Fats and cholestrol

viren19890

Hello all,

This has been an awesome community so far, not just this group, I mean the entire MFP community. I have learned so much in 2 years that I had missed my past 20 years of my life. Yet the more I learn the more I realize how little I know so in the spirit of that lol

Could someone please explain at an elementary level why are Fats connected to cholestrol and why are Doctors still suggesting to stay away from Fats?
What is the relation ?
How did it all began?
Like if I were to explain it to a child-do so in such level but with facts and not co-relation studies please.


P.S-Disclaimer- I follow CKD (so keto for 4 days and then carbs for 3) and so forth during my cutting phases.


Thanks in advance

kpk54

For how it all started, read "The Big Fat Surprise" by investigative journalist, Nina Teicholtz. Some of the "fat fear" stems back to an influential guy named Ancel Keys (physiologist), President Eisenhower's heart attack and Eisenhower's cardiologist. It goes on from there with a variety of studies.

Depending on which on line reviews you choose to read, the book itself is either good book, bad book. Good research, bad research.

milgord

This blog lecture site is a great source of information!

https://intensivedietarymanagement.com/dietary-cholesterol-important-idm-4-2/

motorcyclekopp

There is an awesome documentary called Fat Head that Tom Naughton made -it explains all that stuff REALLY WELL. I believe it's on YouTube -or at least parts of it (or you can rent/buy the entire movie elsewhere too). It's not a typical dull, dry documentary -it's actually quite entertaining & informative at the same time. I believe the guy is/was a comedian -so there is a good amount of light humor in there as well. For me, I like the Part 2 portion of it which starts right around the 45 minute mark. I always tell everyone I know about it. I've personally watched it probably over 20 times now.

All the research I've done backs up just about everything in that documentary too. It's really well done. All in plain, super simple English that anyone can understand. I highly recommend checking it out.

Sunny_Bunny_

kpk54 wrote: »

For how it all started, read "The Big Fat Surprise" by investigative journalist, Nina Teicholtz. Some of the "fat fear" stems back to an influential guy named Ancel Keys (physiologist), President Eisenhower's heart attack and Eisenhower's cardiologist. It goes on from there with a variety of studies.

Depending on which on line reviews you choose to read, the book itself is either good book, bad book. Good research, bad research.

If you truly want to know how this misunderstanding became so widely accepted for so long, which is also why it's dying a very slow death, you would get your answers in that book.
Even the description tells you what happened but the book details it with evidence.

http://thebigfatsurprise.com

This book won Best Science Book in 2014. I think that's the official title...???

And she wrote about how the 2015 guidelines committee didn't use proper sciencetific methods to determine the updates to the guidelines in the BMJ which was challenged with absolute failure.
http://www.bmj.com/company/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/the-bmj-US-dietary-correction.pdf

nvmomketo

I love that book. I'm re-reading it right now.

I blame Ancel Keys.

Fats are not really related to cholesterol unless you have familial hypercholerolemia. There is no connection, just bad science and impatient government policy.

Taubes book Good Calories Bad Calories goes into it too. Cholesterol Con, Great Cholesterol Myth, and Cholesterol Clarity also debunk the fat-cholesterol myth.

Peter Attia has a great blog series on it starting here: http://eatingacademy.com/nutrition/the-straight-dope-on-cholesterol-part-i

This is a good summary on what CVD actually is: http://eatingacademy.com/cholesterol-2/heart-disease-begin-tell-us-prevention

Dragonwolf

I also recommend:

https://player.vimeo.com/video/45485034

It gives a good overview of the politics of how it stuck.

viren19890

Thank you all for posting. I will get to work.

Issue was -I wasn't able to find my thread after posting lol. Apparently it doesn't even show up in "My Discussions".

Thanks again.

viren19890

motorcyclekopp wrote: »

There is an awesome documentary called Fat Head that Tom Naughton made -it explains all that stuff REALLY WELL. I believe it's on YouTube -or at least parts of it (or you can rent/buy the entire movie elsewhere too). It's not a typical dull, dry documentary -it's actually quite entertaining & informative at the same time. I believe the guy is/was a comedian -so there is a good amount of light humor in there as well. For me, I like the Part 2 portion of it which starts right around the 45 minute mark. I always tell everyone I know about it. I've personally watched it probably over 20 times now.

All the research I've done backs up just about everything in that documentary too. It's really well done. All in plain, super simple English that anyone can understand. I highly recommend checking it out.

Lol- they bash vegetarian food-I'm a vegetarian and eat no eggs/meat/seafood. I don't feel weak

viren19890

Umm now bashing calories in and out lol -How credible is this video. Fat head by Tom Naughton. I will still watch it though.

cstehansen

viren19890 wrote: »

Umm now bashing calories in and out lol -How credible is this video. Fat head by Tom Naughton. I will still watch it though.

The issue is not that calories don't matter at all. It is that it is not the only factor or even always the primary factor. Without insulin, your body can't store fat. This is why a T1 diabetic will be skin and bones even if they eat 20,000 calories a day if they do not take insulin.

On the other end of the spectrum, if you over produce insulin (which is a powerful hormone), it will work hard to store and hold onto fat up to and including slowing your base metabolic rate. So no matter how low some people cut calories, they struggle to lose weight because their insulin levels are too high.

On the flip side, when you are in a ketogenic state, there is something called the metabolic advantage that occurs. This is where your body will use 100-300 more calories per day than those not in a ketogenic state. The research I have been able to find leans toward the higher end of that range, but I like to stay conservative.

Some of that advantage may be related to the loss of calories through ketones secreted both in urine and in your breath. This is not entirely unlike the way a T1 diabetic will lose glucose through urine.

As for being a vegetarian, it is possible to be healthy eating that way, however it is much harder. In my experience, many vegetarians should be called pasta/bread eaters more than vegetarians as they really don't eat much in the way of veggies but rather eat a ton of over processed crap (my wife is one of these, although she is getting much better).

One key thing you should know is vitamin B-12 is not found in ANY non-animal product. This is a nutrient which can be stored by your body, so if you had enough stored before becoming a vegetarian, it could be months or even years before the effects of a deficiency become apparent. I would suggest taking a supplement for this. You may be better taking a B Complex since, although you can get other B vitamins from non-animal products, most are in low amounts and likely not in foods you eat regularly.

kpk54

cstehansen wrote: »

On the flip side, when you are in a ketogenic state, there is something called the metabolic advantage that occurs. This is where your body will use 100-300 more calories per day than those not in a ketogenic state. The research I have been able to find leans toward the higher end of that range, but I like to stay conservative.

Clearly, it depends on the study one is reading. This link indicate no metabolic advantage to ketogenic low carb versus non ketogenic low carb.

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/83/5/1055.full

tcunbeliever

Nutritional yeast has B-12, it's a fungi, not an animal (take it to a party).

cstehansen

tcunbeliever wrote: »

Nutritional yeast has B-12, it's a fungi, not an animal (take it to a party).

"A common myth amongst vegetarians and vegans is that it’s possible to get B12 from plant sources like seaweed, fermented soy, spirulina and brewers yeast. But plant foods said to contain B12 actually contain B12 analogs called cobamides that block intake of and increase the need for true B12."

https://chriskresser.com/b12-deficiency-a-silent-epidemic-with-serious-consequences/

This is one of multiple sources I have found saying this same thing. I am not one to bash anyone's WOE. I do think it is important to be as informed as possible about all aspects of whatever WOE you choose.

That said, fungi is not a vegetable nor an animal (according to my biology teacher way way way way back in college), so I have not seen anything about that. However, I find it hard to believe anyone would eat enough yeast to get an appropriate amount of B-12.

Sunny_Bunny_

kpk54 wrote: »

cstehansen wrote: »

On the flip side, when you are in a ketogenic state, there is something called the metabolic advantage that occurs. This is where your body will use 100-300 more calories per day than those not in a ketogenic state. The research I have been able to find leans toward the higher end of that range, but I like to stay conservative.

Clearly, it depends on the study one is reading. This link indicate no metabolic advantage to ketogenic low carb versus non ketogenic low carb.

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/83/5/1055.full

One of this studies authors is Barry Sears of The Zone Diet and the study design was influenced by people from his company.
"HH is an employee of Zone Labs Inc. BS is a stockholder and serves on the boards of directors of Zone Labs Inc and Zone Cuisine Inc; he is also on the boards of directors of Zone Café and ZoneNet. None of the other authors had any personal or financial conflict of interest."

But they claimed no conflict of interest.

Also kinda funny the high carb diet was at 40% which isn't as high as SAD but I wonder how similarly it correlates with The Zone Diet.
I'm actually wondering if he was just wanting to make his diet appear just as good as keto..

kpk54

Well if that was his intent, he was successful.

motorcyclekopp

viren19890 wrote: »

Umm now bashing calories in and out lol -How credible is this video. Fat head by Tom Naughton. I will still watch it though.

If you've been following Jason Wittrock's 21 day, Ketogenic 4,000 calorie a day experiment that's currently in process, you can clearly see that the whole "calorie in, calorie out" concept is complete garbage. I classify the whole "calorie in, calorie out" concept in the same trash can that I store the food pyramid in.

kpk54

motorcyclekopp wrote: »

viren19890 wrote: »

Umm now bashing calories in and out lol -How credible is this video. Fat head by Tom Naughton. I will still watch it though.

If you've been following Jason Wittrock's 21 day, Ketogenic 4,000 calorie a day experiment that's currently in process, you can clearly see that the whole "calorie in, calorie out" concept is complete garbage. I classify the whole "calorie in, calorie out" concept in the same trash can that I store the food pyramid in.

CICO was and is very, very good to me. The food pyramid, not so much.

motorcyclekopp

kpk54 wrote: »

motorcyclekopp wrote: »

viren19890 wrote: »

Umm now bashing calories in and out lol -How credible is this video. Fat head by Tom Naughton. I will still watch it though.

If you've been following Jason Wittrock's 21 day, Ketogenic 4,000 calorie a day experiment that's currently in process, you can clearly see that the whole "calorie in, calorie out" concept is complete garbage. I classify the whole "calorie in, calorie out" concept in the same trash can that I store the food pyramid in.

CICO was and is very, very good to me. The food pyramid, not so much.

Counting calories was one of the first things that I ever tried (many years ago) to manage my weight. I did the whole calories in, calories out stuff for about two months & I never got the results that I was expecting. Of course, back then, I didn't have much nutritional knowledge & was eating a lot of "healthy whole grains" with my soda. I can see possibly using CICO in combination with a Ketogenic diet perhaps, but I personally just eat until I'm full & satisfied -regardless of my calorie numbers. Of course, everyone's body is different though, but I know it definitely didn't work for me (as a stand alone method).

nvmomketo

I think CICO can work really well for some but it is harder to pin down for others.

When I was younger, CICO was a piece of cake. An extra run and skip my sandwich at lunch and I lost weight. Now? It isn't so easy.

Food choices definitely make a huge difference for me. I seem to gain on a higher carb diet at the same caloric level I lose at while LCHF. I could be wrong, but it doesn't feel that way.

I still need o be in a aloric deict to lose weight but food choices, good health and rest, less stress, more energy, and proper medication tend to raise CO for me. LCHF also lowers CI - I'm not as hungry as on a higher carb diet.

swezeytba

I lost over 70 lbs on a CICO diet and was pretty proud of myself. But that was because it took work....it took willpower....some days it took just being miserable because I was so hungry and felt like I couldn't have any more to eat that day.

And it wasn't sustainable and even though I didn't gain huge amount of weight back the lbs did slowly creep up over the years.

Keto is the first WOE where I have felt like I am in control of my life instead of food being in control of my life. I do have to plan ahead a little, but that is doable for me....for sure.