Butter nonsense: the rise of the cholesterol deniers
An interesting read from the Guardian:
Good post Michael.
But, but, but(ter)....
But there HAS to be a conspiracy, doesn't there??? Otherwise how can those who's seen the light be smarter than the sheeples who accept the evidence?????
Curiously, the science behind these is probably even more robust than the science behind climate change seeing as all the data has been directly gathered rather than reconstructed from various disparate proxies.
It's a bit like if the entire temperature record for the past several thousand years had been taken meticulously using calibrated thermometers instead of inferred from tree rings and ice cores. Now wouldn't that give a nice clear picture!
Interesting post but I feel could also cause a robust discussion.I think that whilst eating fatty foods is risky there is also a case to be answered regarding the role of carbs in the diet since excess calories are stored as fat and also there is some query over the role of sugars in metabolic syndrome and the cardiovascular implications.Should get everyone talking!
I think robust discussion is what was intended 😉🙂
He's partly correct isn't he. Although I believe most heart medication including statins is worth taking isn't heart disease mainly caused by chronic inflammation from eating too much sugar and highly processed carbohydrates.
Cholesterol can then enter the arterial wall causing blockages but without the initial damage from inflammation the cholesterol would not enter the wall.
Hasn't Ancil Keys been discredited, although getting the various heart foundations to admit that their dietary advice for the last 50 years has been wrong sadly will not happen.
Hi Londinium have you got a written version of the above video?
We all absorb information in different ways.
A referenced article in a peer reviewed journal of repute would be particularly useful.
The articles are referenced in the documentary from which that clip is lifted. Go watch the doc, if interested.
Thank you, however many of us would find the written references very helpful and would appreciate if you could kindly list them in writing.
Not everyone is able to easily take in information in a visual and auditory format.
I've done it before, spent my time providing references from actual papers which are then mocked and scoffed by the Pro-Statin Brigade.
Watch the film... or search for the references yourself.
That is unfortunate and unhelpful.
I would prefer if you did not make judgements about my views and beliefs they are my own.
With the greatest respect you do not know my views about statins.
As I said before, I provided reference papers previously on posts that I'm fairly certain you engaged in and, therefore, presume that you saw those references - but, if not, the film covers these issues and interviews a several scientists and clinicians. So, if you're really interested, watch the film.
With the greatest respect, I didn't mention you or your views - I mentioned the Pro-Statin Brigade.
Then can I ask you to post the link to the thread with the written references?
I have difficulty taking in information in a video format. It is an issue of making information accessible to everyone.
For me to make an informed choice I require information to be written down. I am disappointed that you feel unable to help me access this information.
I don't have time to scour through lots and lots of posts to find THE post. I provided it before and as you are a HeartStar, I presume you engaged in, or at least saw, that very post.
Anyway, what info or reference are you after EXACTLY?
I am confused by your reply.
I feel your response to be unkind and unhelpful. Why the need to ' shout' at me using capitals?
This forum is known for people's kind generosity of sharing information and links to help them access information they need to help live as well as possible with their conditions.
This will be my last comment.
I am not shouting. I am emphasising. If I were shouting there'd be exclamation marks. And I would appreciate less of the passive aggressive. Your last three replies have all been critical.
"That is unfortunate and unhelpful. I would prefer if you did not make judgements about my views and beliefs they are my own. With the greatest respect you do not know my views about statins."
"I am disappointed that you feel unable to help."
"I feel your response to be unkind and unhelpful. Why the need to ' shout' at me using capitals? This forum is known for people's kind generosity of sharing information and links."
It’s good to share information 🙂 unfortunately this article is nearly a year old and thoughts have changed since then, as they always do 🙂 I’m sure you can find references to the video it if you google it. 😁
Thank you Adaboo for that clarification .
Gary Taubes is a journalist who has written a number of low carbohydrate diet books. A bit like variations on Atkins!
Ah I’ll check that out thanks Dr Adams, coz Atkins is a bit extreme, although once you switch into ketosis, omg yr energy levels sky rocket. Back in the day Arsenal football team used the Aitkins diet.
I tried Atkins once and your right my energy level was amazing! I feel it’s too much protein and fat though, might be wrong. . Who knows 🙂
Yea, but he was bang on the money when he said sugars the enemy not fat. I remember the first time I did Atkins after a solid month on it I lost 2 stone, so I decided to treat myself to a chocolate orange 🍊 🐷. It was honestly so weird the sugar rush was incredible almost euphoric made me realise the effect sugar has on the body. It’s a drug, and the Government has finally got savvy to it now, hence the taxation.
Sugar is definitely the enemy, worst luck! I had some birthday cake a while ago and felt totally high. Got some very strange looks 😂
I have this mental picture of JFK customs. "Mr Gunsmoke, what are these bags of white powder in your suitcase'? "They are sugar, Sir" Rolling eyes "A likely story! Marshall take him away"!
I’d tell the Marshall Curly’s anti- statin crew planted it on me 🤠🤣
Hi, I think that the link between sugars and heart disease needs to be investigated more. That said in my mind there is no doubt of the link between high fat meat and dairy products to high levels of cholesterol and the effect this has on the heart. Given healthy and fit, people have heart attacks, clearly the 22 minutes of walking mentioned in the paper is, excuse my Spanish, crap.
I am a firm believer that more studies, with larger groups must be done in order to find out more and progress further.
I'm not convinced they are actually interested in changing the status quo. Sad to say, there is too much money to be had.
There are so many alternative theories banded about that also muddy the waters.
To my mind, you are right with your mistrust of sugar, but the underlying cause is how our body responds; with insulin. I say this because not everyone has a sweet tooth, but it's the amount of glucose that is being created phcuk.org/nice from all carbohydrate in the body that counts . Think of foie gras, when the ducks and geese are fed on just corn.
A Dr. Kraft measured the insulin levels of his patients from the 70s to the 90s and concluded that those people with heart disease that didn't have diabetes were simply undiagnosed. They had diabetes in situ, or as it is known today, insulin-resistance.
That doesn't mean we should avoid carbohydrate altogether, but recommending low Gi, and halving the RDA would be so healthful.
What it comes down to is that studies did show a rise in cholesterol from eating saturated fat. This is the 'good evidence' PHE referred to. However, studies also showed that over half of people admitted to hospital with a heart attack had normal cholesterol, which undermined the theory that high cholesterol causes heart disease, so they chose to ignore it.
The harmful VLDL is formed from excess carbohydrate.
Other studies showed that full-fat dairy actually improved mortality figures. The theory here is that saturated fat increases HDL as well as LDL, which improves the HDL to LDL ratio.
Here's the position statement xperthealth.org.uk/Portals/... from the trainers of the trainers for the ICS-NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme.
Wat should my sugar level be each day to be in the ‘safe zone’ ? I’m investing in one of these daily sugar level monitors.
iv been told as a type 2 diabetic to try keep it between 5 and 10. i’m usually 5/6. on the many occasions iv been in hospital ,being a nosey begger iv listened to others numbers while getting it checked and been horrified at some of the numbers. nurses don’t even comment on them. iv heard numbers anything from 15 to 37. why when they know what damage this does do they not try to explain such risks. i sit there thinking this is a cardiology ward what are you doing???
Yea, I’ve heard your a nosey beggar 😆. So as I’m pre- diabetic do u reckon under 5 then ?
as i said between 5and 10 is fine. friends and family who aren’t diabetic were 4/5 when tested. hope that helps. we all know i’m a nosey begger but i’m beginning to be a dopey begger so don’t blame me if i’m wrong. ya cheeky pigggg🤣
🤣, u are funny Mae wee Scottish kinkajou. I’ll take yr advice then and stick to that range. I’m buying the blood testing thingy tomorrow at boots.
just beware as monitors are reasonably cheap but testing strips are pretty expensive ❤️
Oh right, I mite have to cut bk on yer Xmas pressie this year then 😕
don’t you dare
No, don’t worry the poundshop has loads of cool presents 🎁.
Sorry, I had to hunt around to dig out the information. For self sponsered individuals (e.g. Type II diabetics) the SD Codefree. The strips are about a third of the cost of those used in mine. My meter was the local NHS Trust's preferred model.
Here's the details:
Nice one, Thanks Doc Adams. I’ll pass it on around the saloon 🤠
I used to put sugar in my coffee, 2 teasoons, and had about 6 cups of coffee per day at least. That is why I cut sugar out. Do have my cravings. Butter, fat, milk this and that.... getting fed up with certain things. Its like ???? what should or can you eat.
If you diabetic I suppose you have to watch your diet more stricter. I do have choclate or a biscuit now and then. I have other struggles to contend with especially when you work in a restaurants kitchen, I often get hungry and can't take a break but did yesterday. I have to think really hard what I can take as a snack and its most of the time a banana to keep me going. I think because of the growing world population, food and trade had to be developed and to make food last longer. I think we are very blessed to have so many choices. But 1 hat doesn't fit all. We are individuals and responsible for our own lives. And there are so many dietary advices that I go back to basics and simple but nutritious food works for me. It gets too confusing otherwise.
Yea, I agree. Thing is I have a lot of cowboy dinners because that’s all the saloon sells. But I’ve spoke to Miss Kitty about doing a range of healthy snacks at the saloon bar like kale 🥬, beetroot and water chestnut wraps but she doesn’t seem too keen.
Think that's the problem James. More convenient to cater for the majority and profit, but forgetting those who do have health problems or food allergies. It limited where I work so have to bring my own food.
Just don't want to risk it. It makes it harder, but also easier, as don't need to wait for food being prepared for me. Those wraps sound intriguing 😁👍
Got to work later at 5 pm until 11.30 pm. Hope it's not mega busy tonight so I get home by midnight.
Of course not.Why would I? Stuff and nonsense.xx
The trouble is these type 2 diabetics don't appear from nowhere. It's as a result of excess carbohydrate meal after meal, day after day, week after week, year after year.
We've been sold on carbohydrate as a 'safe' alternative to fat, with more and more people becoming (pre)diabetic every year because they think they are eating healthy, that the small amount of sugar they have shouldn't be a problem, and that it must be down to genes or they were just unlucky.
Then there are those that have unexplained chronic illness, because the detriment doesn't show in their blood glucose, but their insulin levels are too high.
For fasting, between 4 and 5.4. After a meal, below 8.5 according to the ICS-NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme, although if you aren't on medication lower is better.
Please bear in mind that your blood glucose is the result of your fasting level, plus what you eat, minus what your insulin stores. In other words, what you measure is a response to the amount of insulin demanded and its effectiveness.
It is much better to eat an ideal amount of carbohydrate, instead of keep eating too much carbohydrate necessitating increasing amounts of insulin, from medication and/or our body.
Thank you StillConcerned. You sure know yr stuff 🧐
Very interesting Michael.Pity it wasn`t in the Daily Mail instead of the Guardian.It would have reached a far bigger audience.
I may be wrong but the Mail, and Express, give me the impression of an anti-statin bias. They also tend to keep reiterating articles about curing Type II diabetes when in fact weight loss and life style changes put it into remission. Regaining the weight, poor lifestyle choices and even ageing can cause it to reappear!
Michael you must be aware how old this article is 😂😁
I know.Pretty hopeless commentxx
I think we all know the answer to a good diet: moderation!
Societally we have no idea what a moderate amount is. We've been scared off of fat in favour of carbohydrate. A moderate amount of carbohydrate would prevent us needing to make up any glycogen deficit from other foods, and avoid de novo lipogenesis.
Therefore, the current RDA for carbohydrate is in the region of twice as much as most people need.
It’s all very interesting. For me though, having seen the experience of family and friends who had different diets and the subsequent effect on their arteries, I think there’s something to the fat argument. My dad had a fatty diet and when he died suddenly from a heart attack his arteries were found to be full of gloop. My friend ate all sorts including fat and sugar, was borderline for statins, declined them, ended up needing stents (he takes the statins now). My husband has always had an “irritable stomach” and needs a low fat diet - his arteries are as clear as a bell.
I try to follow “everything in moderation” but I do like something sweet to finish a meal. I don’t have a heart condition although my husband does. My last blood test showed cholesterol at 5.2 (which I know is a bit high) and my blood sugar was normal. I don't know the state of my arteries so I can only hope I’m doing the right thing 😬.
I am convinced a diet high in fat is unhealthy for as yourself I have known a number of people eating a highish fat diet suffer heart disease and even death. The youngest was someone needing stents at 30 after years of a junk food diet, and he was only slightly overweight! In a similar vein I also believe a diet can be too high in carbs particularly refined ones. My aim is around 130 - 140gm CHO per day.
"I am convinced a diet high in fat is unhealthy for as yourself I have known a number of people eating a highish fat diet suffer heart disease and even death. The youngest was someone needing stents at 30 after years of a junk food diet."
I don't know how you could equate "junk food" with a diet of healthy natural fats and low carbs.
Junk food is our downfall, no one needs that kind of fat. Unfortunately even the skinniest person can be full of unhealthy internal fat. Having an internal scan for visceral fat is useful. 🙂
Brunch+dinner in one:
3 poached eggs,
oven baked bacon,
At my local cafe. 😊
Did you get visceral fat tested privately? What does it cost?
Yes I had a complete heart screen overhaul done privately! Although there are those machines in boots etc that show your total body fat. I think mine cost around £150.00 but that was for loads of tests and full bloods etc.
£150 for visceral fat screening and loads of lab tests?
Yes, look up bluecrest screening, might be a bit more in London but probably not much.
Interesting read Michael.
I am a moderation in all things person trying to follow a Mediterranean diet with exercise for body and mind.
I follow a Mediterranean diet because I enjoy the food and the quality of my life is important to me. Refined sugar may well be a problem but high saturated fat too.
Being over weight and inactive is probably the greatest risk after smoking of many diseases.
Dame Prof Sally Davies Cheif Medical Officer has just published advice that exercise trumps most other interventions to remain healthy.
Even small amounts of exercise are beneficial.
The article made a very interesting point that some individuals are 'defined ' by their belief in a particular view about diet and statins.
Unfortunately sometimes the messenger is shot because the message is not in keeping with the listeners defining beliefs.
This happens on both sides of the arguement.
As an aside it is possible to have a heart attack without having blocked arteries. Non obstructive coronary artery disease such as Coronary vasospastic angina, microvascular dysfunction, spontaneous coronary artery dissection.
An interesting post Michael
A friend of mine who had a heart attack 15 years ago has bought into the fat is good, statins are bad argument- stopped taking statins, eating a lot of butter, full fat milk, cheese, fat laden foods, also still smoking and drinking too much.
He thinks I'm being too cautious with my approach post heart attack.
We've agreed to differ on our approach, whoever pops their clogs first, the other can got "I told you so" at the funeral. In the meantime I'll stick with what the bulk of the scientific community say on the subject.
Is it perhaps these stories/research gain traction with the public because people look for something to justify them sliding back into their bad old ways?
I think the biggest risk if that folk don’t change their lifestyle. Some friends who are on statins feel they can eat what they like because the pill will take the flack, same goes for other medication, not just statins! Your friends smoking is what will likely be the catalyst. I’ve tried a few different diets and can’t argue that the lower carb one is the one that has made all my blood results optimal. We are all different though 🙂
It is all interesting, however this article must of taken some hunting as it’s nearly a year old! 🤭. Thoughts have changed an awful lot since then with even a government directive hopefully to release all the studies. If they are all peer reviewed properly then we will all know the truth.
A year is not that long. Some of the videos and articles related to LCHF and anti-statin are five, seven or even ten summers old!
Of course there are old articles on everything, but as there s so much new information to talk about I don’t see the point going over old stuff.
I think the point is that ten years ago some people were aware that there was an over reliance on medication; that the fat we should fear comes from man-made oils, and that created from excess carbohydrate consumption.
Numerous studies since that time have provided support, whereas PHE's Eatwell Guide has if anything gone lower-fat. What has not been acknowledged is that the lower fat options of dairy and cutting fat from meat they advocate raises the insulin index of food.
Very interesting to see in the news recently that whilst medical measures are keeping people with heart disease alive longer, the rate of heart disease has not diminished.
The truth is there is very little will to change the status quo; those that follow conventional guidance believe if only people would follow the Eatwell Guide, whereas all the National Nutrition Surveys say that they are just about.
The exception would be added sugar intake, because people were eating just slightly more than recommended before the change that filtered down from the WHO, to aim below 5% of total intake.
Ok Michael,I`m one of the lucky ones.Mediterranean diet plus dairy products works for me.Low cholesterol, low bp.However,I still have HF.How did that happen???
A poorly researched and written article demonstrating entrenched biases in maintaining the status quo. Science is based on skepticism without it, knowledge does not advance. That's why theories must stand up to peer-review.
One only has to reflect on the experiences of Ignaz Semmelweis broughttolife.sciencemuseum...
and Galileo history.com/this-day-in-his... among other famous scientists and detractors in human history who were eventually proven correct after enduring extreme ridicule.
The statement that the relationship between cholesterol volume as measured by LDL-C with heart disease is 'causal' in nature similar to the causal link between smoking and lung cancer demonstrates a lack of research. There is to date, NO medical evidence whatsover, indicating a 'causal' relationship, only a 'correlative' relationship.
Those critical of low-simple carbohydrate diets and fasting advocates, have not thoroughly researched the subjects and therefore draw erroneous conclusions.
Few supporters of low-simple carb diets such as the Mediterranean Diet advocate for high consumption of saturated fats. Fat consumption is encouraged when it includes that which comes from fish, olives, avocado, nuts and seeds. The Mediterranean Diet limits animal protein so by default, there will be low to modest consumption of dietary saturated fats.
The statement that the liver produces more saturated fat based on the dietary consumption of saturated fat is also medically false. The liver adjusts cholesterol production, inversely, based on dietary consumption of cholesterol. The theory that dietary cholesterol causes heart disease has long ago been discredited.
The liver stores fat when dietary consumption of fructose exceeds energy expenditure requirements of the body. Eventually if this continues over time, and the liver can no longer store the fat, it spills over into the surrounding tissue and organs causing fatty liver disease.
Those who criticize the diet-heart hypothesis are hardly marginalized individuals - they are in many cases highly respected doctors including Dr. Peter Attia, Dr. Robert Lustig, and Thomas Dayspring among others.
Hitler's Germany taught the world on the power of propaganda and we now see how the mass media uses it to further its own politically-biased agenda as do pharmaceutical companies who benefit financially from perpetuating the dietary-fat, diet-heart hypothesis.
Those who try and discredit dissenting opinion appear to want to limit free-speech only to that which supports their own views.
This article belongs in the trash bin.
What alongside the LCHF rubbish!
...along with the HCLF as well.
For a clearer understanding can all abbreviations be explained please?
LFHC = low fat, high carb as just posted.
HCLF = High Carb , Low fat ?
I think I might go for
MCMF and MFMC moderate fat and carbs with lots of fish, vegetables and fruit. Oh and some wine too.
Very rarely eat puddings or biscuits.
My guilty secret Hotel Chocolat.
Love a good peer reviewed article published in a reputable journal to help me make an informed choice.
Also British Heart Foundation , Medical Research Council or National Institute of Health Research funded research.
You can drink to that with a LFLC gin!
Good point well made
To be clear, when I reference carbs I am referring to simple or refined carbs such as sugar, white bread, rice and pasta (not a complete list). I eat a large portion of complex carbohydrates such as vegetables and legumes. I eat close to zero simple carbohydrates. Simple carbs have little to no nutritional benefit other than producing energy.
Thank you for the clarification.
Very well said 👍🏻👍🏻
Indeed, you are correct, as per my own contribution below. I just cannot understand why people who've been fed a diet (pun intended) of propaganda from companies with a vested interest to do so, are therefore going to bash whatever hurts their bottom line. COUNTLESS studies have debunked the low-fat diet, for the myth it is! But STILL I know people who steadfastly believe the flawed science (from, and based on Ancell Keys I believe), who ignored those countries that disproved his (skewed/biased) findings.
Anyway, well said meanwhile. I can't believe this is even up for debate now, given the very broad studies and access to the Internet, which quickly allows lay people access to the truth.
Thanks for the article
I can't believe this is even an issue any longer. FAT does NOT make you fat, nor create cholesterol. My integrative doctor and MANY other doctors and heal experts agree now, that fat (as long as it's saturated fat, of good quality, not trans fats etc) is GOOD for us.
It was the corrupted AMA (American Heart Association) who based this seriously misinformed opinion on one particular study (which was selective in how it was presented) and just repeated it, over and over again, until everyone believed it!
It was supported by the sugar industry (no surprises there) as they wanted to draw attention away from the REAL culprit in health and heart conditions, which is refined sugar! Well, it worked as now so many people are believing this nonsense (not the 'butter nonsense' but the ;fat is bad for you' nonsense!).
Do your research on multiple studies, across the world, available on the 'net, and you'll see how FAT is WAY better than sugar or carbs (which the body converts into sugar).
Dr Mercola has written a book, titled 'Fat For Fuel', which dismisses the myths around fats being 'bad' for us. I've listened to countless podcasts, with world experts in this subject, and the findings are irrefutable.
However, as indicated, just consuming fat isn't always good, as it must be saturated fat and of good quality. Grass-fed butter (such as Kerrygold), which is also rich in vitamin K, has numerous other components beneficial to health - as it olive oil (though NOT vegetable oil - and especially not for cooking, dues its low smoke point, where it oxidises and becomes toxic).
Dr Myhill is a knowledgeable lady who has written 3-4 books on this subject, which are available on Kindle, and Amazon, for printed versions. I have 3 myself, and am actually on a PK (Paleo-Ketogenic) diet, for health, NOT because I'm overweight are have high cholesterol.
Listen to 'Bulletproof Radio', 'Biohackers Lab', 'The Energy Blueprint', or 'Unstressed' as they all interview people with experience who are at the top of their field/game, based on sound science.
I've written a fairly long post here; but if you DO need to see the evidence for yourself, then do listen to any of those podcasts (on YouTube to in many cases), or buy and read the books I've mentioned by Dr Sarah Myhill. They ALL reference the studies and 'evidence', if you are a doubter.
Happy listening, or reading if you prefer the written word.
Oh and before I go, it's ALSO now been shown that a we age, that higher cholesterol is desirable! BOTH LDL and HDL, which again challenges the nay-sayers. But it is 'protective' in one's senior years.
All the best!
Well said! It’s an old article so not sure why it was posted now 🤔. Maybe as the lady above suggested it was meant to cause “ robust discussion “ on someone’s boring Sunday 😅
Thanks for the thumbs-up
OMG! I am so sorry you found my thread so boring and so "so last year"! However, one wonders why you both bothered to read it and then reply in such a pointless manner! Is it because I eat a Mediterranean Diet and do not condemn but take statins?
I read lots of posts on here Michael! I’m always interested to learn! But sorry to say I think you sometimes dig around for articles with the intention of starting a “robust discussion” ( someone else’s opinion, not mine btw) You love a bit of banter and you know that’s what you’ll get, so what’s the issue ???? 🤔🤔
I didn’t realise it was old when I read it! I think a Mediterranean diet is great, I have eaten that way for most of my adult life ( but obviously added too much sugar) I do say on all or most of my posts on diet that “ We are all different “ I have never ever recommended anyone to follow what I eat, but am happy to share what has worked for me.
I have also stated I’m happy everyone is taking their statins too, just because I don’t believe they are good for anyone doesn’t mean I’m not comfortable that people take them! I only post on statins because I’m worried about the harm they might do to everyone! I get slated for it but I’d feel worse if I didn’t share my beliefs! I don’t bother now ☺️
Can’t change the fact you think my comments are all pointless! Sorry but I think it’s important we share more up to date information. 😐
Life's too short to follow all these comments. Especially the bitching. Sorry!!
I can't see any 'bitching'. Just 'debate'. If we aren't allowed to debate, then we allow false and misdirected information to flourish. Sorry if you 'feel' that by engaging in debate, that it's somehow negative - and moreover 'bitching'. I'm sorry you take such a view. Isn't science and challenging conventional thinking the WAY we progress? Obviously not in your mind.
regularly. I also take statins to reduce my cholesterol which is now down to 3 but I was wondering if...
total cholesterol of 7.9 so was referred to a lipid clinic they decided to put me on cholesterol injections...
excellent resting heartbeat..... then came the cholesterol check, the machine simply said 'HI'. subsequently...
I am somewhat confused as to whether high cholesterol is a CAUSE (even The Main Cause) of atherosclerosis...
I should watch my cholesterol. My total cholesterol was normal at the end of 2018 but is slightly higher...