This week: Chewing the fat(s)

Two Yorkshire PigsFat is not the enemy! Good thing, because it seems to have been the theme this week.  (This photo, on the other hand, has nothing to do with fat. It’s just darned cute.)

In response to that silly list of “banned foods” circulating around the internet, I put together my own–much shorter–list of foods I will not eat.  Two out of three of them are types of fat. No fear mongering here: I avoid these foods because healthier and more delicious alternatives are so easy to come by.

Among the foods I will not eat is vegetable shortening. (Give me butter or even lard…). But one reader wrote to ask for clarification: Is the “new” Crisco with 0g trans fats OK? Read my answer here.

Another reader was surprised to learn that some vegetable oils are high in saturated fats–and wondered whether saturated vegetable fats are as bad for you as saturated animal fats allegedly are. Here’s what you need to know about the different types of saturated fat.

Yet another reader wrote to ask about a new supplement he’d seen: What are Omega-7s and should you be taking them?

This week’s podcast also fits the theme, although it’s about body fat, not dietary fat. Find out whether doubling your protein can help you shed your love handles.

And one last item that has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with fat: an interview on Morning Edition, discussing merits of kombucha.

Have a great week!

3 thoughts on “This week: Chewing the fat(s)

  1. Dr. Caldwell B. Esselstyn, Jr. is insistent that for optimum prevention of heart disease, no oils be consumed – re: epithelial lining and nitric oxide production.
    http://www.heartattackproof.com/contact.htm
    What do you think?
    Why is there such a divergence of professional opinion on the subject?

    Thank you for your time and expertise,
    John

  2. Dr. Caldwell B. Esselstyn, Jr. is insistent that for optimum prevention of heart disease, no oils be consumed – re: epithelial lining and nitric oxide production.
    http://www.heartattackproof.com/contact.htm
    What do you think?
    Why is there such a divergence of professional opinion on the subject?

    Thank you for your time and expertise,
    John

    1. In a nutshell, I think the divergence of opinion is due to a divergence of evidence. The scientific evidence does not all point in the same direction, allowing people to pick and choose the evidence they find most compelling, to arrive at an “evidence-based” conclusion. At the heart of all this is the fact that there is enormous individual variation–we don’t all respond the same way to the same interventions. Also, consider that there may be more than one valid approach to the same outcome.

Leave a Reply to John Burke Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.