1945@lycos.com - 18 Jun 2006 07:09 GMT It is healthy to have cholesterol levels higher than what the "experts" are recommending these days. Even Ancel Keys noted that 200-220 was the best range for longevity. As long as the cholesterol is not oxidized or does not get oxidized, which happens when your diet is high in polyunsaturated fatty acids. Same thing with TGs - if they are mostly saturated, you will not have a problem with them. Often, lard is used in experiments in which it is claimed that "saturated fat is bad," but lard is now about 39% saturated and has no antioxidants, and is usually cooked while exposed to air, making lard a very unhealthy food, while coconut oil is 92% saturated and very healthy. How is it that those people on high coconut oil diets have such low rates of "chronic disease?" Well, these "researchers" don't even address that fact, do they? Instead, they assume that the textbooks statements about "cholesterol" are accurate, even though it is now known that oxidized cholesterol is the only thing you need to worry about in this context.
For more information that will help you preserve your health, go to:
http://groups.msn.com/TheScientificDebateForum-
If you want to ask me questions, cite a study and ask for clarification, etc., you can do it from the message board that is on that site.
monty1945@lycos.com - 18 Jun 2006 07:39 GMT Also, it's worth mentioning that "saturated fat" can never have a precise scientific definition in the context of actual human diets, and so it is ridiculous to talk in these terms. One can, however, feed a bunch or dogs, rats, etc., one kind of fat at 30% calories (such as a sunflower and fish oil combination) and another group the same diet except substituting fresh coconut oil for the sunflower and fish oil, and see which group lives longer. You can do that yourself with inexpensive mice, actually. I had a huge bag of shredded coconut in my basement a couple of winters ago, and mice got into the basement and started eating it, avoiding the other food I had down there that was packaged the same way - let nature be your guide.
:-) GMCarter - 18 Jun 2006 11:39 GMT >Also, it's worth mentioning that "saturated fat" can never have a >precise scientific definition in the context of actual human diets, and >so it is ridiculous to talk in these terms. Utter bullshit.
Mr. Natural-Health - 18 Jun 2006 11:52 GMT > >Also, it's worth mentioning that "saturated fat" can never have a > >precise scientific definition in the context of actual human diets, and > >so it is ridiculous to talk in these terms. > > Utter bullshit. Ditto!
monty1945@lycos.com - 18 Jun 2006 16:54 GMT Yes, I agree with my learned "colleagues," using obscentities will always win the day on a scientific newsgroup. Of course, when someone makes a claim that something has never been done in a way that meets the standards of the scientific method (or in this case, has never been defined in a precise way), it is very important to never, ever, cite any evidence. The obscentities work just fine.
:-) Mr. Natural-Health - 18 Jun 2006 23:39 GMT > Yes, I agree with my learned "colleagues," using obscentities will > always win the day on a scientific newsgroup. Of course, when someone > makes a claim that something has never been done in a way that meets > the standards of the scientific method (or in this case, has never been > defined in a precise way), it is very important to never, ever, cite > any evidence. The obscentities work just fine. What is truly obscene, is a buffoon like you yakking away on smn despite the fact that time and time again, Monty has been proved to be both a fool and dangerous.
Who says so? I do. Who else would, if not me?
msamson11975@yahoo.ca - 19 Jun 2006 00:40 GMT > Yes, I agree with my learned "colleagues," using obscentities will > always win the day on a scientific newsgroup. Of course, when someone [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > :-) Monty, I read over your msn discussion site. Intriguing. I have a question for you -- you claim that all polyunsaturates are harmful, especially the lack of need for fish oil (and you're probably right), BUT what about eating whole fish? I mean, the salmon fillets that I eat have several grams of omega 3. Is this bad?
Also, I can't find on your site where exactly your "diet" recommendations are...can you please point me to it?
Thanks!
monty1945@lycos.com - 19 Jun 2006 19:57 GMT You can find that page at: http://groups.msn.com/TheScientificDebateForum-/thebestpracticaldietandtheexplan ationforit.msnw
Also, at the main page, you should see a link that says "the best practical diet," so you could also just click on that. And in the future, the only way to be sure to get a response from me is to post there, because I don't keep up to date on all these threads.
To answer some questions:
There is a huge difference between how you prepare fish. Frying is really unhealthy, boil or making it in a sauce on low heat is much better. You are better off eating fish that is very low in fat, so look for things like flounder. If it smells at all bad, don't eat it. You can also eat it with antioxidant-rich foods to further protect yourself. On a side note, you might want to get a copy of Bruce Fife's book, Saturated fat may save your life. There are some problems with it, but overall it is very comprehensive and explains things in a way that is easy to understand for those who don't have command of the technical language.
The body will make its own polyunsaturated fatty acid, the very stable Mead acid, if you eat very small amounts of polyunsaturated fatty acids, so the claims that you need to eat them is just silly. As I quoted on my web site, the notion of "essential fatty acids" was DIRECTLY refuted as far back as 1948. I and several others I know have been avoiding them for several years now. However, a pregnant woman might need small amounts, which would explain the odd cravings they sometimes have, but there is no way to know at this point. I speak for human adults who are not pregnant and in good health only, though I will look into things and share my thoughts if you wish.
If you want to read about another ridiculous claim, that of a structural lipid bilayer membrane, read some of Gilbert's Ling's books. You can also go to his site, which I think is www.gilbertling.org
msamson11975@yahoo.ca - 20 Jun 2006 23:51 GMT > You can find that page at: > http://groups.msn.com/TheScientificDebateForum-/thebestpracticaldietandtheexplan ationforit.msnw [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > there, because I don't keep up to date on all these threads. > books. Thanks for answering, and see you in your forum.
Ron Peterson - 19 Jun 2006 05:18 GMT > Their findings shed light on the ongoing dilemma in scientific circles > as to > how saturated and trans fats cause an increase in blood cholesterol and > triglycerides, while diets high in unsaturated and polyunsaturated fats > do not. It's a little more complex than that. The fatty acids need to be balanced primarily so that the cell walls will have the right type of phospholipids. Phospholipids have two fatty acids, usually one saturated and one unsaturated. It is best if the unsaturated fatty acid is EPA or DHA.
 Signature Ron
|
|
|