Chief Longwind Of The North
Certified/Certifiable
I was in the doctor's office yesterday, waiting for my wife to be done with her appointment. I picked up "Prevention" magazine and eprused the contents. There were 2 artcles that caught my eye. Ther first was called good and bad fats. I turned to it and read the article. At its begining, there were a few True and False questions/statements. The first of these was "Olive oil is the best oil for reducing LDL (bad) cholesterol." The answer was false. It turns ou that while olilve oil doesn't increase cholesterol levels, it doesn't help reduce bad cholesterol either. The answer also stated that sunflower oil did not contribute to an increase in LDL cholesterol, and in fact, helped lower its levels in the bloodstream, making t the oil of choice for cooking.
The second statement said; "A low fat diet is the best diet for reducing the chances of heart attack." This too was false. In a recent study, 2 groups were placed on seperate diets. The first was given a diet rich in fats where total caloric intake was made up of 33% fat. The second group was given a diet with 8% of total calories derived from fat. The result of the test was that though both groups lost weight, the high fat dieters decreased their chances of getting a heart attack by 18%, while the low-fat dieters reduced their chances by about 7%. At least I think those are the numbers. But I am certain that the high-fat dieters reduced their chance for heart failure significantly more than did the low fat dieters.
The report didn't say what types of fats were given. But assume that as fat contains more calories per unit weight and volume than virtually any other food, the dieters who consumed the high-fat diet had to cut down on portions compared to their low-fat partners.
Something to think about. We keep hearing about low-fat, high fiber, lots of greens and colorful veggies and fruits. I generally believe that stuff. But this article makes me realize that it's all guesswork and that we know too lilttle to pick a particular diet and say that "this one is the best one". I will stick to the "all things in moderation and eat a wide variety in reasonable amounts" plan.
Seeeeeeya; Goodweed of the North
The second statement said; "A low fat diet is the best diet for reducing the chances of heart attack." This too was false. In a recent study, 2 groups were placed on seperate diets. The first was given a diet rich in fats where total caloric intake was made up of 33% fat. The second group was given a diet with 8% of total calories derived from fat. The result of the test was that though both groups lost weight, the high fat dieters decreased their chances of getting a heart attack by 18%, while the low-fat dieters reduced their chances by about 7%. At least I think those are the numbers. But I am certain that the high-fat dieters reduced their chance for heart failure significantly more than did the low fat dieters.
The report didn't say what types of fats were given. But assume that as fat contains more calories per unit weight and volume than virtually any other food, the dieters who consumed the high-fat diet had to cut down on portions compared to their low-fat partners.
Something to think about. We keep hearing about low-fat, high fiber, lots of greens and colorful veggies and fruits. I generally believe that stuff. But this article makes me realize that it's all guesswork and that we know too lilttle to pick a particular diet and say that "this one is the best one". I will stick to the "all things in moderation and eat a wide variety in reasonable amounts" plan.
Seeeeeeya; Goodweed of the North
Last edited by a moderator: