Ron:

You must be confusing saturated fatty acids with "saturated fat," which
has no precise scientific meaning.  Those on diets very rich in
saturated fatty acids, but low in unsaturated fatty acids have the
least "chronic disease," as the raw demographic demonstrates clearly.
Are you aware of this?  Simply go to the WHO's web site and see for
yourslf.

And are you aware of the following, which any "nutritional expert"
should know:

"Fatty acids at room temperature undergo a chemical change known as
auto-oxidation. The fatty acid breaks down into hydrocarbons, ketones,
aldehydes, and smaller amounts of epoxides and alcohols. Heavy metals
present at low levels in fats and oils promote auto-oxidation."

And:

"Rancidification is the decomposition of fats and other lipids by
hydrolysis and/or oxidation. Hydrolysis will split fatty acid chains
away from the glycerol backbone in glycerides. These free fatty acids
can then undergo further auto-oxidation. Oxidation primarily occurs
with unsaturated fats by a free radical-mediated process. These
chemical processes can generate highly reactive molecules in rancid
foods and oils, which are responsible for producing unpleasant and
obnoxious odors and flavors. These chemical processes may also destroy
nutrients in food. Under some conditions, rancidity, and the
destruction of vitamins, occurs very quickly.

Antioxidants are often added to fat-containing foods in order to retard
the development of rancidity due to oxidation."

Note that the molecular-level evidence points to this as the root cause
of various "chronic diseases," and that a highly saturated fat, such as
fresh coconut oil, causes no problems in this context, while a fat
source like lard (only 39% saturated, not much more saturated than
chicken fat) is for some bizarre reason called a "saturated fat" in
nations like the USA, and does indeed cause problems in this context
(especially after it is cooked at high temperatures while exposed to
air).  I suggest you leave you biases aside, Ron, and do some
open-minded research, so that you do not mislead people into eating
exactly the wrong kinds of food.

You can start by reading the essays at:
http://groups.msn.com/TheScientificDebateForum-

Other things you don't seem to know: LDL is only a concern if it is
oxidized.  You can prevent LDL from becoming oxidized.  Low LDL raises
cancer rates substantially.  Low total cholesterol will raise you
chances of a "bleeding" stroke and death from shock, along with cancer
rates.  Some saturated fatty acids tend to raise, while others tend to
lower various cholesterol markers in the context of the "typical
American diet," but since oxidation is the key, this does not make a
difference in the "heart disease" context unless oxidation is taken
into account.  The statistics show tendencies only in the context of
the "typical American diet," which is rich in food that acts as
oxidizing agents and low in antioxidant-rich foods.  If you look at the
studies of those on coconut-rich diets in Asia (as well as the
demographic data), the findings are that such a diet is very healthy
(and one would have to say prevents "heart disease"), which is
impossible if what you are suggesting, Ron, is accurate.  Science
accounts for reality, not for ideology, and perhaps one day you will
realize this obvious point.  If you notions are true, Ron, Asians on
coconut-rich diets should be "dying like flies," instead of having very
low rates of various "chronic diseases" that Americans fear greatly and
talk of as becoming "epidemics."

Sources of the above quoted passages:
http://www.answers.com/topic/fatty-acid and
http://www.answers.com/topic/rancidification