 |
Reply
| | From:  JamieDH4 (Original Message) | Sent: 3/8/2007 6:25 AM |
I was watching this new TV commercial for "Lay's" Potato Chips made with "100% SunFlower Oil". They show people running through flower fields to present the idea of "wholesomeness" and how sunflower oil will somehow bring warm and smiles into your life.
Then they go on to say "50% Less Saturated Fat the our Original".
This leaves the viewer with the idea that SunFlower Oil is healthy, and that it promotes health even though it doesn't. I jst really noticed how they had people running through SunFlower fields to paint the picture in people's minds that eating products with Sunflower Oil will somehow promote happiness and peacefullness and "bring you back to nature".
I just thought to mention this, because I have never seen an add with so much propaganda for the SunFlower Oil being great and the saturated fats being bad. |
|
 First
Previous
2-12 of 12
Next
Last
|
Reply
| |
Yes, this has been going on for decades, in slightly different forms. Read the last two posts to the thread entitled "What is the basis for all these “saturated fat�?causes this or that “disease" claims" to see how even scientists are influenced, even to the point of missing the obvious fact that whay the call "saturated fat" often has much less than 50% unsaturated fatty acids in it ! The other "natural" way to talk about these oils is that they are used for oil painting because they are so susceptible to "free radical attack," and therefore dry and harden quickly. Interestingly, if you eat these oils in large amounts, your cuts will heal up somewhat like a dried oil painting. I noticed that with Mead acid now in my cells, my cuts never get this way, but retain a rubbery quality. |
|
Reply
| |
It's really this whole "getting back to nature" trend that you mentioned that is the problem. There is little to no scientific evidence to back it up, so the way they promote the unsaturated products is by showing people doing yoga, running through fields, etc.
Just because something is natural or organic does not make it good for you. Nightshade is natural AND organic and it is STILL not good for you. |
|
Reply
| |
If you read food labels on the food you buy, you have probably noticed a new ingredient which contains "interesterified fatty acids." They are using a new technology to engineer the fat in food, based upon biochemical properties, and yet there is nothing wrong with something like coconut oil, in terms of its biochemical effects on a human body (when consumed in "normal" dietary ways). In a sense, the ideological, non-scientific views held by many "nutritional experts" has "come full circle." They have essentially created an oil similar to palm, but without the natural antioxidants one would find in a high-quality palm oil product. Though it might not have quite the "mouth appeal" of palm oil, I prefer to use a little coconut oil, because it is biochemically stable (palm oil is about 50% unsaturated, which I consider too high an amount). Instead of cooking with more than a small amount of coconut oil (used to "grease up" baking pans), I use butter on it afterwards, when there is no high heat involved. |
|
Reply
| |
Hello everyone. Sorry for my approximate English but I'm French. I begin to be convinced by what I read on this site but I have a few questions. If I have good understood, we have to avoid so much possible the unsaturated fat (especially the polyunsaturated fat) and to eat so much possible the saturated fat (coconut oil, butter, cheese, ...). OK. But a few questions if I may (I try to understand and it's not so easy for the non-English). 1) I have read many times that the people who have liver problems (eg : hepatitis C) must absolutely avoid the saturated fat because the saturated fat is very bad for the liver (eg : the hepatic enzymes can rise a lot). Then, what to do ? 2) Is milk good as saturated fat ? 3) I have read many times that the webmaster of this site eats lots of cheese and even sometimes eggs. But I have read many times (in French) that there is lots of arachidonic acid in eggs and cheese (and also in milk, I think). Is that not contradictory ? Of because the amount of arachidonic acid is very little in eggs and cheese if I compare with the amount of saturated fat in eggs and cheese ? 4) Some products can reduce the amount of omega 6 PUFA or of arachidonic acid (I have read that in French) : resveratrol, noni, boswellia serrata, curcuma. Can the use of those products (with of course the consumption of lots of saturated fat) accelerate the emptying of the (poly)unsaturated fat (and especially arachidonic acid) in my body ? Thanks for your answers. I don't criticize what is said on this website (I begin to be convinced); I try to understand (especially the first question about liver problems). |
|
Reply
| |
Hi:
1. When they say "liver problems are caused by saturated fat," they usually have fed the animals lard, which is very bad, but it's 40% saturated, so I don't consider it a "saturated fat," as the "experts" do - this is simply ludicrous.
2. I will drink "fat free" milk to avoid oxidized cholesterol (it is very low in cholesterol), since it is homogenized. Generally, I eat a lot more ricotta cheese (whole), along with some butter and cheeses like cheddar - all "full fat." I do not cook the cheese, milk, or dairy. If you do, then they may indeed not be all that healthy for you.
3. I only eat eggs lightly boiled. There are small amounts of AA in eggs. Anyone who told you there is a lot of AA in eggs or cheese is wrong. You will find more in meat, but main problem comes when you consume so much linoleic acid (in oils like corn, vegetable, soybean, safflower, sunflower, etc.) that your body begins to make AA, rather than the natural Mead acid.
4. I have seen no such evidence - it's more likely that they inhibit AA metabolization into very dangerous molecules, such as LTB4.
If you follow a diet like mine, be sure to eat a lot of food like raisins, dark chocolate, prunes, etc., for the first couple of years, because the AA will be removed, and it is dangerous. This is assuming you have AA in your cells now, and I don't know if that is true or not. It depends upon what you've been eating over the last couple of years. You can keep asking whatever questions you have here, but I think it would be good if you also read the essays and the posts that are on subjects that concern you, and then if you don't understand something, come back here and post your questions. |
|
Reply
| |
Hello Hans.
Thanks for your answer !
I have written this :
QUOTE : "1) I have read many times that the people who have liver problems (eg : hepatitis C) must absolutely avoid the saturated fat because the saturated fat is very bad for the liver (eg : the hepatic enzymes can rise a lot). Then, what to do ?"UNQUOTE
And you have answered this :
QUOTE : "1. When they say "liver problems are caused by saturated fat," they usually have fed the animals lard, which is very bad, but it's 40% saturated, so I don't consider it a "saturated fat," as the "experts" do - this is simply ludicrous."UNQUOTE
I agree totally with you for the explanation of lard.
But in the meantime, I have read this study "COCONUT OIL IN HEALTH AND DISEASE: ITS AND MONOLAURIN’S
POTENTIAL AS CURE FOR HIV/AIDS*".
You can find that study here : http://www.coconutoil.com/Dayrit.pdf
And in this study, I have read that :
QUOTE : "The treatment caused .......... a rise in
ALT/AST in 3 of the 7 (Table IVA)."
And coconut oil is 92% saturated fat (not 40% as for lard).
So, my question : the saturated fat (here : of coconut oil) is still good for liver ?
I only try to understand. I'm really convinced that coconut oil (and other saturated fat) is very good for health (I eat coconut oil for one month now) and that PUFA is very bad for health, but I'm really anxious for my liver.
Thanks for your answer. |
|
Reply
| |
May I ask two other (little) questions :
1) Have I to fear oxidized cholesterol if I mix butter and cheese with warm spaghetti (I eat that often) : I don't cook butter and cheese, I only cook spaghetti, but the butter and the cheese will be a little warm (and melt) with the heat of the warm spaghetti. But afterwards I eat immediately those spaghetti, (melt) butter and (a little melt) cheese.
Is there a real danger of oxidized cholesterol with the butter and the cheese "cooked" in that way ?
2) I drink fat milk but always cold. Since I don't cook fat milk, I suppose that I have not to fear oxidized cholesterol with the (cold) fat milk. Is that correct ?
Thanks, Hans, for your answer ! |
|
Reply
| |
No, I don't think if you just get it warm that it will be a major problem, and I suggest you consume the non-fat milk. You can mix it with shredded, then ground dessicated coconut (that's what I do), but once you get the AA out of your cells, it will be less of an issue (assuming you have AA in your cells now). The reason is that some of the lipid in pasteurized, homogenized milk could cause "chronic inflammation," but that's not likely to be a problem if you have Mead acid in your cells rather than AA.
You didn't quote the entire passage from that site that is relevant: "The patients with normal liver and kidney functions showed no effect from the treatments."
Remember, my point is to normalize your biochemistry, and the evidence suggests that Mead acid in your cells rather than AA in your cells is truly essential for normal, healthy biochemistry. Otherwise, you are likely to develop some kind of "chronic inflammatory" problem. When you give people large amounts of SFAs and very little PUFAs, the cells release AA, which can be dangerous, so the short-term makers are not relevant, though I always advise people to eat an antioxidant-rich diet while the make the transition (up to about two years to do).
Keep in mind that there is no way dietary saturated fatty acids will damage your liver directly. Liver cells in a test tube are a different issue, and I already mentioned the AA release from cells. If you read some of the other material on this site, you might have come across the evidence showing that PUFAs are metabolized in the liver into carcinogenic substances - that is the big problem, especially when you eat a lot of cooked meat as well. If you have not yet done so, read the essay about saturated fat being the solution, not the problem. |
|
Reply
| | | From: Johann | Sent: 8/7/2007 6:43 PM |
| Don't ya just love the insult? My favorite is when the voice on the TV says "heart healthy". |
|
Reply
| |
| This message has been deleted by the manager or assistant manager. |
|
Reply
| |
Here is a post (and follow ups) I did for another newsgroup:
Post #1:
You may have seen reports such as the following today:
"Saturated Fat: Even a Little Splurge May Be Too Much."
Source: http://health.usnews.com/usnews/health/healthday/070909/saturated-fat...
You will read that the subject "...ate just one piece of high-fat
carrot cake and drank a milkshake."
As usual, I do not disagree with the actual experimental findings,
just the interpretation. If you go to www.thedailyplate.com, for
example, and search for carrot cake, you find that most are very low
or have no saturated fatty acids in them. One, by "Captain D's," had
22.8 grams of unsaturated fatty acids and zero saturated fatty acids
(or perhaps a trace amount) per 4 ounce piece of cake.
How in the world can any sane human being conclude that carrot cake,
rich in unsaturated fatty acids and low in saturated fatty acids, is
dangerous due to the saturated fatty acid content?
This particular piece of pie also had 32 mg. of cholesterol, much of
which might be oxidized, and this certainly could irritate blood
vessels and prompt inflammation and dilation.
Here's another interesting statement: QUOTE: The sudden boost in
what's known as saturated fat hampered the effects of so-called "good"
cholesterol, the high-density lipoprotein or HDL, from doing its job
-- to protect the inner lining of the arteries from inflammatory
agents that promote the build-up of fatty plaques. UNQUOTE.
They say "what's known as," which is true, in that something that may
contain low or no saturated fatty acids (the actual molecules) has
somehow been classified as "saturated fat" by the "experts." In
science, proper controls should always be used, and in this case it
would be very easy to do so. All they needed to do was to repeat the
experiment using "Captain D's" carrot cake, which has no or tiny
amounts of saturated fatty acid and see if the results were the same.
If so, one could only blame "saturated fat" if one had a severe brain
disorder which prevented basic reasoning functions.
In any case, inflammatory molecules are formed from arachidonic acid,
a polyunsaturated fatty acid, and not from saturated fatty acids. In
fact, due to their resistance to biochemical activity, saturated fatty
acids inhibit the creation of inflammatory molecules. One basic
example is oil painting. Highly unstable polyunsaturated fatty acid-
rich oils are used because the "drying" (free radical activity) occurs
very quickly relative to highly saturated fatty acid-rich oils, such
as coconut. Practically, you could not paint an oil painting using
coconut oil - it would take too long to dry, due to the resistance to
free radical activity.
Moreover, when one makes such a claim, there should be plenty of
evidence. If "saturated fat" was so dangerous (of course, they would
need to explain exactly what they mean by this phrase at some point,
or else there could be no experimentation to determine if the claim is
correct), then the many millions of Asians who have eaten large
amounts of coconut oil for decades (coconut oil is 92% saturated fatty
acids) should have high rates of "heart disease." Instead, it is the
Asians who are switching to typical Western diets (rich in food like
"Captain D's" carrot cake) who are at high risk for heart disease. I
myself always eat a meal rich in saturated fatty acids and low in
polyunsaturated fatty acids three times a day, every day (since
2001). Essentially, I decided to experiment on myself. Instead of
experiencing ill health, I found that my ill health was "cured" by
this diet.
Post #2:
NOTE: Someone sent me parts of this report via email. I wrote up my
post, above, quickly, since I had something else to do (notice the
"typo" errors). Later, I had some free time, so I went to the site
and read the entire report. Here are some very interesting passages:
QUOTE: Celermajer's team had the volunteers eat two meals, spaced one
month apart. Each meal consisted of a slice of carrot cake and a
milkshake. But, in one case the foods were made with saturated fat,
and in the other case the meal was made with polyunsaturated safflower
oil, a much healthier choice.
The high-fat meal, which contained about 90 percent saturated fat, had
the equivalent of 68 grams of fat. In contrast, the meal made with
polyunsaturated oil contained just 9 percent fat. UNQUOTE.
First of all, coconut oil itself is about 91-92% saturated, so how
could one make an edible cake if 90% of it was saturated fatty acids
(SFAs)? This sounds like a mistake. Perhaps they mean a fat source
was used that was 90% saturated fatty acids. If this is so, why are
they concerned for the public's health, when in fact the carrot cakes
available to the general public are low in SFAs, or contain none? Why
didn't they use an actual food item that could be found in a store?
This is just illogical - many people are likely avoiding carrot cake
now when in fact they should be eating carrot cake, if these "experts"
are correct.
Secondly, there is this passage: QUOTE: That fat-laden feast
compromised the ability of the participants' arteries to expand to
increased blood flow, the researchers found. UNQUOTE.
Why would you want to eat a meal that makes your arteries expand? If
this is occurring, then there is biochemical activity that is causing
it. If the arteries are staying as they were before the meal, that
means there is no excess biochemical activity. This is consistent
with what a meal rich in SFAs but poor in PUFAs would be expected to
do, and it is what I want to happen in my body. It is not a sign of
"disease" or impending doom. Yes, it is true that if your arteries
are already clogged you might want this arterial expansion, but that
is just "buying you some time." It is similar to taking highly toxic
"chemotherapy" if you have cancer. Why not just prevent the tumor
from growing in the first place? Why not prevent the arterial plaque
buildup in the first place? Why have these researchers not studied
peoples who eat a lot of SFAs and little PUFAs? Such an experiment
would be "on point," unlike this one, which is about an indirect
"marker" they deem important. Oh, wait, such an experiment was
already done, quite a long time ago, actually. Any idea why these
"researchers" act as if they are unaware of it?
Here it is:
Am J Clin Nutr. 1981 Aug;34(:1552-61. Related Articles, Links
Cholesterol, coconuts, and diet on Polynesian atolls: a
natural experiment: the Pukapuka and Tokelau island studies.
Prior IA, Davidson F, Salmond CE, Czochanska Z.
Two populations of Polynesians living on atolls near the
equator provide an opportunity to investigate the relative
effects of saturated fat and dietary cholesterol in
determining serum cholesterol levels. The habitual diets of
the toll dwellers from both Pukapuka and Tokelau are high in
saturated fat but low in dietary cholesterol and sucrose.
Coconut is the chief source of energy for both groups.
Tokelauans obtain a much higher percentage of energy from
coconut than the Pukapukans, 63% compared with 34%, so their
intake of saturated fat is higher. The serum cholesterol
levels are 35 to 40 mg higher in Tokelauans than in
Pukapukans. These major differences in serum cholesterol
levels are considered to be due to the higher saturated fat
intake of the Tokelauans. Analysis of a variety of food
samples, and human fat biopsies show a high lauric (12:0) and
myristic (14:0) content. Vascular disease is uncommon in both
populations and there is no evidence of the high saturated fat
intake having a harmful effect in these populations.
Post #3:
Something else worthy of note: If you eat way too many calories in
one meal, and if that meal is very rich in SFAs, then one would expect
the short-term effect they detected. Too much pure water will kill
you, if you drink it within a certain time frame. One can always make
a food item "look bad." They key is the long-term effects, and the
study I cited is simply not possible if their claim about how bad SFAs
are is accurate (though they say "saturated fat," which is a phrase that has no
scientific meaning, since lard is often classified as a "saturated
fat" and is only about 40% SFAs). The study is a direct refutation of
what they are claiming that their "maker" findings mean, though again,
if you have terribly clogged arteries, you might want to eat the meal
that expands your arteries and keeps you alive for a few more months
or so. It would indeed be unwise to eat a meal containing too many
calories, 90% of which are from SFAs, if you had such a condition. |
|
|
First
Previous
2-12 of 12
Next
Last
|
|
Free Forum Hosting
Important Announcement
0 recommendations 
Return to General