JasonC SBB

The theory that dietary fat and/or cholesterol causes heart disease was based on completely fudged data and then the data fudger got on the board of the American Heart Association. After that, armies of researchers kept on looking for supporting data and throwing away contradictory data. This went on for >40 years. Incredible.

What is so shocking about all this isn't that one guy falsified data; it's that for decades the mainstream research establishment never corrected the mistake. Armies of researchers kept looking for supporting evidence and dismissed evidence that falsified the initial hypothesis. And then the gov't put its weight behind the theory. The rest is history... of the bad "eat low fat" advice, and the resulting increasing rates of obesity, diabetes, heart disease, high blood pressure, and possibly cancer.

The fudger was Ancel Keys, the study was the "7 countries study", which showed a direct correlation between % of fat calories, and heart disease rates. The fudge? He hid the data from 15 other countries which didn't show the correlation.

Some of the details of the sham are discussed here:
314: Chris Masterjohn On The Health Benefits Of Cholesterol | The Livin La Vida Low-Carb Show

A shorter article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/09/sc...pagewanted=all

viperormiata

iTrader: (24)

My coworkers tell me I'm killing myself with a high fat diet.

Down 130lbs and still making huge gains in the gym while running 6 minute miles at over 200lbs, lol.

The "lipid hypothesis" is the biggest load of horseshit and it sucks to see so many people struggling with weight when they are being told that low calorie, low fat is the way to do it. Getting sucked into these "diet" plans of awful, pre-made food that's all filler, super low calorie, but jacked in sodium and horrible carbs. They eventually starve themselves from a huge calorie restriction/deficit and proceed to burn muscle at an alarming rate and either put it all back on or end up looking like pudding.

JasonC SBB

There are 2 distinct but related, old hypotheses:

- The "blood lipid" hypothesis: blood lipid causes atherosclerosis and heart disease

- The "dietary fat" hypothesis: dietary fat and/or cholesterol causes heart disease

Both are false.

Dot3

iTrader: (1)

Love fat.

mgeoffriau

iTrader: (7)

Enjoyed reading this thread while eating my breakfast of eggs, bacon, and coffee with coconut oil.

JasonC SBB

LOLz. When I get up in the morning, I look forward to having a nice cup of said bulletproof coffee.

miata2fast

iTrader: (2)

Steak and eggs this morning. Yum.

y8s

iTrader: (8)

have been ignoring fat content for years and have the great cholesterol numbers to prove it. I never eat low fat anything unless forced.

ok not ignoring trans fats, just avoiding those.

As far as cholesterol causing X Y Z, can't an autopsy show if there's crap in your arteries and determine what it is?

Scrappy Jack

iTrader: (2)

This is why you can't leave science to private enterprise.

mgeoffriau

iTrader: (7)

Harv

iTrader: (4)

The bulletproof coffee thing sounds like complete nonsense. The key nonsense being avoiding "toxins" or "detoxing" which has no basis in science at all.

The guy seems to be trading off the same rap of another nonsense guru, that being Timothy Ferriss.

mgeoffriau

iTrader: (7)

LULWUT?

You think toxins are imaginary?

Harv

iTrader: (4)

Not sure if serious. The whole detoxing thing is complete nonsense. Detox diets, colon cleansing all of a piece.

mgeoffriau

iTrader: (7)

That's not what I asked.

You said avoiding toxins has no basis in science. I'm asking if you believe toxins exist or not. Are there things that, if ingested or absorbed by the body, are detrimental to one's health?

Harv

iTrader: (4)

No, that's not what I said, I said avoiding "toxins" as in the things that these guys label as such that aren't really anything like real toxins. It's a scare tactic that has no basis in science.

Is it just a coincidence that this guy has labeled normal coffee as having "toxins" and sells a line of coffee that does not have these "toxins?"

mgeoffriau

iTrader: (7)

Are mycotoxins real or imaginary?

hustler

iTrader: (6)

Harv

iTrader: (4)

All of these pseudoscience gurus attach some factual element to their nonsense, because it sounds better when they peddle their wares.

The first answer here sums up my thoughts about this guy and what he is peddling.

food safety - Are fungal toxins a significant problem in coffee, and if so, can they be avoided? - Seasoned Advice

I'm sure this will not convince you at all as you obviously have a significant defense mechanism built up around the mycotoxin topic.

mgeoffriau

iTrader: (7)

Not really; for what it's worth, I don't buy his coffee (though I do buy very freshly roasted beans from a source I trust).

Mostly I just find the overly-reductionistic approach common to those stuck in a 1950's health and nutrition mindset to be generally irritating.

But it's funny that you essentially missed the reason Jason linked to that post -- it has nothing to do with toxicity or detoxing.

Harv

iTrader: (4)

The fact that he adds oil and butter to the coffee? I got that, but the site is still nonsense.