I'm in total disagreement with the author on saturated fats. Many nutrients essential to health, especially HEART health, are found in animal fats.
The author is also ignorant of fats in general. No source of fat is entirely saturated, entirely mono-unsaturated or entirely polyunsaturated. Only the balance of them changes from source to source. To concentrate on just a few fat sources because they are high in mono-unsaturated fats is to limit the variety of things you eat and therefore reduce your nutrient intake. I thought reducing nutrient intake wasn't a good thing. Just like it is best to eat a variety of vegetables, it's also best to eat a variety of fat sources from coconut oil, to olive oil, to fish oils, to lard, to poultry fat, to beef fat. and butter.
By bashing saturated fats and telling people to avoid many animals sources of saturated fat people would also be shunning good sources of her precious mono-unsaturated fat. Beef tallow is about 40% mono-unsaturated. Lard is about 50%, FIFTY, mono-unsaturated. That puts lard on par with chicken fat, but no, lard is "bad", despite being the second richest food source of Vitamin D out there. Oh look, Vitamin D is good for the heart.
When by saying that saturated fats are bad for your heart you end up limiting people's sources of heart healthy nutrients you know you've got something wrong.
It has never been proved that saturated fat and cholesterol cause heart disease. From the very first, decades ago, the first studies linking saturated fat and cholesterol to heart disease were falsified. The fats they used in the study that were indicated in contributing to heart disease were vegetable oils, but they were labeled as animals fats. The first population study that "proved" countries with a higher saturated fat and cholesterol intake had higher rates of heart disease were falsely interpreted, countries that did not prove the correlation were left out of the study.
- 2/10/2011 9:35:05 AM