The Case Against the Case Against Fat

Current guidelines recommend that Americans consume less than 10 percent of their daily calories from saturated fat…

[But] a 2006 studybased on data collected from 82,802 women, found that the subjects who consumed the highest percentage of their daily calories from fat (including saturated fat) did not experience an increased risk of developing heart disease later in life. In fact, women who ate the highest amounts of vegetable fat—from foods like olive oil and nuts—had lower risks of heart disease than women on low-fat diets.

A meta-analysiscompared the reported food intakes of nearly 350,000 men and women with their cardiovascular health years later and also found no connection between saturated fat intake and heart or vascular disease.

Comments (4)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. monkeywrench says:

    In addition to the misguided war on fats, we’re seeing crazy legislators in the worst nanny state of all — New York — propose an outright ban on salt. My response: When salt is outlawed, only outlaws will have salt!

  2. Devon Herrick says:

    Fats are rich in calories. I suspect that some of the guidelines are based more on how public health advocates want people would act rather than reporting on objective data.

    I remember a few ago a new study found a high degree of correlation between low salt and mortality. Of course numerous study find correlation between low weight and mortality.

  3. Vicki says:

    Interesting. I can always count on the unconventional point of view being represented at this blog.

  4. Ken says:

    Where else but at this blog are we going to find the case against the case against fat? Thanks for all that you do.