High fat diet at a caloric deficit
GeorgiePie88
Posts: 54 Member
Hi everyone
I've tried doing some research, but couldn't find much. Do you think there are long-term negative affects of having a high-fat diet, even if I'm eating at a deficit?
I tend to eat a lot of high-fat foods, although most of the foods I eat are "healthy fat" (ie: coconut, nuts, avocado, plant-based oils). I try to get enough protein and don't over-do it on the carbs. Overall, however, I would say that roughly 50% of my daily calories come from fat. I eat roughly 1400 calories a day to aim to lose approximately half a pound of week.
I've tried doing some research, but couldn't find much. Do you think there are long-term negative affects of having a high-fat diet, even if I'm eating at a deficit?
I tend to eat a lot of high-fat foods, although most of the foods I eat are "healthy fat" (ie: coconut, nuts, avocado, plant-based oils). I try to get enough protein and don't over-do it on the carbs. Overall, however, I would say that roughly 50% of my daily calories come from fat. I eat roughly 1400 calories a day to aim to lose approximately half a pound of week.
0
Replies
-
If you can do it consistently over time, go for it.
If not, just eat moderately in a deficit.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
I am a keto'er ..I eat 75% fat with 5% carbs ..I have lost 96 lbs in a little over 2 years7
-
If most of that was saturated fat I would be concerned as there is the potential for your risk of heart disease to increase. However, that clearly isn’t the case for you. If it works and it is sustainable for you then go for it. If it stops working or you notice unwanted side effects then look at changing it.2
-
As long as you have no health issues that would be negatively affected by a high fat diet (like familial hypercholerolemia), I do not know of any long term negative health effects.
I would avoid plant fats and trans fats though. Those tend to cause health problems. Saturated, monounsaturated and omega-3 polyunsaturated fats (usually from animals) tend to be quite good for you and lower the risk of many diseases. As long as you don't eat too many calories, they are good for you.
5 -
Yes there can be negative long term effects per the American Heart Association - heart.org
Make sure you get your cholesterol checked in a few months to see if it's gone up, especially LDL. I did a low carb high fat diet for a while and my cholesterol was 100 points above the optimal level. I cut back on fat an now stay under 15% fat for my labs to stay normal.
Another thing that could go wrong with a high fat diet is insulin resistance goes up which raises your risk of diabetes. So get your fasting blood glucose and A1c test to make sure you're not one of those people.1 -
Traveler120 wrote: »Yes there can be negative long term effects per the American Heart Association - heart.org
Make sure you get your cholesterol checked in a few months to see if it's gone up, especially LDL. I did a low carb high fat diet for a while and my cholesterol was 100 points above the optimal level. I cut back on fat an now stay under 15% fat for my labs to stay normal.
Another thing that could go wrong with a high fat diet is insulin resistance goes up which raises your risk of diabetes. So get your fasting blood glucose and A1c test to make sure you're not one of those people.
The bolded is not correct. One will get transient physiological insulin resistance from a LCHF diet, meaning that your bdy gets used to fewer carbs and needing less insulin so if you reintroduce a moderate or high carb diet it will take your body a day or so to adjust... The same way it takes the body a day or so to adjust to a LCHF diet from a higher carb diet.
The AHA's advice on saturated fats is sadly outdated and based on very weak science, IMO. Canada dropped their (limited) saturated fat guidelines already and many other countries are doing the same. I wouldn't be surprised if the AHA changed their tune very very soon.3 -
Thanks for your input, everyone!0
-
Traveler120 wrote: »Yes there can be negative long term effects per the American Heart Association - heart.org
Make sure you get your cholesterol checked in a few months to see if it's gone up, especially LDL. I did a low carb high fat diet for a while and my cholesterol was 100 points above the optimal level. I cut back on fat an now stay under 15% fat for my labs to stay normal.
Another thing that could go wrong with a high fat diet is insulin resistance goes up which raises your risk of diabetes. So get your fasting blood glucose and A1c test to make sure you're not one of those people.
...........The AHA's advice on saturated fats is sadly outdated and based on very weak science, IMO. Canada dropped their (limited) saturated fat guidelines already and many other countries are doing the same. I wouldn't be surprised if the AHA changed their tune very very soon.
A bit of fact-checking shows you're misinformed or worse, lying.
Canadian Cardiovascular Society - http://www.ccs.ca/en/ posted their 2016 updated guidelines here:
https://www.ccs.ca/images/Guidelines/PocketGuides_EN/Lipids_Gui_2016_EN.pdf
"Key Messages:
• LDL-cholesterol levels are directly linked to the development of atherosclerosis and its reduction is directly linked to the reduction in cardiovascular disease events"
"Healthy Eating:
• We suggest that individuals avoid the intake of trans fats and decrease the intake of saturated fats for CVD disease risk reduction".
1 -
Read up on keto.1
-
Traveler120 wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »Yes there can be negative long term effects per the American Heart Association - heart.org
Make sure you get your cholesterol checked in a few months to see if it's gone up, especially LDL. I did a low carb high fat diet for a while and my cholesterol was 100 points above the optimal level. I cut back on fat an now stay under 15% fat for my labs to stay normal.
Another thing that could go wrong with a high fat diet is insulin resistance goes up which raises your risk of diabetes. So get your fasting blood glucose and A1c test to make sure you're not one of those people.
...........The AHA's advice on saturated fats is sadly outdated and based on very weak science, IMO. Canada dropped their (limited) saturated fat guidelines already and many other countries are doing the same. I wouldn't be surprised if the AHA changed their tune very very soon.
A bit of fact-checking shows you're misinformed or worse, lying.
Canadian Cardiovascular Society - http://www.ccs.ca/en/ posted their 2016 updated guidelines here:
https://www.ccs.ca/images/Guidelines/PocketGuides_EN/Lipids_Gui_2016_EN.pdf
"Key Messages:
• LDL-cholesterol levels are directly linked to the development of atherosclerosis and its reduction is directly linked to the reduction in cardiovascular disease events"
"Healthy Eating:
• We suggest that individuals avoid the intake of trans fats and decrease the intake of saturated fats for CVD disease risk reduction".
I think she may be referring to this announcement:
http://news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do?nid=1141989
that followed this Senate's report:
https://sencanada.ca/content/sen/committee/421/SOCI/Reports/2016-02-25_Revised_report_Obesity_in_Canada_e.pdf
I'm not sure what the outcome will be, but definitely things are moving.
1 -
Things are definitely moving from the days when all fat was bad and sugar good, back in the 60's/70's now it is being recognised that fat is the principal building block for our hormones and things. Cocoanut oil, olive oil and the like are recognised as being "healthy fats". Nuts are seen as "better" protein than meats because the fats are more beneficial over all. But for now this is all generalisation and what is right for one is not for another, for now at least.1
-
I've been wondering this, too, because my diet is similar... about 50% of my calories come from fat in the form of nuts, seeds, coconut, and some olive oil or coconut oil.
I developed a wide range of food intolerances during my last pregnancy. I can't eat beans or most grains, and quite a few vegetables as well. I've never been a big fan of meat, but I try to eat it about three times a week and the rest of the time my protein sources are from nuts and seeds. I also drink a vega protein shake every day.
Anyway, my food choices are so limited that I'm not sure I could do anything about it either way. Last time I had my cholesterol checked it was on the low side.0 -
Its interesting, your developing food intolerances during a pregnancy, many cases of Hashimoto's seem, to be triggered around the time of a pregnancy, but not always, not all medics are up with this. (I have read open access teaching hospital papers and stuff) Pregnancy puts pressure on the mother's systems, its a person thing how one's body reacts.
From my experience, I think salicylate is not a primary problem for you because I was not able to eat/use olive oil, cocoanut, and nuts. My problem was with principally with fruit and veg which use salicylate as a protection from moulds and mildews, note to avoid gm because the modification probably includes/increases salicylate levels.
Most people are not aware the body is capable of making its own cholesterol, I can't think of the process at the moment. Cholesterol is the fat which is base to many hormones or similar. If your level is low you could track down the background blocks for it.
Turning my thoughts to histamine. Histamine is found on meat, you said you were never a fan this could be a tiny signpost. Fresh meat is not as badly effected I think if memory serves right fresh cooked is similar it is when you come to cold cuts, second day servings, reheating and the like. Using "sausage" as a broad term for foods which combine hung or aged meat these are high in histamine. It is also in cheese usually aged and similar. Keeping the surfaces scrupulously clean can help, don't go down the modern chemical path, use the old fashioned sodas like the earlier generations used they add less to the home in the way of chemicals. Beans is definitely a lack of a digestive enzyme. Pressure on the "thyroid" etc, limits the range of enzymes a body can make for itself and feed into the gut to aid the microbes and things.
The lack of certain digestive microbes increases the risk of b 12 deficiency, some digestive microbes make the "intrinsic factor", medical name, which help absorb b12. Its all fascinating.
The gut should be semipermeable, meaning the only food which can pass through it is so fine it is reduced to the status of a "sugar" for want of a better term. Working on your digestive biome will help.
I strongly suggest you read the work of on line, people such as, Chris Kresser, someone who was loosing his life, vitality etc. after doing a year out between school and University, learned his way through it all and has his clinic. He recognises the presence of moulds in the domestic environment as an increasing problem in our homes and cities. A Dr D Jockers has come into my reading recently and I find his work interesting too. There are other medics with a presence on line too. Often decried by those who have no experience of our sort of problems Mercola is also helpful.
Mercola had a vit c product which was so simple, I could use it, that was when I was at my worst, it was found by my dentist to use instead of antibiotics which is how he regularly uses it. (I had my amalgam fillings replaces the metals in the fillings can cause toxicity problems. Lead and coper water pipes can contribute. Using the contraceptive pill can cause issues, they over-ride the bodies natural pathways. A gd was taken ill recently and the only cause that could be speculated at was the use of the pill! nothing else was found, no idea if her t3 status was investigated)
Returning to the Thyroid Numbers to which doctors refer when they are thinking of treatments, the site Stop the Thyroid Madness, had an item which is critical of the way these numbers were achieved. When most research is embarked on the status of the sample is usually taken. Their point was, the blood samples used, were devoid of relevant information, if the downer had a thyroid diagnosis, were they related to someone with a thyroid status had this information been available the "normal range" would more probably been more closely defined. This does not take away from each of us having our own "pre thyroid problem " status which is specific to us considering the feed back loops.
I hope you are able to fine someone with greater knowledge to help you through this minefield.0 -
Gianfranco_R wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »Yes there can be negative long term effects per the American Heart Association - heart.org
Make sure you get your cholesterol checked in a few months to see if it's gone up, especially LDL. I did a low carb high fat diet for a while and my cholesterol was 100 points above the optimal level. I cut back on fat an now stay under 15% fat for my labs to stay normal.
Another thing that could go wrong with a high fat diet is insulin resistance goes up which raises your risk of diabetes. So get your fasting blood glucose and A1c test to make sure you're not one of those people.
...........The AHA's advice on saturated fats is sadly outdated and based on very weak science, IMO. Canada dropped their (limited) saturated fat guidelines already and many other countries are doing the same. I wouldn't be surprised if the AHA changed their tune very very soon.
A bit of fact-checking shows you're misinformed or worse, lying.
Canadian Cardiovascular Society - http://www.ccs.ca/en/ posted their 2016 updated guidelines here:
https://www.ccs.ca/images/Guidelines/PocketGuides_EN/Lipids_Gui_2016_EN.pdf
"Key Messages:
• LDL-cholesterol levels are directly linked to the development of atherosclerosis and its reduction is directly linked to the reduction in cardiovascular disease events"
"Healthy Eating:
• We suggest that individuals avoid the intake of trans fats and decrease the intake of saturated fats for CVD disease risk reduction".
I think she may be referring to this announcement:
http://news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do?nid=1141989
that followed this Senate's report:
https://sencanada.ca/content/sen/committee/421/SOCI/Reports/2016-02-25_Revised_report_Obesity_in_Canada_e.pdf
I'm not sure what the outcome will be, but definitely things are moving.
You obviously didn't read your own links coz none of this is providing any evidence that "Canada is dropping their saturated fat guidelines" as was asserted. In fact, rather than reversing anything, they're saying they need to communicate it much better than they currently are and that their current food guide is consistent with the latest evidence reviewed.
http://news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do?mthd=tp&crtr.page=1&nid=1142009
"New scientific evidence
During the evidence review, Health Canada found that much of the science on which the Food Guide is based is consistent with the latest evidence on diet and health. However, we need to strengthen how we communicate our advice. Here are some examples of important messages we want to communicate to Canadians:
Replacing saturated fat with unsaturated fat is linked to a lower risk of cardiovascular disease.
A higher intake of sugar-sweetened beverages is linked to an increased risk of obesity in children."2 -
A lot of the "fat is bad for you" studies were sponsored by the sugar industry. Here's the article: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/13/well/eat/how-the-sugar-industry-shifted-blame-to-fat.html?_r=01
-
stripeybelly wrote: »A lot of the "fat is bad for you" studies were sponsored by the sugar industry. Here's the article: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/13/well/eat/how-the-sugar-industry-shifted-blame-to-fat.html?_r=0
It's more of a conspiracy theory than actual evidence. Below is an abstract from the paper.
"The Roger Adams papers and other documents used in this research provide a narrow window into the activities of 1 sugar industry trade association; therefore, it is difficult to validate that the documents gathered are representative of the entirety of SRF internal materials related to Project 226 from the 1950s and 1960s or that the proper weight was given to each data source. There is no direct evidence that the sugar industry wrote or changed the NEJM review manuscript; the evidence that the industry shaped the review’s conclusions is circumstantial. We did not analyze the role of other organizations, nutrition leaders, or food industries that advocated that saturated fat and dietary cholesterol were the main dietary cause of CHD. We could not interview key actors involved in this historical episode because they have died."
So overall, people are trying to vilify sugar/carbs like fat was for years. I suspect in a few years, they will find out that somewhere in the middle is ideal because for some reason we can't think in the middle.
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10456755/how-the-sugar-industry-shaped-heart-disease-research/p12 -
stripeybelly wrote: »A lot of the "fat is bad for you" studies were sponsored by the sugar industry. Here's the article: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/13/well/eat/how-the-sugar-industry-shifted-blame-to-fat.html?_r=0
It's more of a conspiracy theory than actual evidence. Below is an abstract from the paper.
"The Roger Adams papers and other documents used in this research provide a narrow window into the activities of 1 sugar industry trade association; therefore, it is difficult to validate that the documents gathered are representative of the entirety of SRF internal materials related to Project 226 from the 1950s and 1960s or that the proper weight was given to each data source. There is no direct evidence that the sugar industry wrote or changed the NEJM review manuscript; the evidence that the industry shaped the review’s conclusions is circumstantial. We did not analyze the role of other organizations, nutrition leaders, or food industries that advocated that saturated fat and dietary cholesterol were the main dietary cause of CHD. We could not interview key actors involved in this historical episode because they have died."
So overall, people are trying to vilify sugar/carbs like fat was for years. I suspect in a few years, they will find out that somewhere in the middle is ideal because for some reason we can't think in the middle.
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10456755/how-the-sugar-industry-shaped-heart-disease-research/p1
I doubt it. Given how we keep hearing that protein makes your kidneys fall out, I suspect that's next. It just never got the attention of the other two, because most people don't consume very large amounts of it.0 -
I have noticed that a lot of people that say they are on low carb/high fat (myself included) are actually practicing more of a low carb/moderate fat. It is very similar to a diabetic diet actually (unless you are going for ketosis). It works very well for my husband and myself because both of us are more satiated with the higher protein foods and less prone to snacking. I might also add that with the reduced snacking it is easier to maintain a deficit. I don't know what the cholesterol levels are at but an ultrasound done 8 months after the original showed that the husband's fatty liver had almost completely resolved and now looks completely normal, also both of our blood pressure is in the perfect zone for our ages. Diabetes runs very strongly in both of our families so we see this as a way of life and not just a diet if we want to avoid all the problems that almost every one else in our families has.2
-
Gianfranco_R wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »Yes there can be negative long term effects per the American Heart Association - heart.org
Make sure you get your cholesterol checked in a few months to see if it's gone up, especially LDL. I did a low carb high fat diet for a while and my cholesterol was 100 points above the optimal level. I cut back on fat an now stay under 15% fat for my labs to stay normal.
Another thing that could go wrong with a high fat diet is insulin resistance goes up which raises your risk of diabetes. So get your fasting blood glucose and A1c test to make sure you're not one of those people.
...........The AHA's advice on saturated fats is sadly outdated and based on very weak science, IMO. Canada dropped their (limited) saturated fat guidelines already and many other countries are doing the same. I wouldn't be surprised if the AHA changed their tune very very soon.
A bit of fact-checking shows you're misinformed or worse, lying.
Canadian Cardiovascular Society - http://www.ccs.ca/en/ posted their 2016 updated guidelines here:
https://www.ccs.ca/images/Guidelines/PocketGuides_EN/Lipids_Gui_2016_EN.pdf
"Key Messages:
• LDL-cholesterol levels are directly linked to the development of atherosclerosis and its reduction is directly linked to the reduction in cardiovascular disease events"
"Healthy Eating:
• We suggest that individuals avoid the intake of trans fats and decrease the intake of saturated fats for CVD disease risk reduction".
I think she may be referring to this announcement:
http://news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do?nid=1141989
that followed this Senate's report:
https://sencanada.ca/content/sen/committee/421/SOCI/Reports/2016-02-25_Revised_report_Obesity_in_Canada_e.pdf
I'm not sure what the outcome will be, but definitely things are moving.
Yes. Thank you.
I may have got it mixed up. I believe it is the total fat limit that was dropped... They are just reassessing sat. fats since there is not any good science supporting the idea that it is unhealthy.
Change is just way too slow.
0 -
Gianfranco_R wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »Yes there can be negative long term effects per the American Heart Association - heart.org
Make sure you get your cholesterol checked in a few months to see if it's gone up, especially LDL. I did a low carb high fat diet for a while and my cholesterol was 100 points above the optimal level. I cut back on fat an now stay under 15% fat for my labs to stay normal.
Another thing that could go wrong with a high fat diet is insulin resistance goes up which raises your risk of diabetes. So get your fasting blood glucose and A1c test to make sure you're not one of those people.
...........The AHA's advice on saturated fats is sadly outdated and based on very weak science, IMO. Canada dropped their (limited) saturated fat guidelines already and many other countries are doing the same. I wouldn't be surprised if the AHA changed their tune very very soon.
A bit of fact-checking shows you're misinformed or worse, lying.
Canadian Cardiovascular Society - http://www.ccs.ca/en/ posted their 2016 updated guidelines here:
https://www.ccs.ca/images/Guidelines/PocketGuides_EN/Lipids_Gui_2016_EN.pdf
"Key Messages:
• LDL-cholesterol levels are directly linked to the development of atherosclerosis and its reduction is directly linked to the reduction in cardiovascular disease events"
"Healthy Eating:
• We suggest that individuals avoid the intake of trans fats and decrease the intake of saturated fats for CVD disease risk reduction".
I think she may be referring to this announcement:
http://news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do?nid=1141989
that followed this Senate's report:
https://sencanada.ca/content/sen/committee/421/SOCI/Reports/2016-02-25_Revised_report_Obesity_in_Canada_e.pdf
I'm not sure what the outcome will be, but definitely things are moving.
Yes. Thank you.
I may have got it mixed up. I believe it is the total fat limit that was dropped... They are just reassessing sat. fats since there is not any good science supporting the idea that it is unhealthy.
Change is just way too slow.
You're welcome.
Anyway I must say I am not enthusiast about the methodology of the change. We don't need to replace one dogma with another. Governments should simply take a step back on dietary guidelines.0 -
Hello, your calories and diet sound very similar to mine. I have been wondering the same so thanks for asking the question! I eat lots of coconut oil (in smoothies), olive oil, avocado, almonds, houmous, eggs. I feel sure these foods are good for me though. I also eat a lot of fresh vegetables ( I am veggie and dairy free.) I am just this week starting over having gained 20 pounds through not tracking and exercising as often as I should. It freaks me out when I look at my nutrition graphs at the end of the day and it's around 50% fat, even though I think they are "good" fats!0
-
Gianfranco_R wrote: »Gianfranco_R wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »Yes there can be negative long term effects per the American Heart Association - heart.org
Make sure you get your cholesterol checked in a few months to see if it's gone up, especially LDL. I did a low carb high fat diet for a while and my cholesterol was 100 points above the optimal level. I cut back on fat an now stay under 15% fat for my labs to stay normal.
Another thing that could go wrong with a high fat diet is insulin resistance goes up which raises your risk of diabetes. So get your fasting blood glucose and A1c test to make sure you're not one of those people.
...........The AHA's advice on saturated fats is sadly outdated and based on very weak science, IMO. Canada dropped their (limited) saturated fat guidelines already and many other countries are doing the same. I wouldn't be surprised if the AHA changed their tune very very soon.
A bit of fact-checking shows you're misinformed or worse, lying.
Canadian Cardiovascular Society - http://www.ccs.ca/en/ posted their 2016 updated guidelines here:
https://www.ccs.ca/images/Guidelines/PocketGuides_EN/Lipids_Gui_2016_EN.pdf
"Key Messages:
• LDL-cholesterol levels are directly linked to the development of atherosclerosis and its reduction is directly linked to the reduction in cardiovascular disease events"
"Healthy Eating:
• We suggest that individuals avoid the intake of trans fats and decrease the intake of saturated fats for CVD disease risk reduction".
I think she may be referring to this announcement:
http://news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do?nid=1141989
that followed this Senate's report:
https://sencanada.ca/content/sen/committee/421/SOCI/Reports/2016-02-25_Revised_report_Obesity_in_Canada_e.pdf
I'm not sure what the outcome will be, but definitely things are moving.
Yes. Thank you.
I may have got it mixed up. I believe it is the total fat limit that was dropped... They are just reassessing sat. fats since there is not any good science supporting the idea that it is unhealthy.
Change is just way too slow.
You're welcome.
Anyway I must say I am not enthusiast about the methodology of the change. We don't need to replace one dogma with another. Governments should simply take a step back on dietary guidelines.
I do think they are starting to... they did increase protein and decrease carb recommendations, removed dietary cholesterol, and brought in the requirement to distinguish between added sugars and natural. All of these, IMO, are in the right direction. But governments can't be chasing the latest and greatest data (like some would want) until there is a ton of evidence by a variety of sources before they can make those changes.
But we should face facts... how many people even look or follow government regulations?0 -
Gianfranco_R wrote: »Gianfranco_R wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »Yes there can be negative long term effects per the American Heart Association - heart.org
Make sure you get your cholesterol checked in a few months to see if it's gone up, especially LDL. I did a low carb high fat diet for a while and my cholesterol was 100 points above the optimal level. I cut back on fat an now stay under 15% fat for my labs to stay normal.
Another thing that could go wrong with a high fat diet is insulin resistance goes up which raises your risk of diabetes. So get your fasting blood glucose and A1c test to make sure you're not one of those people.
...........The AHA's advice on saturated fats is sadly outdated and based on very weak science, IMO. Canada dropped their (limited) saturated fat guidelines already and many other countries are doing the same. I wouldn't be surprised if the AHA changed their tune very very soon.
A bit of fact-checking shows you're misinformed or worse, lying.
Canadian Cardiovascular Society - http://www.ccs.ca/en/ posted their 2016 updated guidelines here:
https://www.ccs.ca/images/Guidelines/PocketGuides_EN/Lipids_Gui_2016_EN.pdf
"Key Messages:
• LDL-cholesterol levels are directly linked to the development of atherosclerosis and its reduction is directly linked to the reduction in cardiovascular disease events"
"Healthy Eating:
• We suggest that individuals avoid the intake of trans fats and decrease the intake of saturated fats for CVD disease risk reduction".
I think she may be referring to this announcement:
http://news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do?nid=1141989
that followed this Senate's report:
https://sencanada.ca/content/sen/committee/421/SOCI/Reports/2016-02-25_Revised_report_Obesity_in_Canada_e.pdf
I'm not sure what the outcome will be, but definitely things are moving.
Yes. Thank you.
I may have got it mixed up. I believe it is the total fat limit that was dropped... They are just reassessing sat. fats since there is not any good science supporting the idea that it is unhealthy.
Change is just way too slow.
You're welcome.
Anyway I must say I am not enthusiast about the methodology of the change. We don't need to replace one dogma with another. Governments should simply take a step back on dietary guidelines.
I do think they are starting to... they did increase protein and decrease carb recommendations, removed dietary cholesterol, and brought in the requirement to distinguish between added sugars and natural. All of these, IMO, are in the right direction. But governments can't be chasing the latest and greatest data (like some would want) until there is a ton of evidence by a variety of sources before they can make those changes.
But we should face facts... how many people even look or follow government regulations?
Right -- despite the (tiresome) arguments here about carbs vs. fat and all the rest, the basic guidelines have always been good advice if followed and yet not followed: eat more vegetables, eat mostly whole foods and less refined carbs, don't overdo sugar or eat lots of sugar from non whole food sources, etc. Also, don't eat too much.0 -
Gianfranco_R wrote: »Gianfranco_R wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »Yes there can be negative long term effects per the American Heart Association - heart.org
Make sure you get your cholesterol checked in a few months to see if it's gone up, especially LDL. I did a low carb high fat diet for a while and my cholesterol was 100 points above the optimal level. I cut back on fat an now stay under 15% fat for my labs to stay normal.
Another thing that could go wrong with a high fat diet is insulin resistance goes up which raises your risk of diabetes. So get your fasting blood glucose and A1c test to make sure you're not one of those people.
...........The AHA's advice on saturated fats is sadly outdated and based on very weak science, IMO. Canada dropped their (limited) saturated fat guidelines already and many other countries are doing the same. I wouldn't be surprised if the AHA changed their tune very very soon.
A bit of fact-checking shows you're misinformed or worse, lying.
Canadian Cardiovascular Society - http://www.ccs.ca/en/ posted their 2016 updated guidelines here:
https://www.ccs.ca/images/Guidelines/PocketGuides_EN/Lipids_Gui_2016_EN.pdf
"Key Messages:
• LDL-cholesterol levels are directly linked to the development of atherosclerosis and its reduction is directly linked to the reduction in cardiovascular disease events"
"Healthy Eating:
• We suggest that individuals avoid the intake of trans fats and decrease the intake of saturated fats for CVD disease risk reduction".
I think she may be referring to this announcement:
http://news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do?nid=1141989
that followed this Senate's report:
https://sencanada.ca/content/sen/committee/421/SOCI/Reports/2016-02-25_Revised_report_Obesity_in_Canada_e.pdf
I'm not sure what the outcome will be, but definitely things are moving.
Yes. Thank you.
I may have got it mixed up. I believe it is the total fat limit that was dropped... They are just reassessing sat. fats since there is not any good science supporting the idea that it is unhealthy.
Change is just way too slow.
You're welcome.
Anyway I must say I am not enthusiast about the methodology of the change. We don't need to replace one dogma with another. Governments should simply take a step back on dietary guidelines.
I think they should step back from guidelines that apply to everyone. There's too much variation out there for that to work.0 -
Gianfranco_R wrote: »Gianfranco_R wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »Yes there can be negative long term effects per the American Heart Association - heart.org
Make sure you get your cholesterol checked in a few months to see if it's gone up, especially LDL. I did a low carb high fat diet for a while and my cholesterol was 100 points above the optimal level. I cut back on fat an now stay under 15% fat for my labs to stay normal.
Another thing that could go wrong with a high fat diet is insulin resistance goes up which raises your risk of diabetes. So get your fasting blood glucose and A1c test to make sure you're not one of those people.
...........The AHA's advice on saturated fats is sadly outdated and based on very weak science, IMO. Canada dropped their (limited) saturated fat guidelines already and many other countries are doing the same. I wouldn't be surprised if the AHA changed their tune very very soon.
A bit of fact-checking shows you're misinformed or worse, lying.
Canadian Cardiovascular Society - http://www.ccs.ca/en/ posted their 2016 updated guidelines here:
https://www.ccs.ca/images/Guidelines/PocketGuides_EN/Lipids_Gui_2016_EN.pdf
"Key Messages:
• LDL-cholesterol levels are directly linked to the development of atherosclerosis and its reduction is directly linked to the reduction in cardiovascular disease events"
"Healthy Eating:
• We suggest that individuals avoid the intake of trans fats and decrease the intake of saturated fats for CVD disease risk reduction".
I think she may be referring to this announcement:
http://news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do?nid=1141989
that followed this Senate's report:
https://sencanada.ca/content/sen/committee/421/SOCI/Reports/2016-02-25_Revised_report_Obesity_in_Canada_e.pdf
I'm not sure what the outcome will be, but definitely things are moving.
Yes. Thank you.
I may have got it mixed up. I believe it is the total fat limit that was dropped... They are just reassessing sat. fats since there is not any good science supporting the idea that it is unhealthy.
Change is just way too slow.
You're welcome.
Anyway I must say I am not enthusiast about the methodology of the change. We don't need to replace one dogma with another. Governments should simply take a step back on dietary guidelines.
I do think they are starting to... they did increase protein and decrease carb recommendations, removed dietary cholesterol, and brought in the requirement to distinguish between added sugars and natural. All of these, IMO, are in the right direction. But governments can't be chasing the latest and greatest data (like some would want) until there is a ton of evidence by a variety of sources before they can make those changes.
But we should face facts... how many people even look or follow government regulations?
I did. I was low fat for years. And got my servings of whole grains and fruits. Limited meats and fats. Went for white meat and skipped the yolks. Skim milk on cardboard, I mean Special K.1 -
Gianfranco_R wrote: »Gianfranco_R wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »Yes there can be negative long term effects per the American Heart Association - heart.org
Make sure you get your cholesterol checked in a few months to see if it's gone up, especially LDL. I did a low carb high fat diet for a while and my cholesterol was 100 points above the optimal level. I cut back on fat an now stay under 15% fat for my labs to stay normal.
Another thing that could go wrong with a high fat diet is insulin resistance goes up which raises your risk of diabetes. So get your fasting blood glucose and A1c test to make sure you're not one of those people.
...........The AHA's advice on saturated fats is sadly outdated and based on very weak science, IMO. Canada dropped their (limited) saturated fat guidelines already and many other countries are doing the same. I wouldn't be surprised if the AHA changed their tune very very soon.
A bit of fact-checking shows you're misinformed or worse, lying.
Canadian Cardiovascular Society - http://www.ccs.ca/en/ posted their 2016 updated guidelines here:
https://www.ccs.ca/images/Guidelines/PocketGuides_EN/Lipids_Gui_2016_EN.pdf
"Key Messages:
• LDL-cholesterol levels are directly linked to the development of atherosclerosis and its reduction is directly linked to the reduction in cardiovascular disease events"
"Healthy Eating:
• We suggest that individuals avoid the intake of trans fats and decrease the intake of saturated fats for CVD disease risk reduction".
I think she may be referring to this announcement:
http://news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do?nid=1141989
that followed this Senate's report:
https://sencanada.ca/content/sen/committee/421/SOCI/Reports/2016-02-25_Revised_report_Obesity_in_Canada_e.pdf
I'm not sure what the outcome will be, but definitely things are moving.
Yes. Thank you.
I may have got it mixed up. I believe it is the total fat limit that was dropped... They are just reassessing sat. fats since there is not any good science supporting the idea that it is unhealthy.
Change is just way too slow.
You're welcome.
Anyway I must say I am not enthusiast about the methodology of the change. We don't need to replace one dogma with another. Governments should simply take a step back on dietary guidelines.
I do think they are starting to... they did increase protein and decrease carb recommendations, removed dietary cholesterol, and brought in the requirement to distinguish between added sugars and natural. All of these, IMO, are in the right direction. But governments can't be chasing the latest and greatest data (like some would want) until there is a ton of evidence by a variety of sources before they can make those changes.
But we should face facts... how many people even look or follow government regulations?
I did. I was low fat for years. And got my servings of whole grains and fruits. Limited meats and fats. Went for white meat and skipped the yolks. Skim milk on cardboard, I mean Special K.
Congrats... you are the first lol.0 -
Gianfranco_R wrote: »Gianfranco_R wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »Yes there can be negative long term effects per the American Heart Association - heart.org
Make sure you get your cholesterol checked in a few months to see if it's gone up, especially LDL. I did a low carb high fat diet for a while and my cholesterol was 100 points above the optimal level. I cut back on fat an now stay under 15% fat for my labs to stay normal.
Another thing that could go wrong with a high fat diet is insulin resistance goes up which raises your risk of diabetes. So get your fasting blood glucose and A1c test to make sure you're not one of those people.
...........The AHA's advice on saturated fats is sadly outdated and based on very weak science, IMO. Canada dropped their (limited) saturated fat guidelines already and many other countries are doing the same. I wouldn't be surprised if the AHA changed their tune very very soon.
A bit of fact-checking shows you're misinformed or worse, lying.
Canadian Cardiovascular Society - http://www.ccs.ca/en/ posted their 2016 updated guidelines here:
https://www.ccs.ca/images/Guidelines/PocketGuides_EN/Lipids_Gui_2016_EN.pdf
"Key Messages:
• LDL-cholesterol levels are directly linked to the development of atherosclerosis and its reduction is directly linked to the reduction in cardiovascular disease events"
"Healthy Eating:
• We suggest that individuals avoid the intake of trans fats and decrease the intake of saturated fats for CVD disease risk reduction".
I think she may be referring to this announcement:
http://news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do?nid=1141989
that followed this Senate's report:
https://sencanada.ca/content/sen/committee/421/SOCI/Reports/2016-02-25_Revised_report_Obesity_in_Canada_e.pdf
I'm not sure what the outcome will be, but definitely things are moving.
Yes. Thank you.
I may have got it mixed up. I believe it is the total fat limit that was dropped... They are just reassessing sat. fats since there is not any good science supporting the idea that it is unhealthy.
Change is just way too slow.
You're welcome.
Anyway I must say I am not enthusiast about the methodology of the change. We don't need to replace one dogma with another. Governments should simply take a step back on dietary guidelines.
I do think they are starting to... they did increase protein and decrease carb recommendations, removed dietary cholesterol, and brought in the requirement to distinguish between added sugars and natural. All of these, IMO, are in the right direction. But governments can't be chasing the latest and greatest data (like some would want) until there is a ton of evidence by a variety of sources before they can make those changes.
But we should face facts... how many people even look or follow government regulations?
I did. I was low fat for years. And got my servings of whole grains and fruits. Limited meats and fats. Went for white meat and skipped the yolks. Skim milk on cardboard, I mean Special K.
Congrats... you are the first lol.
LoL Nah. There's gotta be at least a couple of others!0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions