Comments on: Saturated fat: we still don’t get it

By: Bill Shrapnel

Bill Shrapnel — Sun, 05 Oct 2014 01:12:51 +0000

Hello Lisa. I can’t say I have ever seen a Tick on Coco-Pops. Are you sure of your facts?
I recommended that saturated fat be replaced by unsaturated fats and I have provided ample evidence in support of this many times on this blog. Please take the time to read through and study the references.
Virtually every nutrition authority in the world recommends the same thing so I may be onto something! Regards, Bill

By: Lisa

Lisa — Sat, 04 Oct 2014 14:17:52 +0000

lol… and Bill Shrapnel consults to Goodman Fielder, Kelloggs and the Australian Oilseeds Federation. Previously, he consulted to Unilever (responsible for Miracle Margarine). And, he also previously worked for the National Heart Foundation, responsible for the tick of death program (as seen on such wonderful foods such a frozen pizza and Coco-pops!). Notice, he’s going to keep looking for evidence that saturated fat is bad for you because he doesn’t have a pay-cheque from that industry. His advice is as biased as it comes, he is a consultant to the worst of the food industry.

By: Bill Shrapnel

Bill Shrapnel — Mon, 11 Aug 2014 21:02:44 +0000

Hi Hellene. The onus is really on those pushing the more-saturated-fat-is-better argument to mount a decent scientific argument to support their case. What the science is actually telling us is that saturated fat and carbohydrate are now known to confer the same risk for heart disease. So, if saturated fat is increased in the diet at the expense of carbohydrate there should be no harm. But importantly, there is no benefit either, so this can’t be portrayed as a healthy option.
In contrast, unsaturated fats are a better option than either saturated fat or carbohydrate. Most dietary authorities recommend the replacement of saturated fat with unsaturated fat. However, there is an equally valid argument for replacing carbohydrate with unsaturated fats – giving higher fat diets, but enriched with unsaturated fats rather than saturated fats.This is like the Mediterranean diet, only more so.
The scientific trials testing this option are only now being conducted and one from CSIRO has just been published. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25071075
This shows the benefit of a higher fat, high unsaturated fat diet for people with type 2 diabetes. No health authority is recommending high saturated fat diets though. Regards, Bill

By: Hellene

Hellene — Mon, 11 Aug 2014 00:36:16 +0000

Hi Bill,

Do you have a summary or some references to combat the pro-paleo argument that more saturated fat is better? Are there any studies that have actually compared high saturated fat (equivalent of what some of these pro-paleo-butter-and-coconut-oil-in-my-coffee-6-eggs-and-bacon-for-breakfast-type are having), to replacing sat fat with carbs or unsat fat evidence/disease risk. As that is how the media’s version of these studies have been interpreted by some.

By: Janis Williams

Janis Williams — Wed, 30 Jul 2014 07:20:30 +0000

Nice summary Thanks

By: ENW

ENW — Wed, 23 Jul 2014 05:51:57 +0000

I am confused. Do you think a low fat diet is 35% total fat? Some would say this is the same as the Mediterranean diet.

The recommendations as I read them are to replace saturated fat with poly and mono unsaturated fats not carbohydrate. And if you include the other dietary recommendations which are to include more vegetables, fish, legumes is this not the healthy dietswe are aiming for? It does recommend limiting added fats such as oils and margarine’s but not poly and mono unsaturated fats from whole foods such as nuts , seeds, fish, avocado, olives, nut pastes

By: Bill Shrapnel

Bill Shrapnel — Fri, 11 Apr 2014 22:27:57 +0000

Come on Nikki. You can’t blame the food industry for everything. After all, the Dietary Guidelines and the Australian Guide to Healthy Eating were developed by the National Health and Medical Research Council. No one would argue that the NHMRC’s committee was biased towards the food industry. In fact, the big criticism of the committee was that it was more interested in global warming than nutrition science.
Yes, you could argue that the dairy industry has had an influence on the proposed star food labelling system. The early algorithm used to allocate stars rated dairy products fairly lowly, because of their saturated fat content, so the system was changed. Now I understand that three of the six categories of food considered are dairy categories, specially created to bump up the scores of dairy foods. This makes a nonsense of the whole thing. Why is saturated fat in a hamburger bad for you and saturated fat in dairy foods OK?
The public health nutrition sector hasn’t fought this – they have embraced it. Sometimes it’s worthwhile stepping out of the trenches and reflecting. Regards, Bill

By: Bill Shrapnel

Bill Shrapnel — Fri, 11 Apr 2014 22:12:20 +0000

Hi Shane. You are asking all the right questions. The Jakobsen pooled analysis showed that saturated fat and carbohydrate conferred the same risk for heart disease. However, the carbohydrate referred to in this study is the sum total of all carbohydrate typically consumed by western populations. So, as you suggest, we are including everything from nutrient-poor, high GI, low fibre confectionery to nutrient-rich, low GI, high fibre legumes. The ‘quality’ of carbohydrate-rich foods differs widely and this most certainly has implications for coronary risk.
Carbohydrate quality is still not well defined but lots of people are working on it. The measures I use to define higher quality are higher fibre (or wholegrain), lower GI and higher nutrient density. There are lots of carbohydrate-rich foods in the average diet that lack ANY of these qualities and these should be targets for reduction, or replacement with better quality carbs or unsaturated fats.
Low fat diets are OK and most likely beneficial if they are comprised of a combination of nutrient-rich foods, wholegrains, high fibre foods and low GI foods. However, typical low fats diets are full of poor quality carbs. Similarly, high fat diets are OK if they are rich in unsaturated fats as in the classic Mediterranean diet.
So whether a diet is low or high in fat doesn’t really matter and we shouldn’t focus on it. The quality of the fat and the quality of the carbohydrate are the key variables. Regards, Bill

By: Shane

Shane — Fri, 11 Apr 2014 13:21:07 +0000

Thanks for the article, Bill.

I’m still a bit confused though.

Is it right to say that low fat diets don’t work? Or does it depend on what kind of low fat diet it is? I believe that some low fat diets, like the Ornish diet, have some pretty impressive studies that suggest that they are an effective treatment for heart disease. Have diets like these been shown to not work? I guess it depends on how the researcher defines a low fat diet, I know of some studies where the low fat group eats a diet consisting of about 30% fat! which I wouldn’t consider to be low fat.

Also, when the study authors say ”replacing saturated fat with carbohydrate has no benefit”, it must depend on the type of carbohydrate. Doesn’t it? I find it hard to believe that someone eating less bacon and more chick peas wouldn’t be doing their heart a favour. Is it just the fibre-less refined carbohydrates that are not good replacements, or all carbohydrates? If it IS just refined carbohydrates, shouldn’t it be specified? Imagine if it were the other way around and it read ”replacing refined carbohydrates with fat showed no benefit.” I think that would be misleading since fat could be anything from biscuits to cashews. Likewise, carbohydrate could be anything from lentils to lollipops.

By: Nikki

Nikki — Tue, 08 Apr 2014 03:33:31 +0000

I have to argue the problem is not that public health nutritionists are unaware or ‘asleep at the wheel,’ its that the food industry is being allowed to drive the ship while public health nutrition has been demoted to cabin boy.