HSWC, I would like a reference for the refutation of the EFA claim. All I have found is that it was in the 1948 World Book, and the study was conducted by MIT. This is not a reference. Who did the study? What was the title, journal, etc?
My claim is that maybe if we fed people a very low carb diet (0-72g), the "problems" of cooked meat would not occur. As Taka said, the combination of carbs and omega-6 seems to be esp bad. Maybe carbs are fine with high-SFA/low-PUFA, but probably not for all people. You have mentioned how your relatives are overweight and they eat more cooked meat or PUFAs, but they eat more carbs and calories too. You can't blame all problems on PUFAs, esp with simple correlations like what your relatives supposedly eat.
The Western Diet is obviously bad, but you seem to blame a single factor (PUFAs), while I think the high carb diets and/or refined carbs are involved. Agriculture, grains, and sugar did not just come along and improve our health. You can believe the evidence or not, but you can't deny that our diet changed 10,000 years ago and has undergone other radical changes such as the refining of sugar and grains, and the introduction of vegetable oils, hydrogenated oils, etc.
I am not interested in any challenges to put up money for an experiment. That is just hot air, as far as I am concerned. If you want to discuss the evidence and your interpretation of it, fine. But the burden of proof is on YOU to show that meat cooked in any way causes disease in the absence of carbs. If you can't present human studies, you lose.
If you want to propose studies, talk with someone else. I am not a scientist and neither are you. I just think carbs need to be controlled in studies claiming meat or animal foods have harmful effects. Not doing so assumes carbs are harmless, something which should be demonstrated with comparison. Surely you would not be afraid to repeat the sausage, eggs, and hash brown study WITHOUT hash browns, and using a good coconut oil for all of the cooking. |