cholesterol

November 27, 2004

So, let me get this straight. CAN we lower our cholesterol? Or shouldn't we

even try? And IS there a " dangerous level " of cholesterol or not? Anyway, I

guess to eat in a more healthy way, we should eliminate all processed foods,

most

sugars (especially processed white sugar and corn syrup), and all

polyunsaturated fats, right? Also all white flour products. Anything else? Is

that the

basic idea, or am I missing something? And I'm assuming we will see a change for

the better in our health, correct? Oh yeah--and switch to organic dairy,

meats, and fruits and veggies too, right? Or isn't this an issue? Oh bother (to

quote Winnie the Pooh). I hope I'm getting this right because I need to talk to

dh tonight, and if I don't have my facts straight, he'll NEVER cooperate!

Marilyn the confused

November 27, 2004

--That's sort of what I thought. I'm reading right now! Marilyn

November 27, 2004

>>>My husband and I have VERY high cholesterol, and I'm worried that this way of

eating will harm rather than help the situation. Can anyone give me some advice

or information that can help us? We really need to lower our numbers a bit, but

I still want to eat healthy, and in a way my husband will go along with! For

once, he's actually willing to listen to my dietary advice (BIG change from the

usual!), and I want to be armed with the right things to tell him! Marilyn<<<

Try this for starters:

http://www.westonaprice.org/cgi-script/csSearchPro/csSearchPro.cgi?command=query\

& terms=cholesterol & mbool=AND & mcase=Insensitive

(you may have to cut 'n' paste the link)

Cheers,

Tas'.

November 27, 2004

> -----Original Message-----

> From: [mailto:sand8013@...]

>

> >>>My husband and I have VERY high cholesterol, and I'm worried that

> >>>this way of eating will harm rather than help the situation. Can

> >>>anyone give me some advice or information that can help

> us? We really

> >>>need to lower our numbers a bit, but I still want to eat

> healthy, and

> >>>in a way my husband will go along with! For once, he's actually

> >>>willing to listen to my dietary advice (BIG change from

> the usual!),

> >>>and I want to be armed with the right things to tell him!

> Marilyn<<<

>

> Try this for starters:

>

> http://www.westonaprice.org/cgi-script/csSearchPro/csSearchPro

> .cgi?command=query & terms=cholesterol & mbool=AND & mcase=Insensitive

> (you may have to cut 'n' paste the link)

This brings up something that's been at the back of my mind for a while. The

position of the WAPF on cholesterol, as I understand it, is that elevated

levels may or may not be a symptom of some deeper problem. That's not very

helpful. If we can't use cholesterol levels to monitor our cardiovascular

health, then what can we use? How do I know whether or not I'm at risk for a

stroke or heart attack? The recommended approach seems to be to eat well and

have faith that everything will come out okay, but I want a way to monitor

my health and take corrective actions if need be. Remember that neither

Price nor Stefansson lived to be particularly old.

November 27, 2004

Marilyn,

I can tell you my experience. (Though there is very good information on this

subject all over the web. You just have to know who to believe.) Mine was

getting high several years ago. Then I went on a diet for MS, which lowered it

too low. (It was a low fat, no gluten, no dairy and no legume diet.) I went

from 230 down to 140! But, as I said, that was too low. Then it started edging

back up again to 196, and I couldn't figure out what caused it. (Not that there

is anything wrong with 196, I just wanted to understand how my diet was

affecting it.) I finally determined it was transfats, after it reached 220. (I

hadn't been eating them when it went down to 140, but then started eating them

again.) For the last year, I've been eating much more fat, but only good fats

- nuts, seeds, avocados, coconut milk and oil, and avoiding transfats like the

plague. (No hydrogenated fats, not heating fats too high etc., which means I

only sauté with coconut oil.) Now my cholesterol is 230 again, but the HDL is

124, which my doctor says is the best he's ever seen, so he's very happy with

the 230. He even admitted it could be my diet, when I told him what I was

eating. (I've always had fairly good HDL, though, but it used to run around

80.)

Carol

My husband and I have VERY high cholesterol, and I'm worried that

this way of eating will harm rather than help the situation. Can

anyone give me some advice or information that can help us? We really

need to lower our numbers a bit, but I still want to eat healthy, and

in a way my husband will go along with! For once, he's actually

willing to listen to my dietary advice (BIG change from the usual!),

and I want to be armed with the right things to tell him! Marilyn

November 27, 2004

,

I think the WAPF stance is that combined lifestyle factors (smoking,

overweight, diet, sedentary, inflammation, etc., etc.) are to be

considered when assessing heart disease risk, not simply total

cholesterol numbers.

B.

just paraphrasin' off the top o' me head

On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 16:40:56 -0800, Berg <bberg@...> wrote:

>

> > -----Original Message-----

> > From: [mailto:sand8013@...]

> >

> > >>>My husband and I have VERY high cholesterol, and I'm worried that

> > >>>this way of eating will harm rather than help the situation. Can

> > >>>anyone give me some advice or information that can help

> > us? We really

> > >>>need to lower our numbers a bit, but I still want to eat

> > healthy, and

> > >>>in a way my husband will go along with! For once, he's actually

> > >>>willing to listen to my dietary advice (BIG change from

> > the usual!),

> > >>>and I want to be armed with the right things to tell him!

> > Marilyn<<<

> >

> > Try this for starters:

> >

> > http://www.westonaprice.org/cgi-script/csSearchPro/csSearchPro

> > .cgi?command=query & terms=cholesterol & mbool=AND & mcase=Insensitive

> > (you may have to cut 'n' paste the link)

>

> This brings up something that's been at the back of my mind for a while. The

> position of the WAPF on cholesterol, as I understand it, is that elevated

> levels may or may not be a symptom of some deeper problem. That's not very

> helpful. If we can't use cholesterol levels to monitor our cardiovascular

> health, then what can we use? How do I know whether or not I'm at risk for a

> stroke or heart attack? The recommended approach seems to be to eat well and

> have faith that everything will come out okay, but I want a way to monitor

> my health and take corrective actions if need be. Remember that neither

> Price nor Stefansson lived to be particularly old.

>

November 27, 2004

Marilyn,

AFAIK the number you want to reduce in your cholesterol tally is trigycerides.

To lower triglycerides you must stop eating refined carbohydrates and

keep your daily carb intake about 75 grams. Read the articles on the

WAPF website.

B.

On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 20:46:29 EST, sahmomof8@... <sahmomof8@...> wrote:

>

> So, let me get this straight. CAN we lower our cholesterol? Or shouldn't we

> even try? And IS there a " dangerous level " of cholesterol or not? Anyway, I

> guess to eat in a more healthy way, we should eliminate all processed foods,

most

> sugars (especially processed white sugar and corn syrup), and all

> polyunsaturated fats, right? Also all white flour products. Anything else? Is

that the

> basic idea, or am I missing something? And I'm assuming we will see a change

for

> the better in our health, correct? Oh yeah--and switch to organic dairy,

> meats, and fruits and veggies too, right? Or isn't this an issue? Oh bother

(to

> quote Winnie the Pooh). I hope I'm getting this right because I need to talk

to

> dh tonight, and if I don't have my facts straight, he'll NEVER cooperate!

> Marilyn the confused

>

November 27, 2004

According to Sally Fallon and others such as s

(author of The Milk Book and Eat Your Cholesterol), there has never been a

proven link between high cholesterol and higher mortality. It is highly

likely that that was a myth fabricated years ago by the producers of all

the various processed vegetable oils in order to increase sales.

Really, you can't go wrong with a diet composed mainly of food items in as

close a state as possible to that in which God originally intended. That

means reduce or eliminate white flour, white sugar, processed and packaged

foods, and all fake fats, and consume raw dairy, water with no fluoride or

chlorine, organic produce, and organic grass-fed meat.

Don't be discouraged if you can't afford to do it all at once. Here is a

wonderful quotation I came across the other day, from Calvin Coolidge: " We

cannot do everything at once, but we can do something at once. " Perhaps you

could start by changing your diet first, so that way your family can see

firsthand the benefits. I myself have had great improvement in some

hormonal problems, plus I don't have " nap attacks " anymore, since changing

to raw dairy and eliminating nearly all white flour and sugar from my diet.

As you gradually stop buying some processed foods, that will free up funds

to start making other changes. Perhaps you don't need to worry about buying

purified water because you are on a well. So you can concentrate on other

things. Myself, our water often has high chlorine levels, so I made that

one of the first changes I made, after switching to raw dairy and spelt due

to food allergies.

If you haven't read it yet, I can't recommend highly enough Sally Fallon's

Nourishing Traditions. After that, I would suggest

s' The Milk Book and Eat Your Cholesterol. Sally has a new book

coming out in the spring about good fats, which I am looking forward to

reading.

November 27, 2004

Thank you ,

I can't afford to do everything at once, but we are doing what we can....

Although at this point we find that it would be much cheaper to go

back to " Krafted Mac & Cheese " ...but as a family we have decided we

would rather be hungry.

L.

>

> Really, you can't go wrong with a diet composed mainly of food items in as

> close a state as possible to that in which God originally intended. That

> means reduce or eliminate white flour, white sugar, processed and packaged

> foods, and all fake fats, and consume raw dairy, water with no fluoride or

> chlorine, organic produce, and organic grass-fed meat.

>

> Don't be discouraged if you can't afford to do it all at once. Here is a

> wonderful quotation I came across the other day, from Calvin Coolidge: " We

> cannot do everything at once, but we can do something at once. " Perhaps you

> could start by changing your diet first, so that way your family can see

> firsthand the benefits. I myself have had great improvement in some

> hormonal problems, plus I don't have " nap attacks " anymore, since changing

> to raw dairy and eliminating nearly all white flour and sugar from my diet.

>

> As you gradually stop buying some processed foods, that will free up funds

> to start making other changes. Perhaps you don't need to worry about buying

> purified water because you are on a well. So you can concentrate on other

> things. Myself, our water often has high chlorine levels, so I made that

> one of the first changes I made, after switching to raw dairy and spelt due

> to food allergies.

November 27, 2004

No. That's not true! Potatoes and real cheese, even in made in

quantity and frozen for later consumption would be better than Kraft(ed)

GE products, chemically laden with addictive additives (seems we could

combine those two words to addictitives, cuz I love making new words,

like Glutenator and its derivatives . Procecessed foods are still

more expensive than whole, real foods.

Deanna

Lillig wrote:

> Thank you ,

> I can't afford to do everything at once, but we are doing what we can....

> Although at this point we find that it would be much cheaper to go

> back to " Krafted Mac & Cheese " ...but as a family we have decided we

> would rather be hungry.

> L.

>

November 27, 2004

I would normally agree, but I'm in this ____-hole called Idaho...

Kraft(ed) family dinner... $1.79, add bag of peas for $2.34, add

butter and milk per recipe on box $1.50 = $5.63 to feed family until

point of not wanting to eat any more.

Potatoes $0.50, cream $1.25, cheese $3.00, add peas and butter $2.84 = $7.59

I can save two dollars a meal with Kraft(ed)! Now when we start

talking fresh produce the numbers get really large, if you add in

meat, it gets ridiculous.

And so dh says, " why aren't we eating Kraft(ed)? " And I answer because

we know better. And that's also another reason we are moving! To find

food at a more reasonable price... I spend more money on food than I

do on rent because I know better... and I still am forced to buy the

chemically laden food that we are sensitive to out of necessity. I

just buy the best chemically laden food that I can, and spend the

extra money to not have preservatives added whenever it is a choice!

What was that in another thread about slavery? Like I said there, we

are just full-blooded American slaves... the government calls it

poverty. And we don't even qualify for food stamps in this state! And

WIC doesn't provide farmer's market coupons in Idaho.

(I did figure out that if we lived in debt, we would qualify for food

stamps...interesting, huh?) There are no food pantries here that give

fresh food, only processed.

hmmmph...off track... no I have actually found a place where it is

cheaper to buy boxed than fresh!

L.

On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 20:54:51 -0600, Deanna <hl@...> wrote:

> No. That's not true! Potatoes and real cheese, even in made in

> quantity and frozen for later consumption would be better than Kraft(ed)

> GE products, chemically laden with addictive additives (seems we could

> combine those two words to addictitives, cuz I love making new words,

> like Glutenator and its derivatives . Procecessed foods are still

> more expensive than whole, real foods.

>

> Deanna

>

> Lillig wrote:

>

> > Thank you ,

> > I can't afford to do everything at once, but we are doing what we can....

> > Although at this point we find that it would be much cheaper to go

> > back to " Krafted Mac & Cheese " ...but as a family we have decided we

> > would rather be hungry.

> > L.

> >

>

November 27, 2004

I'm sorry, . I spend maybe 3/5 of my mortgage costs on food

monthly; but I don't live in CA (or the west in general), so I live on

good land and fresh air pretty cheaply, even with the very minor threat

of tornadoes. Actually, with global warming the threat has moved north

substantially. I am not poor AND a native Californian. I wouldn't

consider moving back there until/if housing goes down. Maximize funds.

I have much less smog than anywhere but the high mountains in CA also.

I wouldn't go back easily, although my Dad has lived through the boom

and made quite a killing on housing exchanges. But unless you've been

there 20 years as a home owner, I can't see going now. Too many people,

too much traffic.

CA is the cheapest place to buy food, yet she has the highest housing

costs (and their high minimum wage and even higher than normal wages

won't keep pace with that) in the nation. Go north and pay high

energy. I am west of any cities so don't breathe in offending fumes

from cities here or in Canada. We did plan it that way for breathing

when we move from hither to yon.

Deanna

Lillig wrote:

> I would normally agree, but I'm in this ____-hole called Idaho...

> Kraft(ed) family dinner... $1.79, add bag of peas for $2.34, add

> butter and milk per recipe on box $1.50 = $5.63 to feed family until

> point of not wanting to eat any more.

> Potatoes $0.50, cream $1.25, cheese $3.00, add peas and butter $2.84 =

> $7.59

> I can save two dollars a meal with Kraft(ed)! Now when we start

> talking fresh produce the numbers get really large, if you add in

> meat, it gets ridiculous.

> And so dh says, " why aren't we eating Kraft(ed)? " And I answer because

> we know better. And that's also another reason we are moving! To find

> food at a more reasonable price... I spend more money on food than I

> do on rent because I know better... and I still am forced to buy the

> chemically laden food that we are sensitive to out of necessity. I

> just buy the best chemically laden food that I can, and spend the

> extra money to not have preservatives added whenever it is a choice!

> What was that in another thread about slavery? Like I said there, we

> are just full-blooded American slaves... the government calls it

> poverty. And we don't even qualify for food stamps in this state! And

> WIC doesn't provide farmer's market coupons in Idaho.

> (I did figure out that if we lived in debt, we would qualify for food

> stamps...interesting, huh?) There are no food pantries here that give

> fresh food, only processed.

>

> hmmmph...off track... no I have actually found a place where it is

> cheaper to buy boxed than fresh!

> L.

>

> On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 20:54:51 -0600, Deanna <hl@...> wrote:

> > No. That's not true! Potatoes and real cheese, even in made in

> > quantity and frozen for later consumption would be better than

> Kraft(ed)

> > GE products, chemically laden with addictive additives (seems we could

> > combine those two words to addictitives, cuz I love making new words,

> > like Glutenator and its derivatives . Procecessed foods are still

> > more expensive than whole, real foods.

> >

> > Deanna

> >

> > Lillig wrote:

> >

> > > Thank you ,

> > > I can't afford to do everything at once, but we are doing what we

> can....

> > > Although at this point we find that it would be much cheaper to go

> > > back to " Krafted Mac & Cheese " ...but as a family we have decided we

> > > would rather be hungry.

> > > L.

> > >

> >

November 27, 2004

We actually got from Chicago to Mesa by way of school. But the housing

cost was too high to continue schooling. Moved north for the cheaper

housing costs... should have stayed where we were. Over all it is much

more expensive here in Idaho. Keeping that in mind as we make plans to

move... that and somewhere dry... with no mildew...

L. - dreaming of fresh air with no mildew... and who did not

mean to make anybody feel bad, just presenting a side of the story

nobody else has mentioned (and maybe nobody else is in such a spot).

P.S. Poor is a state of mind. And we are not poor. We just live in

poverty. $20,000 would be a REALLY good year.

> I'm sorry, . I spend maybe 3/5 of my mortgage costs on food

> monthly; but I don't live in CA (or the west in general), so I live on

> good land and fresh air pretty cheaply, even with the very minor threat

> of tornadoes.

November 28, 2004

>>That's not very

helpful. If we can't use cholesterol levels to monitor our cardiovascular

health, then what can we use? How do I know whether or not I'm at risk for a

stroke or heart attack? The recommended approach seems to be to eat well and

have faith that everything will come out okay, but I want a way to monitor

my health and take corrective actions if need be. Remember that neither

Price nor Stefansson lived to be particularly old.

<<

~~~I think they're only talking about total cholesterol, and ignoring 'good'

cholesterol. How high ones HDL is an indicator, from what I've read. It's ok

to have high cholesterol, if the HDL is proportionately high also. The one

thing that bothers me about WAPF is they don't seem to make a distinction

between 'factory' beef and grass-fed beef. I agree that natural saturated fat

is healthy, but it's just not the same as the fat on beef that has been fed corn

and soy.

Carol

November 28, 2004

I very highly recommend a book, " The Cholesterol Myths : Exposing the

Fallacy that Saturated Fat and Cholesterol Cause Heart Disease

by Uffe Ravnskov "

This is a link to the book at Amazon so you can read a description of it:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0967089700/qid=1101661317/sr=8-1/r\

ef=pd_csp_1/104-8722384-7608749?v=glance & s=books & n=507846

In essence, the book is written by a Swedish doctor, who undertook an

extensive study of the research papers purporting to show a link between

cholesterol and atherosclerosis or coronary artery disease. He found that

the studies did not support this hypothesis. In fact, many of the

researchers went so far as to draw conclusions in their abstracts (along the

lines of cholesterol is dangerous and we must reduce it) that their own

studies didn't show. It is truly mind-boggling to read it and discover how

we have been so mislead by mainstream medicine and Big Pharma.

What I have discovered in my reading/research on this topic is that the

people who live the longest are older women with the highest cholesterol

levels.

The role of cholesterol in atherosclerosis is unclear, there is a connection

since cholesterol is found in plaques in damaged arteries, but it appears

that the cholesterol there is actually a secondary effect and not the

*cause* of the atherosclerosis, as mainstream medicine would have us

believe. Cholesterol is used as building material and its role in the

arteries may be more along the lines of repairing damage caused by other

factors.

I really can't recommend this book highly enough, it is a true eye-opener,

and very soundly researched and written, with excellent documentation.

Another web site to check out is Dr. Ravnskov's own site:

http://www.ravnskov.nu/cholesterol.htm and The International Site for

Cholesterol Skeptics: http://www.thincs.org/

But above all " Cholesterol Myths " is well worth every cent, if you can't

find it in your local library... and is truly a " must read " , I feel, for

everyone these days, especially with so much brainwashing going on about the

evils of cholesterol.

Cholesterol

>

> My husband and I have VERY high cholesterol, and I'm worried that

> this way of eating will harm rather than help the situation. Can

> anyone give me some advice or information that can help us? We really

> need to lower our numbers a bit, but I still want to eat healthy, and

> in a way my husband will go along with! For once, he's actually

> willing to listen to my dietary advice (BIG change from the usual!),

> and I want to be armed with the right things to tell him! Marilyn

>

November 28, 2004

The simplest explanation to me is that, when the studies on saturated fat were

done in the 50s, they didn't take into consideration that people had begun to

eat transfats. (Hydrogenated fats, mainly.) Now, many believe that transfats

were the culprit, not saturated fats. Transfats seem to be a problem in just

about every area of health. They've been linked to cancer too. I personally

think they are the biggest danger to our health.

Carol

I very highly recommend a book, " The Cholesterol Myths : Exposing the

Fallacy that Saturated Fat and Cholesterol Cause Heart Disease

by Uffe Ravnskov "

November 28, 2004

My understanding is pretty much in line with , I think Enig published

studies that supported transfats elevating cholesteral but not the other fats.

Atkins talked that the significant studies used back then to target fats as

causing high cholesteral had people eating both high fat and high carbohydrate.

According to him, the fats were targeted arbitrarily and the carbohydrates

overlooked. I also remember years back that there was some scandal over

fraudulent research blaming cholesteral. That is when they turned around and

came out with the " good " cholesteral and the " bad " . I've since never trusted

any of it and don't even get mine tested. I also know there are other ideas

(and studies) associating it with pollution. It seems to be a industrialized

society problem. Atkins stressed that the worse thing you can do is to eat high

fat and high carb, that you can increase one from his % recommendations but you

must decrease the other to compensate.

You actually do need cholesteral in your diet. I know it is used in the

prodution of hormones. The connection of high cholesteral in causing

atherosclerosis is another piece that was not established contrary to what the

public got laid with, but I think there are other reasons that abnormally high

levels are still thought to be not healthy. I can't answer that at the moment

but you might want to evaluate the two other aspects of your diet (one being

transfats, and the other being high fat/high carb together) and see if that is

applicable to your situation. Since it is both you and your husband with

particularly high levels, it seems there has to be a correlation to what you

both are eating.

I know also that heart disease and heart attacks go with diabetes. I had a

recent study but lost it that insulin affected the heart rythmn and was a player

in heart attacks (this would not be those caused by clogged arteries).

Cholesterol

>

> My husband and I have VERY high cholesterol, and I'm worried that

> this way of eating will harm rather than help the situation. Can

> anyone give me some advice or information that can help us? We really

> need to lower our numbers a bit, but I still want to eat healthy, and

> in a way my husband will go along with! For once, he's actually

> willing to listen to my dietary advice (BIG change from the usual!),

> and I want to be armed with the right things to tell him! Marilyn

>

November 28, 2004

>>My understanding is pretty much in line with , I think Enig

published studies that supported transfats elevating cholesteral but not the

other fats.<<

~~~I believe that was me, Carol.

That is when they turned around and came out with the " good " cholesteral and the

" bad " . I've since never trusted any of it and don't even get mine tested.

~~~When I was eating transfats, my good cholesterol was lower and my bad

cholesterol was higher, and I had gallstones. Since I quit eating transfats,

the gallstones have dissolved and are now gone, my good cholesterol is up and

the bad cholesterol is down, so I believe it does make a difference.

Carol

November 28, 2004

I don't think this is an issue that can really be reduced to one simple

explanation, I believe it's multifactorial.

I completely agree, though, that the use of vegetable oils and trans fats

are a factor, and undoubtedly a huge factor, and may well be the primary

factor. But there are a lot of other factors which I feel are also highly

contributory, not the least of which is the effect of stress on our bodies'

systems. Dr. Ravnskov also felt smoking was a contributing factor.... a

commonality behind all of these things being they increased free radicals,

which may be the agent responsible for the damage to the lumens of the

vessels in the first place.

I also think that other factors, such as the loss of quality in our foods in

general, processed foods, and pasturization of milk, also have roles

here.... (another book I would highly recommend is " The Untold Story of

Milk " by Ron Schmid).

Re: Cholesterol

>

> The simplest explanation to me is that, when the studies on saturated fat

> were done in the 50s, they didn't take into consideration that people had

> begun to eat transfats. (Hydrogenated fats, mainly.) Now, many believe

> that transfats were the culprit, not saturated fats. Transfats seem to be

> a problem in just about every area of health. They've been linked to

> cancer too. I personally think they are the biggest danger to our health.

> Carol

November 28, 2004

I wasn't saying that transfats were the only problem. I was saying that it was

transfats, as opposed to saturated fat, that was the culprit in the studies done

in the 50s.

Carol

>>I don't think this is an issue that can really be reduced to one simple

explanation, I believe it's multifactorial.<<

November 28, 2004

I was reading a PDF publication from Danone Nutritopics and found a

mention that lowering your ingestion of transfats by just 2% caused

measurable changes for the better healthwise.

Darrell

>~~~When I was eating transfats, my good cholesterol was lower and

>my bad cholesterol was higher, and I had gallstones. Since I quit

>eating transfats, the gallstones have dissolved and are now gone,

>my good cholesterol isup and the bad cholesterol is down, so I believe

>it does make a difference.

>Carol

November 28, 2004

Carol, my apologies for the name mix up. I have a name disorder in my brain. I

do great with phone numbers.

This article came out yesterday on the subject. Relevant and maybe of interest

to some.

http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20041127/food.asp

Science News Online

Week of Nov. 27, 2004; Vol. 166, No. 22

Saturated Fat Shows Unexpected Benefit

Parsell

It's been an article of faith in the medical community for more than 40 years

that diets high in saturated fats put people at risk of heart disease. Most

saturated fats boost blood concentrations of harmful, low-density-lipoprotein

(LDL) cholesterol and lead to the buildup of plaque in arteries. So researchers

at the Harvard School of Public Health were " surprised " by the results of a new

study showing exactly the opposite effect in a group of postmenopausal women.

Dariush Mozaffarian and his colleagues examined the daily diets and coronary

artery conditions of 235 U.S. women. The women's average age was 66 at the

beginning of the 3-year study, and all had some plaque buildup at that time.

The scientists took X-ray images at 10 places along each woman's heart arteries

at the start and end of the study. The women all provided comprehensive records

of what foods they ate and how much, including details such as the kinds of oils

used for frying and baking.

The researchers analyzed the women's intake of various nutrients in relation to

plaque buildup during the study, adjusting for factors such as age, education,

smoking habits, and use of medication. The X-rays after 3 years showed that

those women who had regularly eaten the highest amounts of saturated fats had

the least amount of additional plague buildup in their arteries.

The women who ate more saturated fat also had a healthier balance of good and

bad cholesterols, as well as more desirable blood concentrations of various

kinds of fats.

The body needs a variety of dietary fats for energy, for proper functioning of

the body, and for processing the fat-soluble vitamins A, D, E, and K. But

excessive saturated fat can increase blood cholesterol, which circulates through

the body in molecules called lipoproteins. When cholesterol builds up on the

lining of blood vessels-a condition known as atherosclerosis-it constricts blood

flow and can cause heart attacks and strokes.

Saturated fats come from meat and dairy products, as well as oils in some

tropical plants such as coconut and palm trees.

No single answer

The Harvard researchers also examined the women's carbohydrate intake in

relation to plaque progression. The women with the highest amounts of

carbohydrates in their diets over the 3 years had the most plaque buildup. This

was especially evident among women who ate a lot of low-fiber carbohydrates and

those who had less physical activity.

Mozaffarian says the results, published in the November American Journal of

Clinical Nutrition, shouldn't be construed as an endorsement of diets that

advocate eating high amounts of fats and avoiding carbohydrates.

The outcome does support the advice of nutritionists who argue that people

should be careful about what kind of carbohydrates they eat, he adds. " The women

[in the study] who ate carbs in the form of whole-wheat grains did fine, " he

says. " The problem was with women who ate highly-refined carbohydrates. "

An important distinction in this study, Mozaffarian cautions, is that the

participants weren't typical in a number of ways.

For one thing, all the women were postmenopausal. Moreover, three-fourths of

them were overweight, and 40 percent were obese. A quarter had diabetes.

Other studies have shown that women generally experience changes in their lipid,

or fat, levels as they age. Concentrations of good, high-density lipoprotein

(HDL) cholesterol tend to decline after menopause, for example.

Most other dietary studies have linked saturated fat intake with high blood

concentrations of bad LDL cholesterol. That effect wasn't seen in this study,

however.

Another significant trait of the group that may help explain the results is that

most of the women consumed relatively low amounts of fat compared with those in

typical U.S. diets. About 25 percent of this group's calories came from fats,

whereas the fat content of most U.S. diets may be 40 percent or more.

In the study, " the beneficial effects [of saturated fats] were the greatest in

women with the lowest fat intake overall, " Mozaffarian points out.

He speculates that similar antiplaque benefits might also have occurred if the

women had eaten more heart-friendly monosaturated fats, such as in canola and

olive oils, in place of the saturated fats, so long as overall fat intake was

low.

Dietary mystery

What interplay of factors affected plaque formation among the menopausal women

in the study is a " paradox " that can't be fully explained, lipid experts

Knopp and Barbara Retzlaff of the University of Washington in Seattle

acknowledge in an editorial accompanying the published study.

Knopp says the answer probably lies in the specific combination of

characteristics of the women in the group.

Most of them, he notes, were " sort of a model for metabolic syndrome " -a set of

physiological conditions that puts a person at risk of diabetes and other

diseases involving problems processing insulin. Furthermore, he points out,

two-thirds of the women were taking hormone supplements.

Mozaffarian says the study highlights the complex way in which dietary fats

interact, which is not well understood. " Fats are not just inert metabolic

substances, they have wide-ranging metabolic effects in the body, and these

effects are different for different kinds of fats, " he says.

Also, he says, " there's greater appreciation today of the fact that the effects

of dietary nutrients are different in different people. "

The researchers were " initially surprised by the findings, but not so much so "

after considering possible explanations, Mozaffarian says.

Results of studies of saturated fat intake and coronary artery-disease risk have

been inconsistent. And most of those studies have focused on men, while the

effects of diet on heart disease may differ in men and women.

The volunteers in the Harvard dietary study were a subset of women from six

cities who were enrolled in a randomized trial designed to evaluate whether

hormone replacement therapy curbs atherosclerosis. The results, which showed

that female sex hormones did not prevent coronary artery disease in the

postmenopausal women, were " a great disappointment, " Knopp and Retzlaff note.

References:

Knopp, R.H., and B.M. Retzlaff. 2004. Saturated fat prevents coronary artery

disease? An American paradox. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition

80(November):1102-1103. Available at

http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/80/5/1102.

Mozaffarian D., E.B. Rimm, D.M Herrington. 2004. Dietary fats, carbohydrate, and

progression of coronary atherosclerosis in postmenopausal women. American

Journal of Clinical Nutrition 80(November):1175-1184. Abstract available at

http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/abstract/80/5/1175.

Sign In

cholesterol

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest