Nutritional myths quiz

I got them all right because I have great friends who I trust to know what they are talking about.

Got them all.

all of em correct =P

Wooohooo all correct. I'm learning x

I missed one but considering i was completely clueless I'll take it! Thanks Chris!

I got them all right except the first one, and it's because I disagree with the first one on evidential grounds. I'll see his 21 study meta-analysis, and raise him a 48 study meta-analysis (selected as the best studies out of 22,000 reviewed) done by the Cochrane Collaboration, widely recognized to be the gold standard in evidence reviews:

http://www.cochranejournalclub.com/reduced-or-modified-dietary-fat-preventing-cardiovascular-disease/pdf/CD002137.pdf

They found a statistically significant 14% reduction in cardiovascular events (including things like cardiovascular mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, unstable angina, chronic stable angina, life-threatening arrhythmias, nonfatal heart failure, nonfatal stroke, peripheral arterial disease, retinal vascular thrombosis, revascularization procedures, transient ischemic attacks, and reversible ischemic neurological deficits) for reduction of saturated fat in the diet and a non-significant 8% reduction in heart attacks in particular with saturated fat reduction.

The effect is small, particularly for women, but that's enough for me personally to stay at least somewhat wary about saturated fat intake.

In fact, the study I linked even addresses the meta-analysis your article references specifically, and its limitations:

"Siri-Tarino 2010 included 21 prospective epidemiologic studies assessing the relationship between saturated fats and coronary heart disease, stroke and cardiovascular disease, finding that saturated fat intake was not associated with risk of coronary heart disease, stroke or cardiovascular disease. Observational studies are potentially powerful at providing associations between dietary factors and cardiovascular risk, but the scale of measurement error is such that detecting such effects may be difficult. Thus intervention studies are needed to clarify cause and effect, to ensure that confounding is not either hiding or generating true relationships. Trials also directly address the issue of whether altering dietary fat in adults is helpful in reducing the risk of cardiovascular diseases in the general population and in those at high risk. It is essential that intervention trials form the basis of evidence based practice in this area."

TL;DR: That meta-analysis was only looking at epidemiological studies, not RCT's of dietary interventions as this meta-analysis does (which are more powerful for showing cause and effect).