Here's the study "Meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies evaluating the association of saturated fat with cardiovascular disease"

http://www.ajcn.org/c...

Prevailing condemnation of saturated fats by the medical community is wrong. A new analysis of risk of coronary, stroke and vascular disease vindicates saturated fats.



The relationship between saturated fats and diseases of the heart and blood vessels has had its ups and downs during the last half century. Based on very limited data and some questionable analysis, there was an early effort to associate diets rich in saturated fats, e.g. eggs and bacon, bread and butter, meat and potatoes, with cardiovascular disease (CVD). This coincided with increasing availability of cheap vegetable oils from corn and soy beans. Unfortunately, the shift from saturated fats to omega-6-rich vegetable oils and starch/sugar/high fructose corn syrup was associated with a rise in inflammatory degenerative diseases and not by a decline in CVD. A new analysis shows that saturated fats were never a risk factor for CVD.
Initial Studies Linking Saturated Fats with CVD Were Weak

How did the medical community become convinced that saturated fat was bad for heart and arteries? The simple answer is that the original studies that concluded that saturated fats were a risk factor for CVD, actually presented data to show that the effect, though statistically significant was small. In retrospect, the difference in carbohydrates may have been more important.

More Studies Erode the Risk of Saturated Fats

Analysis of all of the studies linking CVD and dietary saturated fats was performed more ten years ago and the conclusion was that if saturated fats contributed to CVD, the effect was small. Even at that time, there was great skepticism that dietary saturated fats in meat, eggs, dairy products and other foods were a risk for heart and vascular diseases.

The Most Recent Analysis of Saturated Fats and CVD Risk

The best studies of the impact of adding saturated fats to a diet on heart disease and stroke were analyzed in a recent study with the stunning conclusion that saturated fats do not contribute to CVD. This comes at the same time that the efficacy of statins and lowering serum lipids is being questioned.

Saturated Fats Were Always Healthy

Traditionally, a healthy diet contained plenty of protein and fat. Most of that fat was saturated fat from animals and carbohydrates were from whole grains or starchy vegetables. In the last half century, the meat has become fatter, vegetable oils have been added and breads are higher in available starch. Attempts to blame CVD on saturated fats were misguided and these fats have now been shown to be harmless. Risk is now beginning to shift to dietary vegetable oils and starch.

An Abstract

ABSTRACT

Background: A reduction in dietary saturated fat has generally been thought to improve cardiovascular health.

Objective: The objective of this meta-analysis was to summarize the evidence related to the association of dietary saturated fat with risk of coronary heart disease (CHD), stroke, and cardiovascular disease (CVD; CHD inclusive of stroke) in prospective epidemiologic studies.

Design: Twenty-one studies identified by searching MEDLINE and EMBASE databases and secondary referencing qualified for inclusion in this study. A random-effects model was used to derive composite relative risk estimates for CHD, stroke, and CVD.

Results: During 5–23 y of follow-up of 347,747 subjects, 11,006 developed CHD or stroke. Intake of saturated fat was not associated with an increased risk of CHD, stroke, or CVD. The pooled relative risk estimates that compared extreme quantiles of saturated fat intake were 1.07 (95% CI: 0.96, 1.19; P = 0.22) for CHD, 0.81 (95% CI: 0.62, 1.05; P = 0.11) for stroke, and 1.00 (95% CI: 0.89, 1.11; P = 0.95) for CVD. Consideration of age, sex, and study quality did not change the results.

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.

Received for publication March 6, 2009. Accepted for publication November 25, 2009.

Thank you for posting this, Carlos.

It might interest you that there's NEVER (that's right, never) been a single study linking saturated fat to heart disease. The lipid hypothesis is just that - a hypothesis. A hypothesis that was never proven, but has been pushed as dietary dogma for a good 50 years now, thanks to underhanded people in government who constructed a food pyramid designed to sell agricultural commodities rather than health. Have you ever seen the documentary The Oiling of America? If you're interested in this stuff, it's a Must-See.

http://www.amazon.com...

Well I read the article that's the basis for the movie Kim, but haven't seen the movie. The best movie I've seen regarding the "obesity epidemic" was "killer at large".

Sounds like "The Vegetarian Myth" by Lierre Keith. Mara has it on her Kindle. ;-)

Uh oh, Carlos. You've really done it now. You've basically just fallen down the rabbit hole.

Before you know it, you'll be putting butter in your coffee and bitching about the gdmf'in farm bill every year. Keep it up and you may find yourself pining for raw (unpasteurized) milk.

I'm impressed that Mara is reading Lierre Keith. Good for you, Mara.

Carlos: I've added Killer at Large to my Netflix queue - thanks!

The Oiling of America is little more than a lecture/powerpoint presentation of Mary Enig's paper, presented by Weston A. Price president Sally Fallon. It's a bit dry, but contains a lot of very important information. If you react to it the way Jack and I did, it will make you ANG-RY. I have a copy if anyone's interested.

Paul: This stuff is exactly what Lierre Keith advocates in the nutrition portion of her book. Lierre rocks!

Oh yay. I was wondering when someone would start another discussion about what we should or shouldn't be eating. I'm glad it wasn't a vegan this time or, instead of thanking him, you people would have ripped him a new one and told him to stop trying to encourage other people to eat his own preferred way. (I hope that doesn't sound bitchy. You know it's true.)

My own input here is that, first, no one is going to change his dietary habits based on something he reads on the San Antonio Atheist Message Boards (and that goes BOTH ways). Even when you-know-who posts her slaughterhouse videos, the same person who watches them and thinks how sick they are is still going to go to McDonald's for a big mac that same evening.

If we're going to have these discussions, what we should be doing is encouraging one another how to eat RESPONSIBLY. I may disagree with certain peoples' dietary choices, but I still appreciate those who can see that there is a vast difference between eating free-range, grass-fed beef from family farms and going to Burger King. Of course, even if the more "ethical" choice is only made fifty percent of time, it's still better than never, and there's always something to be said for that.

As for me, I've denied my body of most the above-mentioned saturated fats for the majority of my life. I feel great, I think I look great, so I see no reason to do anything differently. If you feel the same way about your diet, more power to you. But, seriously, please, let's understand that no one is right and no one is wrong. Science is forever changing, and ten years from who the heck know what a more advanced study is going to tell us. There's always going to be evidence on both sides of every argument.

I just wish I had the patience to actually cook. Last time I was only warming something up only to burn it from inattentiveness. lol