Fat grams

Marymtte

Why does My Fitness Pal have that my goal for the category Fats is for me to eat 21 grams of saturated fats a day, and no polyunsaturated or monounsaturared fats? I thought we should be staying away from saturated fats and go for the other two. Help????

RodaRose

The only fat that is a concern is Transfat (or trans fatty acids).

aub6689

I think mfp is setting that as a cap. Basically what it does for sodium too.

yarwell

There are no Government targets / limits on the unsaturated fats, no RDA or similar, hence no default value in MFP. You can set one in custom goals.

EddieP50

Both Saturated Fat and Trans Fats are the bad fats. Those are the ones that should be limited.

Phrick

EddieP50 wrote: »

Both Saturated Fat and Trans Fats are the bad fats. Those are the ones that should be limited.

or you could read up and become a bit more current in your recommendation... there is much mounting evidence that saturated fats were unfairly demonized and aren't "bad fats" at all

EddieP50

Sorry, but I have read up and that information was given to me directly by doctor. Link below to handout he gave me.

http://gicare.com/diets/low-cholesterol-diet/

For the "much mounting evidence" please provide links to clinical case studies from documented and verifiable medical websites and case studies which have generally been accepted by the medical community as a whole.

Phrick

EddieP50 wrote: »

Sorry, but I have read up and that information was given to me directly by doctor. Link below to handout he gave me.

http://gicare.com/diets/low-cholesterol-diet/

For the "much mounting evidence" please provide links to clinical case studies from documented and verifiable medical websites and case studies which have generally been accepted by the medical community as a whole.

oh , you mean the ones I don't have access to due to the paid nature of many of the sites? I could link to articles that reference said studies, but I've hung around here long enough to know that you'd just use that as fuel to bash - "that's not a study it's an article/opinion piece/blah whatever." Nah, not up for that today. How about we just part ways: you go with what you doc told you and I'll stick with what my doctor told me (which is just about the opposite of the handout you linked to).

aub6689

Just to be fair you are both correct to some degree. While trans fats were found to be the most highly related to cardiovascular risk factors (High LDL, low HDL, triglycerides, atherosclerosis, etc) many findings suggest a small reduction in cardiovascular risk by lowering saturated fat (but not dietary fat), however because one macro does not operate in a vacuum- a lot of research now suggests that the source of saturated fat may have more important implications.
Also there are free academic journals at pubmed. One of my favorites is cochrane though. Because one study doesn't necessarily prove a thing, cochrane does systemic reviews and metaanalyses to state where the combined evidence lies thus far. They can be found at cochrane.org and there is a search feature.

yarwell

EddieP50 wrote: »

For the "much mounting evidence" please provide links to clinical case studies from documented and verifiable medical websites and case studies which have generally been accepted by the medical community as a whole.

"Generally accepted" is not something measurable, or useful. The generally accepted belief of yesteryear was that surgeon's need not wash their hands etc.

But recent peer reviewed studies on saturated fat :-

http://www.bmj.com/content/351/bmj.h3978 "Conclusions Saturated fats are not associated with all cause mortality, CVD, CHD, ischemic stroke, or type 2 diabetes, but the evidence is heterogeneous with methodological limitations. Trans fats are associated with all cause mortality, total CHD, and CHD mortality, probably because of higher levels of intake of industrial trans fats than ruminant trans fats. Dietary guidelines must carefully consider the health effects of recommendations for alternative macronutrients to replace trans fats and saturated fats." (my bold)

Five years older :-

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/early/2010/01/13/ajcn.2009.27725.abstract "Conclusions: A meta-analysis of prospective epidemiologic studies showed that there is no significant evidence for concluding that dietary saturated fat is associated with an increased risk of CHD or CVD. More data are needed to elucidate whether CVD risks are likely to be influenced by the specific nutrients used to replace saturated fat. "

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26586275
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20354806
etc etc

EddieP50

Thanks for the links. I will review.

Marymtte

Sorry, but I still don't think, but I may have missed it, that anyone answered my original question. Poly and mono unsaturated fats are supposed to be much better than saturated, yet MFP gives me 20 grams of sat. fat but no poly or mono fats. I don't get why.

MarkusDarwath

Marymtte wrote: »

Sorry, but I still don't think, but I may have missed it, that anyone answered my original question. Poly and mono unsaturated fats are supposed to be much better than saturated, yet MFP gives me 20 grams of sat. fat but no poly or mono fats. I don't get why.

I believe the zero simply means there is no target set, and thus your diary will not display that category. It does not mean they are saying you should not have any of that.

psuLemon

Marymtte wrote: »

Sorry, but I still don't think, but I may have missed it, that anyone answered my original question. Poly and mono unsaturated fats are supposed to be much better than saturated, yet MFP gives me 20 grams of sat. fat but no poly or mono fats. I don't get why.

https://myfitnesspal.desk.com/customer/portal/articles/1375583-a-message-about-myfitnesspal-s-updated-nutrition-goals

That is how all the goals are set. There just are no standards set for unsaturated fats as Yarwell has mentioned. As such, your goals are zero. But you should try eat both.

psuLemon

EddieP50 wrote: »

Thanks for the links. I will review.

If you want to see a good discussion, I would check out: http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10396286/afraid-of-animal-fats-and-cholesterol#latest

There are just as many studies suggesting otherwise as there are studies currently supporting that SFA isn't as bad as we thought. I suspect SFA isn't as bad, when it comes from meats and milk, as opposed to fried foods and cooking in vegetable oils. I have also see some evidence that PUFA will counteract SFA and MUFA will help lower cholesterol.