Doctor's Note

So how did they do it? Sorry for the cliffhanger, but then the next video, The Saturated Fat Studies: Set Up to Fail, would have gone from too long to way too long.

For those unfamiliar with Trans Fat in Meat and Dairy (and refined vegetable oils), that’s why I made a video about it.

The U.S. National Academy of Sciences Institute of Medicine “as low as possible” position, echoed by the European Food Safety Authority, is described in my video: Trans Fat, Saturated Fat, and Cholesterol: Tolerable Upper Intake of Zero.

What happened when a country tried to put the lower saturated fat guidance into practice? See the remarkable results in Dietary Guidelines: From Dairies to Berries.

Don’t think the dietary guidelines process could be undermined by underhanded corporate tactics? Sad but true:

If you haven’t yet, you can subscribe to my videos for free by clicking here.

To post comments or questions into our discussion board, first log into Disqus with your NutritionFacts.org account or with one of the accepted social media logins. Click on Login to choose a login method. Click here for help.

  • veganchrisuk

    This video will prove very useful in the coming months when I find myself defending my viewpoint….

  • Jane’s Addiction

    What happened to the old signoff line, “More on that in tomorrow’s video”? : )

    • It got cut off! I’m going to re-upload it. Thanks so much for pointing that out!

  • Toxins

    Stay tuned for tomorrows video which is the sequel to this one! If anyone is interested, here is plant positve’s dissection of the TIME article featured in this video. I think its great supplementary info.
    http://plantpositive.com/blog/2014/6/28/how-time-magazine-sacrificed-its-standards-to-promote-satura.html

  • Dasaniyum

    The cliffhanger is too good

  • Beth Hird

    looking forward to the next one! Thank you Michael!

  • Charzie

    Okay, I don’t want to be the crankypuss here, but on the BIG issues, (meaning important, arguable, controversial, whatever) what is wrong with a bigger, longer video? Apparently it may be about actual production rather than attention spans, but I personally would love to see some longer videos on relevant topics instead of having it split in two! Like someone else suggested, this argument will come in handy, and it would be easier to link to a single video rather than multiples…and a lot more likely to get watched.

    • dogulas

      It will certainly be in a playlist on youtube, so a proper link to that should have the videos play automatically, back to back. I agree with you though. I don’t really see the point of the split.

    • tbatts666

      I imagine nutritionfacts has thought about it.

      I would second your thought for share-ability…It is easier to share a longer video.

    • Bruce Cropley

      I like both the long and the short videos. I think the short ones are useful for getting people to actually *watch* them – when I am linked to an hour long video, I know I will often abandon it before it has even started if I’m not strongly interested in the topic already.

    • Ron Evans

      I would also like to see longer videos, maybe with the Dr. talking more slowly. I’m in no hurry. Thank you, nevertheless.

  • Arjan den Hollander.

    I got some really nice pointers toward mental health from this butter pushing psychiatrist:
    http://evolutionarypsychiatry.blogspot.nl/p/map.html

    Her bits on magnesium and choline (zombieland prt 2) have already proven a big help in dousing the fire/heat that was raging in my upper spine and brain past few months. Yes I’m aware of the choline is bad bits on nutritionfacts, but low choline from near vegan diet might actually have caused mania in me.
    Supping my already high magnesium from foods with an additional 600-800 mg and 3-4 250mg choline already completely changed my outlook.
    Unexpectedly locking a gaze looking someone in the eye was like looking in a high powered light for me even 6 days ago,
    made me actually recoil as if in disgust, so overstimulating. 2 capsules of choline and I could mingle and look people in the eyes again.
    Completely bizarre!
    I hope this experience of mine can help somebody else, just paying it forward.

    PS: I just can’t shake the feeling her pushing saturated fats is killing people though ^^

  • Dick

    Missing from this story is the value of the low and mid chain saturated fatty acids. Seems we’re going backwards. The Texas A&M study (see http://www.frytest,com ) showed clearly that trans fact was the main culprit. The American Heart Assoc. was given $4 million to advertise and they pulled a fast one by attacking the “Bad Fat Brothers – Trans fats and saturated fats”. They went silent on saturated fats for a while and now are back with their standard confusion of the issues. Coconut oil is probably the healthiest fat in the world. The 50% fraction is lauric acid which is a natural antibiotic and it’s found naturally in mother’s breast milk. The 2 chain saturated fatty acid is vinegar. Lauric acid can be bought as “Monolaurin” in 600 mg and 300 mg. capsules.

    • Arjan den Hollander.

      Coconut slams my veins shut the same as does other overly fatty food.
      As a male you can use the firmness of your erections as a barometer of this process.
      You can check your d*** Dick to see if your theory holds up.
      For me it has the same effect as have other high fat foods.

      Do some food experiments and change something every week or few weeks, some changes will give you solid feedback.
      Then ride the wave of stacked good effects, it is worth it even though it takes some discipline.

    • Toxins

      Coconut oil is not the healthiest food in the world. Please provide studies to back up your claims. Every study I have seen with coconuts show increased LDL and total cholesterol, never the other way around. Please see here for more on coconuts.

      http://nutritionfacts.org/?s=coconut

    • footestomper

      What is the other 50% ??????? Watch the videos Toxins references below!

    • Mark (mbglife)

      Just because mothers’ milk has some of that type of fat in it to help an infant grow quickly, doesn’t mean it’s good for an adult, and it doesn’t mean that consuming a significant percent of it is good either. To me, what’s in breast milk is irrelevant. The question is, what’s ‘optimal’ for adult human health.

  • M85

    I bet the dairy industry’s tactics will ultimately backfire.

  • Mr Smith

    with all these vegan and vegetarian diet , there is a danger of Niacin deficiency as well as missing out of the goodness of lactic acid which comes mainly from yougurt !!

    • Huh? Lactic acid? (Which we make ourselves) I thought the main selling point for yogurt was the bugs.

      • Arjan den Hollander.

        Yeah, a good run should solve that ^^

    • As MacSmiley says, at least know what you’re pointing out if you’re going to make a comment. Not only is lactic acid produced by the human body (excessively as a byproduct of strenuous exercise), but lactose (which is what I think you’re trying to say) is actually a sugar that is present in all milk products (not mainly yogurt), and often a source of dietary distress. It’s one of the major food intolerances that leads to gastric issues. Lactose, even if you like and eat a lot of dairy, is hardly goodness. Oh, and regardless of which spelling of yogurt you prefer, you spelled it wrong.

      As for your comments below, you can cherry pick all kinds of studies about dairy being or not being healthy. Cherry-picked science never makes a point. Peer-reviewed, data-driven and empirically valid science and the volume of studies which support a particular finding/position, do make a point. Longitudinal studies that cover many years, like the Framingham heart study, are better cherry pickings than one that lasted two years. You can’t possibly draw a conclusion about long-term effects and health from one two-year window.

      Why are you concerned about deficiency. If you eat properly, from a variety of sources, you should be fine. Besides, you don’t say what kind of deficiency. B-12 is likely the only realistic potential issue, and it’s a stored vitamin, not one you need to replenish all the time. Calcium, protein and virtually all other nutrients are very plentiful in well-planned veg diets. In fact, most research suggests the SAD provides way more protein than needed, which often contributes to issues such as osteoperosis, when calcium is obtained by upping dairy intake. Processing excess protein leeches calcium from the bones and blood, often creating a vicious circle.

  • Mr Smith

    A harvard study = heart problems is the biggest killer and milk seem to help a big deal here
    ——————

    A recent study, which followed more than 5,000 Spanish university graduates for about two years, found a link between dairy intake and risk of high blood pressure.

    ”We observed a 50% reduction in the risk of developing high blood pressure among people eating 2-3 servings of low-fat dairy a day (or more), compared with those without any intake,” Alvaro Alonso, MD, PhD, a researcher in the department of epidemiology at the Harvard School of Public Health, said in an email interview.

    Although most of the low-fat dairy consumed by the study subjects was as milk, Alvaro believes low-fat yogurt would likely have the same effect.

  • Mr Smith

    to clarify , I am a vegetarian but concern about deficiency

    • Oh, and referring to your first comment, it’s niacin deficiency you’re concerned about? Really? You only need about 16mg a day and can easily obtain that from grains, nuts and many other vegetarian sources. A well-balanced diet can’t possibly leave you deficient. Sorry, but you really need to become better informed about nutrition. It’s not ideal, but if you’re really worried, take a multi. Lots of people do, even though most of it gets flushed out of your system when you pee and isolated vitamins have very little evidence of efficacy.

    • Toxins

      Mr. Smith, Niacin deficiency is unlikely to occur if eating whole unrefined plant foods. This means whole grains, beans, fruits, veggies, tubers and the like. If you go to cronometer.com, you can track your nutrient intake., You would be surprised how much you are getting of each nutrient.

    • Thea

      Mr Smith: Your concern is quite understandable. Concern about developing a deficiency is one of the reasons people fear adopting a whole food plant based diet. Given all of the mis-information out there, I totally get why people are afraid. However, as NutritionFacts shows/as the body of evidence currently shows, a whole food plant based (WFPB) diet is the optimal diet for disease prevention for the majority of people (ie, baring some unique/rare issue with a person). A well planned WFPB diet is the one that is least likely to leave you with a deficiency. You are in the right place to educate yourself on this topic.

      Here is a nice, short video that talks about common deficiencies in vegans vs omnivores. You will notice that niacin is not among the problems that vegans typically face.
      http://nutritionfacts.org/video/omnivore-vs-vegan-nutrient-deficiencies-2/

      I would also refer you to a great book by Brenda Davis and Vesanto Melina called Becoming Vegan, Express edition. These are extremely knowledgable registered dieticians who have taken a close look at the evidence in nutrition, and put together a great reference book for people who are concerned about particular nutrients. (It also has menu plans for putting it all together.) The book has a section on niacin that would interest you. It includes a list of the many easy ways to get plenty of niacin from a WFPB diet – so that you can get it in a safe package (as opposed to yogurt which has plenty of drawbacks).

      This site is a great place to educate yourself about the problems of eating any form of dairy:
      http://nutritionfacts.org/topics/dairy/

      Let me know if you would like some additional references that put it all together to show you how to eat healthy so that you avoid deficiencies. It’s not as hard as you might think!

  • Linda N

    As a nutritionist, I have a real problem with these types of studies. And those who are promoting such biased, and fractionated information/disinformation. No wonder the public is confused!

    Nutrition is about biochemistry, enzyme function, and the nutrients in food needed to run those enzymes and our bodies. I applaud the poster below who had the intelligence to look to more than one site to solve his health problems. He or she could have a PEMT gene snp or any of the other gene snips that would take extra choline to make him feel better.

    All of us as a species need essentially the same nutrients, but biochemical individuality will make some people have to take more of some nutrients to get specific enzymes to function better or function at all. It is the reality of the human condition. Some people actually will need more animal protein and/or saturated fat in their diets because they will have snps on their LDL receptors that will make it more difficult to get cholesterol into the cell or other snps. (Yes, Virginia, cholesterol is a necessary molecule.) Vegan diets will make these people ill. Others thrive on a vegan diet (but B12 is still an issue here).

    The cholesterol theory of heart disease is dead. But that does not mean one should shun fresh veggies for nothing but huge steaks. It also does not mean that a little butter on one’s veggies or some beef in your diet is going to kill you either. NO ONE diet is right for everyone, and in my view, anyone who promotes that a vegan diet (or a paleo one) is the ONLY diet that everyone should follow, (albeit with all good intentions and ignorance of the true science of nutrition) is committing gross malpractice. Period.

    • Linda N

      P.S. By stating that anyone or anything “seeks to undermine latest guidelines from the American Heart Association and the American College of Cardiology.” implies of course that the American Heart Association and the American College of Cardiology know what they are talking about. And of course they don’t. Heart disease is at an all time high largely due to their recommendations , plus statin drugs are most likely the cause of the huge increase in congestive heart failure since their prescribing has become (too!) routine! Cardiologist Stephen Sinatra finally woke us as have other forward-thinking cardiologists.

      • largelytrue

        YOUR analysis of this is just so biased!!!1

        See how we’re not having a discussion? Slow down the dismissive rhetoric and bring some credible evidence for some of your claims, and we can have a more effective conversation. We need to get beyond mere expressions of our opinion. At the rate that we are going this probably means that the discussion should focus on actual references to peer reviewed literature that either you or I (or any other party to the discussion) think were well-conducted, because it seems that we simply may not trust each others’ authorities enough to follow them as closely as the other party wishes.

        I, for one, am not so interested in the fact that you trust Masterjohn’s narratives (or a substantial part of them). I want you to highlight some of his central claims that you think to be strong, and give some indication that you have thought carefully about how he has supported them. If you can do that, you will also have shown us some of the stronger evidence for his position and that actually will make me more interested in following his point of view if I can verify that the evidence is of good quality.

      • Stephen Sinatra? You mean THIS Stephen Sinatra?

        http://youtu.be/XumPQLTzPWI

        What a pseudoscientific joke.

      • b00mer

        “[…] implies of course that the American Heart Association and the American College of Cardiology know what they are talking about. And of course they don’t. Heart disease is at an all time high largely due to their recommendations”

        How can the current heart disease epidemic be the result of the AHA’s recommendations if no one is following them?

        “How Many Meet the Simple Seven”
        http://nutritionfacts.org/video/how-many-meet-the-simple-seven/

        “[…] in U.S. adults, only about 1% have a bare minimum of healthy eating behaviors, such as five-a-day fruits and veggies, eating beans, whole grains, drinking less than 3 cans of soda a week. What percentage of Americans hit all seven of the simple 7? 14,000 men and women were surveyed, and most had 2 or 3 but hardly any had all 7 simple health components. Just how low a prevalence was having 7 out of 7? Only about 1 out of 2000 Americans had all 7 factors intact. And the one they were missing the most? Diet.”

        • Linda N

          “How Many Meet the Simple Seven?” Boy I agree with you on this one! I go above and beyond the simple seven with platefuls of veggies at every meal. Yes even breakfast. Huge veggie smoothie. Even most vegans I meet don’t meet this guideline. Lots of white bread and white flour and a few green beans with a lot of beans or rice at supper and think they are eating healthy. Heavy on the starches, skimpy on the veggies. And most non vegans don’t meet this guideline either. But this is where I think the two sides are arguing over the wrong things. I don’t think whether someone eats some animal protein or not is the real problem or bashing each other because someone dared to eat something that had a face or came from a face. It is that vegans, vegetarians, and omnivores all need to be eating more veggies. Pile them on, baby!

          • Toxins

            Linda, if you are unfamiliar with the issues of animal products detailed in Dr. Greger’s previous videos I would encourage you to view them. The reason to avoid animal products has pretty solid evidence and is not based on ethical arguments.
            http://nutritionfacts.org/index.php?s=igf-1
            http://nutritionfacts.org/index.php?s=endotoxemia

            Once you view most of the evidence available on this website I find it rationally impossible to continue considering animal products a healthy part of a diet.

          • Linda N

            Irrationality is in eye of the beholder. I have viewed these videos, and I still find that both camps cherry pick the evidence. I am not a vegan, cannot be a vegan, and will never be a vegan. I do not follow a paleo diet, cannot follow a paleo diet, and will never follow a paleo diet. I see followers of both camps in viciously poor health every day. And they are unwilling to change their thinking because they are blinded by whichever guru they have decided to follow.
            Real nutrition education lies in understand nutritional biochemistry. I think it bodes well for any lay person to do his or her own research in the area. I do so hope whichever diet you choose works for you in the long run. Most consequences don’t show up for years.

          • Toxins

            I am confused by your response.

            “I have viewed these videos, and I still find that both camps cherry pick the evidence.”

            What evidence to the contrary can you present that a plant based diet will lead to ill health outcomes. Vegan does not equate to whole foods plant based, the discrepancy is important. You cite cherry picking, so please present studies to show how the studies presented here are at fault.

            “Real nutrition education lies in understanding nutritional biochemistry.”

            Most of the studies presented on this website are in regards to biochemistry. I don’t quite understand what specifics your asking for.

            ” And sadly it is MD gurus doling out most of the misinformation because they get no training in nutrition in medical school and think that double blind studies are the be all end of evidence-based knowledge.”

            Dr. Greger is not giving us his medical opinion, he is presenting evidence available for the public to view. It is important to use the available evidence and view it in its entirety. Dr. Greger has never claimed that double blind studies are the only usable studies, he has stated otherwise on several occasions about the importance of longitudinal and cross sectional studies, and presents these in his videos. Based on your response, I get the idea you are not quite familiar with the evidence presented on this website. There are literally hundreds and hundreds of studies shared here supporting a plant based diet, along with contrary evidence presented and examined. There is no cherry picking. I have said this before. but because the evidence points towards a plant based diet does not mean that the science is biased. Its just how our body works. Our biology is the same.

            If you have studies to share then please do, I have not seen you share any evidence thus far in your posts.

          • Linda N

            This will be my last post on this subject because the wars between the diet gurus gets old after awhile.

            The links you gave me led me to a menu of videos one of which was here:
            http://nutritionfacts.org/video/the-answer-to-the-pritikin-puzzle/

            “The Answer to the pritikin puzzle” with McGregor’s [fractionated] analysis that “Lower cancer rates among those eating a plant-based diet may be a result of reduced blood levels of IGF-1 and enhanced production of IGF-1 binding protein.”

            Cancer is a complicated disease and boiling it down to IGF-1 and citing in vitro experiments where they drop blood on cancer cells in a petri dish and then implying that this proves that blood of those on vegan diets stop cancer growth in its tracks “in vivo” is ridiculous at it’s core. It’s cherry picking AND its misleading.

            Of course the blood of anyone eating any healthy diet pitted against the Standard American diet would win out in almost any nutrition study. Healthy diets should be full of veggies and moderate levels of fruit but they do not have to be vegan to be healthy,

            Also McGregor seems to conveniently forget to mention that Pritikin himself suffered from leukemia and eventually committed suicide due to his pain and suffering. It is postulated that while he had clean arteries, Pritkin’s diet may have been too low in protein which may also be one reason why it was so hard for adherents to stay on the diet. Cancer stresses the body, and cancer patients may need more protein especially if they are undergoing treatment which Pritikin was.

            http://www.livestrong.com/article/428130-calories-and-protein-needs-for-a-cancer-patient/
            Written by Erica Wickham, M.S., R.D., C.D.N.
            and
            http://www.livestrong.com/article/264906-protein-for-cancer-patients/

            And here is a study Claiming that “A Low Carbohydrate, High Protein Diet Slows Tumor Growth and Prevents Cancer Initiation”

            http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/early/2011/06/10/0008-5472.CAN-10-3973

            The Pritikin diet has also been shown to be too low in essential fatty acids which why some modern promoters of it often modify it to include a variety of omega-3 fat-containing fish at least twice a week and that those with coronary heart disease consume one gram of omega-3 fats per day.

            http://www.medicinenet.com/diet_plans_and_programs/page3.htm

            Nutrition studies have to take into consideration the TOTALITY of nutrition and biochemisty. By this I mean biochemical pathways, individual genetic snps, the totality of someone’s nutrition, whether they have all the necessary co-enzymes for proper enzyme functioning etc. etc.

            This is the totality of nutritional biochemistry. Not the continuing hammering and cherry picking of data between the diet gurus who want everyone to believe that their dietary beliefs with their cherry-picked studies are the be all end all of nutrition research.

            Linda

          • Toxins

            “”The Answer to the pritikin puzzle” with McGregor’s [fractionated] analysis that …”

            This video is one video of an entire series on IGF-1. To look at this video alone and to come to wide conclusions would not be proper. Dr. Greger has shared studies how those with the lowest IGF-1 do not develop cancer (little people) and how elevated IGF-1 is linked with various forms of cancer. After all, IGF-1 is, in terms of biochemistry, responsible for cancer proliferation, survival, migration and angiogenesis.
            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19075184

            Hence, why IGF-1 is such an important hormone and lowering it would aid in cancer prevention.

            A systematic review and meta-analysis found strong associations with elevated IGF-1 and prostate cancer.
            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2743036/

            17 prospective studies found strong associations with breast cancer and elevated IGF-1
            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3113287/

            It goes beyond blood dripped on petri dishes, and extrapolating that lower IGF-1 in vivo would result in lower cancer rates is not based on strict in vitro experiments. Researchers in the field of nutrition and cancer research recognize IGF-1 as a cancer promoter. This is not Dr. Greger’s own workings.

            Yes, cancer is a complicated disease, which is why that a diet with animal based foods does more than merely raise IGF-1 for cancer risk. By the same token, a plant based diet helps to prevent cancer by more then lowering IGF-1. There is a reason why there are a large quantity of association studies linking vegetarian diets with lower mortality from chronic diseases and meat intake linked with higher mortality and chronic disease. Good luck finding studies linking increased meat intake with lower cancer rates, these types of studies do not exist, because human bodies do not work this way.
            Here are some more cancer links in regards to meat based diets. You can see the studies cited in the sources cited section yourself, this is an easier way to present the studies though for your benefit.

            http://nutritionfacts.org/video/starving-cancer-with-methionine-restriction/
            http://nutritionfacts.org/video/caloric-restriction-vs-plant-based-diets/
            http://nutritionfacts.org/video/cholesterol-feeds-breast-cancer-cells/
            http://nutritionfacts.org/video/carnitine-choline-cancer-and-cholesterol-the-tmao-connection/
            http://nutritionfacts.org/video/eggs-choline-and-cancer/
            http://nutritionfacts.org/video/cancer-as-an-autoimmune-disease/
            http://nutritionfacts.org/video/prostate-cancer-survival-the-av-ratio/
            etc. etc.

            “And here is a study Claiming that “A Low Carbohydrate, High Protein Diet Slows Tumor Growth and Prevents Cancer Initiation””

            How much that can be extrapolated from these genetically altered, immune deficient mice in this study is extremely limited. After all, we have human data showing the opposite effect in the real world. For one that claims that studies are not the end result, I would have hoped a better portrayal of the contrary evidence, because this is not it. Studies must be viewed as pieces of a puzzle in the big picture. This is not what you are doing here.

            Your concern of those on a plant based diet not getting enough protein is also not based on the evidence. A recent study comparing 33,000 nonvegetarians to 4,000 semi vegetarians, 6,000 pesco vegetarians, 21,000 pesco vegetarians, and 5,000 strict vegans found that they all consumed about the same amount of protein, and all groups exceeded 70 grams per day.
            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23988511

            Less than 3% of adults in this country do not consume enough protein as table 1 shows in the below cited study. This perhaps could be due to caloric restriction, as protein deficiency cannot seem to exist without other nutritional deficiencies.
            http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/87/5/1554S/T1.expansion.html

            “The Pritikin diet has also been shown to be too low in essential fatty acids which why some modern promoters of it often modify it to include a variety of omega-3 ..”
            If you are unaware, whole plant foods have plenty of omega 3. Even without flax seed and walnuts, the entirety of the diet over the course of a day can still have plenty of omega 3 as long as total omega 6 is low. Needs are 1.1 grams for women and 1.6 for men. There is no need to supplement fish oil.

            “Interest in the cardiovascular protective effects of n–3 (omega-3) fatty acids has continued to evolve during the past 35 y since the original research describing the low cardiovascular event rate in Greenland Inuit was published by Dyerberg et al. Numerous in vitro experiments have shown that n–3 fatty acids may confer this benefit by several mechanisms: they are antiinflammatory, antithrombotic, and antiarrhythmic. The n–3 fatty acids that have received the most attention are those that are derived from a fish source; namely the longer-chain n–3 fatty acids eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA; 20:5n–3) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA; 22:6n–3). More limited data are available on the cardiovascular effects of n–3 fatty acids derived from plants such as a-linolenic acid (ALA; 18:3n–3). Observational data suggest that diets rich in EPA, DHA, or ALA do reduce cardiovascular events, including myocardial infarction and sudden cardiac death; however, randomized controlled trial data are somewhat less clear. Several recent meta-analyses have suggested that dietary supplementation with EPA and DHA does not provide additive cardiovascular protection beyond standard care, but the heterogeneity of included studies may reduce the validity of their conclusions. No data exist on the potential therapeutic benefit of EPA, DHA, or ALA supplementation on those individuals who already consume a vegetarian diet. Overall, there is insufficient evidence to recommend n–3 fatty acid supplementation for the purposes of cardiovascular protection; however, ongoing studies such as the Alpha Omega Trial may provide further information.

            Combined with the lack of convincing clinical data in favor of n–3 fatty acid supplementation for cardiovascular endpoints and the lack of data in those that consume a vegetarian diet, it is difficult to make the recommendation that vegetarians should consume fish to optimize their cardiovascular mortality.”

            http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/89/5/1597S.long

            “Nutrition studies have to take into consideration the TOTALITY of nutrition and biochemistry. ” Again, we are dealing with humans who are extremely similar with little genetic variation. To assume that everyone is genetically broken is a leap in logic. You have provided several articles to livestrong and random websites, these are not studies, nor sources of evidence. This website is not about propping up Dr. Greger’s dietary regime, it is about sharing STUDIES. That is its main function.

    • I agree, but I post as a layperson who reads and eats, nothing more. I’m always interested in professionals who do post, their affiliations and how they’re paid. I’m not at all suggesting anything, but to suggest this information is any more biased than dairy/meat industry funded research, is a little bit of kettle and teapot stuff. Your Disqus history suggests you regularly attack this site’s posts and other things, like the benefits of grain, which is fine. Anything public should hold up to scrutiny and debate. You could easily link your Disqus profile to your website or some professional profile. You do seem to have a strong paleo-oriented approach. I’m totally open about a largely plant-based bias, but I also don’t think diets with some meat and dairy can be perfectly health (personally, not ethically or environmentally).

      The only thing I’d say about paleo is not so much whether a high protein/high fat/grain-free diet is healthy or not, rather that the notion that current paleo is anything close to how cavemen ate has been debunked. I’m not a vegan myself, but statistically I think you’re likely to find a lot less disease (via long-term studies) with it than you will with a paleo style of diet (which needs more time for any decent level of evidence).

      Also, the fact that people speak totally about ‘personal’ health and not holistic health is problematic to me. Meat and dairy production is inherently cruel and environmentally problematic. In terms of what we do to the planet we live on, and its inhabitants, focusing totally on nutrition and not the others is a lapse in logic. Current animal-derived food production is very damaging. ‘ethical’ or ‘sustainable’ or ‘humane’ meat is a serious fallacy due to lack of enforceable standards and the actual definition of free-run and free-range.

      • Linda N

        They don’t like me on the paleo blogs either! LOL. I think grains are toxic, but not because they are grains. It is the mold in them because they sit around gathering mold in the grain bins. Thus I use quinoa and buckwheat as my grain substitutes. (Something the paleo bloggers go nuts about and trash me there for because they are so carb-phobic. I do agree that current animal-derived food production is very damaging. And these meats do contain more saturated fat than wild counterparts. Thus I look for naturally raised/organic animal products. I do not eat/drink dairy. Too allergic.
        I do think that most all industrialized nations eat too many grains to the exclusion of veggies!! I know paleo eaters who just down the commercial steaks and butter and if there are 3 asparagus on the plate they think they have had enough veggies for the day.
        I also know vegans living on rice and beans and sugar-laden fruit pies that are convinced that they are never going to get heart disease who become very surprised when the heart attack comes. (If they survive it!)
        I myself favor a mostly Mediterranean-style diet but again no one diet is right for everyone.

        • If both camps don’t like you, you’re probably doing something right ;-) I don’t preach (or try not to), but do come primarily from the animal welfare side of the equation. I don’t distinguish between rights and welfare because the distinction is meaningless if we have a strong standard of care for all animals. Anyway I digress.

          Organic meat is definitely a step in the right direction and if it suits you personally, then it’s certainly an improvement. For me, there is simply too much suffering and/or pollution no matter which direction one goes for meat and dairy. I don’t eat any eggs, meat, fish or fowl but there is a very small amount of dairy in my diet. Cream in my coffee and occasionally some cheese, but very little. In most cases I use almond milk – love the flavour but not the consistency for many things. The best we can do is what works for us, while hopefully reducing the impacts of our choices.

          I like quinoa but it’s another potential digestive mess and I do find it causes gut problems for me. I’d agree we use too many grains, and in particular, the vast majority of commercial cereals and related products are so processed and sugar-laden that they’re not healthy. Plus, there’s so much sugar in so much of it. As for meat and veggies, the reason cardiovascular disease is so much lower with traditional “3rd world” and many Asian diets, is that meats augment a largely vegetable dinner plate, not the other way around. There’s just too much meat in most diets.

          Just like we often don’t talk about the holistic impacts of food choices, the other piece is exercise, of course. As a 50 year old with some family diabetes history, that’s my biggest concern and I’ll admit to something of a sweet tooth. It doesn’t absolve me of course, but I’m also an avid runner and cyclist. Depending what time of year it is, I’m doing anywhere from 10-20 hours a week. You can’t outrun a bad diet, particularly as you age, but you can sure use up some of the excess calories your body will convert to fat and you can do a lot to keep your blood pressure, blood sugar and triglycerides fairly normal by getting a good amount of fitness in.

          I’ll agree on the mostly Mediterranean style diet and that one definitely doesn’t fit all, but again, between food choices and lifestyle, regardless of what we choose to eat, a lot more thought about where it comes from and what else we’re doing is very important.

          • Linda N

            I don’t have any problem eating animals as long as they are raised humanely, had a nice life before I ate them, and were killed humanely as well. I obviously do not want antibiotics and chemicals in my food either. These become necessary in Confined animal raising methods.

            I do agree that for most people using animal protein as more of a condiment than as the main dish is very wise, as most Asian countries do. But there are always biochemical exceptions. Those with genetic defects that require more methionine are but one example.

            Everything on this plane of existence eats and is eventually eaten. Bugs will eat us too when we are put into the ground. Energy is neither created nor destroyed. Just moved around. Such is the cycle of life. Total veganism is a relatively new. Even Vegans in India eat bugs (if inadvertently) in their grains and veggies, thus getting more complete protein than is otherwise calculated for in todays charts.

            I understand and totally sympathize with your ethical concerns. But for me the nutrition is the main focus.

            Processed grains and cereals and sugar and GMO’s Yuck! And, yes, exercise is another key factor, as is lifestyle. One overlooked aspect of health is all the toxic chemicals we put in and on our bodies today and that is a discussion for another day~

          • Thule

            You said this:
            “I don’t have any problem eating animals as long as they are raised humanely, had a nice life before I ate them, and were killed humanely as well.”

            By the same token, you shouldn’t have any problems if a more intelligent species arrives and does that to you. If you are raised “humanely” and killed “humanely” for the sake of their gluttony.

            But I suspect that seeing yourself in the other end you would claim against that “arrangement”

            Well those animals know and feel exactly as you, the IQ difference doesn’t change a thing.

            And if you feel that my example is extreme, know that in meso America people were raised as catlle (in great numbers) exactly for this end.

          • mark gillono

            Linda, instead of buying into the myths and lies fed to us by our culture and society, not top mention a few words on a label, why not investigate the matter for yourself. btw, you may be surprised to know that there are cultures who have been vegan for thousands of years-veganism is only a “new concept” in the western world.

            youtube.com/watch?v=R-W3xi2jMYI

            freefromharm.org/animal-products-and-ethics/factory-farming-alternative-farming/

            bitesizevegan.com/ethics-and-morality/vegan-nugget-7-humane-free-range-cruelty-free/

          • jj
          • JohnnyReason

            Drones are a valuable tool to root out environmental degradation like this. They have many other positive uses as well.

          • As long as you eat animal products knowing the side effects for them and the environment, that has to be your call. I would dispute though, that even in a so-called ‘humane’ environment, they can possibly have a nice life. Again, humane meat is really a pipe dream. Intentions are part of being humane. It’s simply a value judgement to me that raising an animal to kill it is inhumane, no matter how I treat it.

          • jj

            “were killed humanely as well” Is there really such a thing as humanely killed? Sounds like fantasy.

    • Toxins

      As a dietician, (if you that’s what you mean by nutriitonist), it is your duty to have an evidence based approach and not fall for fad dietary trends. It is an indisputable fact that not a single person needs dietary cholesterol (unless with a rare genetic deficiency) or saturated fat. These are simply undebatable facts.

      “Saturated fatty acids are synthesized by the body to provide an adequate level needed for their physiological and structural functions;
      they have no known role in preventing chronic diseases. Therefore, neither an AI nor RDA is set for saturated fatty acids.There is a positive linear trend between total saturated fatty acid intake and total and low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol concentration and increased risk of coronary heart disease (CHD). A UL is not set for saturated fatty acids because any incremental increase in saturated fatty acid intake increases CHD risk.”

      “Given the capability of all tissues to synthesize sufficient amounts of cholesterol for their metabolic and structural needs, there is no evidence for a biological requirement for dietary cholesterol. Therefore, neither an Adequate Intake nor a Recommended Dietary Allowance is set for cholesterol.There is much evidence to indicate a positive linear trend between cholesterol intake and low density lipoprotein cholesterol concentration, and therefore increased risk of coronary heart disease (CHD). A Tolerable Upper Intake Level is not set for cholesterol because any incremental increase in cholesterol intake increases CHD risk.”

      http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10490&page=542

      Elevated cholesterol is also required for heart disease to occur, there is no other factor more important that can result in plaque build up other than cholesterol.

      • Linda N

        Go read Chris Masterjohn on this issue. He has a Ph.D in in Nutritional Sciences. When he stopped eating meat and eventually all animal products, his health took a real hit. He had to go back to eating animal products. Eventually his 23andMe profile showed genetic snps that explained why he became so sick. He has it all over RD’s whose training is designed by the USDA, which is, of course, beholden to all food industries.

        “Elevated cholesterol is also required for heart disease to occur, there is no other factor more important that can result in plaque build up other than cholesterol” Bologna. Dr. Sinatra (cardiologist) found out how false that statement is when he went into practice. He found people with very low LDL”s and cholesterol just full of clogged arteries when he did tests, and found others with cholesterol numbers as high as 350 with whistle clean arteries. Only then did he start to look deep and found that there was much more to the biochemistry of heart disease than we have been led to believe.
        Remember, an awful lot of money is made on drugs that lower cholesterol, and drug companies run the health care show in this country. Yes, they even dictate to the government. And they will threaten anyone whose views they think will rain on their gravy train.

        • Toxins

          Chris Masterjohn is a classic paleo “confusionist” spreading misinformation and claims without base. His anecdotal account of being vegetarian also has little value for this discussion and his advice is hardly scientific regardless of his pedigree. You can see all about that here.
          http://plantpositive.com/blog/2012/3/26/tpns-42-the-confusionist-mind-and-the-good-old-days.html
          http://plantpositive.com/22-cholesterol-confusion-5-cho

          Your last paragraph is also not based on the evidence.
          Here is the link between cholesterol and heart disease that has been proven in hundreds of studies.

          http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=363237

          http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=373603

          “This systematic review and meta-regression analysis of 108 randomised controlled trials using lipid modifying interventions did not show an association between treatment mediated change in high density lipoprotein cholesterol and risk ratios for coronary heart disease events, coronary heart disease deaths, or total deaths whenever change in low density lipoprotein cholesterol was taken into account. We found a statistically significant, substantial association between change in low density lipoprotein cholesterol and risk ratios for coronary heart disease events, coronary heart disease deaths, or total deaths, adjusted for other lipid subfractions and drug class.”
          http://www.bmj.com/content/338/bmj.b92

          This study looked at 13,148 participants using an ultrasound to measure arterial wall thickness. “In general, wall thickness increased with increasing intake of animal fat, saturated and monounsaturated fat, cholesterol and Keys’ score and decreased with increasing intake of vegetable fat…the association between diet and wall thickness was in the expected direction in all race-sex groups.”

          http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/139/10/979.abstract

          There has never been a single study showing that increasing saturated fat leads to less heart disease. Not one. In addition to the many other studies showing this link, animal models clearly show that a pattern of high fat diets leads to heart disease. There has never been an animal model showing that atherosclerosis was created with carb feeding but many with saturated fat feeding. A high fat diet has never reversed heart disease. The only diet to ever reverse heart disease is a low fat, plant based diet very high in carbohydrates.
          http://www.jfponline.com/fileadmin/qhi/jfp/pdfs/6307/JFP_06307_Article1.pdf
          http://www.pmri.org/publications/1761.pdf

          • Linda N

            “Chris Masterjohn is a classic paleo “confusionist” spreading misinformation and claims without base. ” This is a classic example of attacking the messenger, so I pay it no attention. Whatever you think of Chris Masterjohn, he has a Ph.D in Nutrition Science and you do not. That makes him better at understanding the limitations of most nutritional studies, including those posted here by Dr. Gregor. As far as I am concerned NO MD is qualified to give advice on Nutritional matters unless they actually have studied nutrition. They studied disease (symptom clusters) and drug therapies for suppression, not cure.

          • Toxins

            Masterjohn is not the messenger of truth Linda, he is someone who is spreading misinformation. Like I said, his degree does not make him an authority. It makes no difference what someones degree is in, they have to use studies and evidence to back up their claims regardless of who they are. That is what I have provided you with and that is what you are depriving me of. If you viewed the links to plant positive you would see how Masterjohn does not have a coherent view of the evidence.

          • Linda N

            I have viewed the links to plant positive. Find them incomplete and cherry picked. Both sides of the diet wars have this same problem. If you believe that Dr. Masterjohn does not have a coherent view of the evidence, that is your choice of course. I suspect, however, that your being a NF team member can cause you to be biased to any evidence that does not support the views of this site. That would make you not be able have a coherent view of any evidence that does jive with your own beliefs. The very thing of which you are accusing Dr. Masterjohn.

            As I stated to James. I am not a paleo promoter. Nor am I a promoter of vegan diets or any other diet. I thought I knew all about nutrition from physician blogs too…until I went back to school.

            I don’t need to tell you where to find opposing evidence. I am sure you can do that for yourself.

        • Thule

          Is this Dr Sinatra you mention, reversing and totally curing heart disease JUST with his diet? Present the cases, then.

          Dr Esselstyn does exactly that, he has hundreds of cases, terminal ones, and brought them back to heal and yes, of course clean arteries with a WFPB diet. Show the evidence that the diet you promote HEAL hundreds of
          terminal patients. Not hearsay or anecdotal evidence, but as a treatment that is being done every day. We are waiting.

        • If you’re going to start pushing Masterjohn as some sort of authority, you’re losing any possible goodwill you were building with me. Hardly the ‘science’ you claim to value, and validating (as I initially suspected) your paleo leanings. Most claims of paleo have zero longitudinal shelf life for validity and have nothing to do with how our forebears actually ate. I guess Robb Wolf is next? Or what about the claim that everyone can have grass-fed meat, despite the fact that our planet could come nowhere near producing enough grass-fed meat without making it inhabitable.

          • Linda N

            I am not pushing Dr. Mastejohn as some kind of authority. But he does have credentials. As do some vegan nutritionists I knows. Believe what you will. James. I do not eat paleo, nor am I a vegan, Also I need no ones’ good will. I don ‘t get destroyed just by blogger’s opinions of me. I just am interested in nutrition. That is why I went back to school. But I have also found that cholesterol is not the boogie man either. As I stated before, some people do well on a well-planned vegan diet and thrive on it. For others it is disastrous and wrecks their health. It all depends upon biochemical individuality. If you want to shoot the messenger because you do not like the message, be my guest. I thought I knew all about nutrition too…until went back to school.

          • I’m not going to debate you any more Linda, as you’re passive-aggressive in your approach. This is twice now you’ve made a statement like, “I thought I knew all about nutrition too…until went back to school.” First, I’ve never suggested I knew all about nutrition, though this kind of comment suggests both I’m clueless and you’re educated and well informed. Neither is true, and your bias toward a paleo diet comes through in everything you say, though you keep saying you don’t have one.

            You keep claiming things for which little empirical evidence exists and try to veil that fact by suggesting you’re educated and everyone who doesn’t think your way, including government agencies, are idiots.

            Whether you look at the Framingham study, much of the work of ‘real’ doctors like Dean Ornish (who’ve not only been able to stop, but reverse heart disease through lifestyle changes which include low fat vegan diets) and countless others, plant-based diets have longitudinal data that shows they work.

            Thousands of nutritionists/dieticians and health professionals understand that healthy, natural carbs are our primary fuel source, yet somehow you’ve got magic knowledge that suggests more fat, more protein and fewer carbs is healthier. High protein diets are hard for our bodies to manage, fat is harder to access as fuel. That’s simple body chemistry. And, no I don’t need to go to school to understand that, as I’ve got solid reading skills. Paleo proponents, through how they cherry-pick and conduct themselves, are akin to climate change deniers, in everything from science/evidence denial, to finding random and uncommon conditions for which standard dietary evidence doesn’t apply, then claim that’s why the approach is completely invalid.

            Until you actually indicate what your credentials are and link to some kind of resource on the web as proof, you’re just coming off as a crackpot with a chip on your shoulder.

          • Linda N

            “Yet somehow you’ve got magic knowledge that suggests more fat, more protein and fewer carbs is healthier” I Never said any such thing. So this is a straw man argument because you have determined with no justification that I have Paleo leanings. I did say that for some people having a lower carb diet can be useful and I stand by that statement. And I will add now that diabetes and/or obesity are two good examples. In other ways, most people could use more carbs in the form of veggies rather than grains, especially processed grains. But most people can and do eat a balanced diet which includes grains with no problem. I do believe that Beans are great as they are very slow absorbing and most people could stand to eat more of them. The Paleo people would obviously not agree with me, however. If I did have paleo leanings it would be my concern, but since I lean neither towards paleo nor vegan, passive aggressive allegations that imply that to have Paleo is irrelevant. and ridiculous. It is like calling someone a women to insult them. It is what it is, The paleo people throw out the accuasations about vegans that come to there sites and it serves no purpose in my view. I do have credentials (both from the UK and the US) but feel no need to justify myself here, nor post them on the internet where they can be stolen or altered.

            On paleo blogs to be called a vegan is an insult. And of course on vegan blogs to be called a paleo follower is an insult. What nonsense. I think both sides do themselves an injustice by playing this sort of game and failing to look at nutrition as a whole or nutritional biochemistry as the science that it is.

            I do also see a lot of bloggers on both sides of the isle making statements that have no basic in nutritional biochemisty. And I defended one blogger with a Master’s degree on that issue. If we could not get energy from fats by turning them into ketones or turn proteins into glucose by gluconeogenesis we would be in pretty bad trouble. Our bodies have several pathways for getting the energy that we need. Eskimos lived for long periods on a high fat, high protein diet and adapted, but there is a study some place on the internet in a clinical nutrition journal that talks about how they probably were able to do that because of the high level of potassium and minerals in water supplies near by. The Citric acid cycle pathway does need a small amount of glucose to prime the pump so to speak but that would be a biochemical discussion for another time.

            And I am not in agreement with some paleo proponents that ancient man lived solely on low glycemic leafy veggies and meats he could hunt or eggs he could gather. There is some evidence that ancient man knew very well how to dig up roots and tubers.

            And, a diet without plenty of fruits and veggies (Veggies in my book more than fruits as they were always seasonal before modern times.) is deficient in so many nutrients that I do not think good health can be obtained without them.

            What bothers me about most posts on both the paleo and vegan blogs is an unwillingness to look at nutrition as whole and unwillingness to look at anything the other side has to say because the posters appear to so wedded to their believe systems that they are blinded to any other views. There are plenty of studies on both sides of the isle.

            Sad. Sad for them, Sad for Dr, Gregor, and Sad for the paleo proponents as well.

          • Masterjohn is not really paleo. He’s been a Weston Price apologist since 2005 or before. His PhD is a RECENT acquisition, for which he was motivated by WAPF to obtain for the purpose of lending some legitimacy to his advocacy of their organization and dietary tenets.

            That hardly makes him the most reliable of sources.

          • DanielFaster

            Agreed, the paleoechochamber is hardly anything you want to bother with.

      • DanielFaster

        Hey Toxins, Lawrence posted a link to a Klaper presentation below, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0tJyb1wTxg4#t=133, explaining his theory as to why longtime meat eaters taking in exogenous choline for several decades from childhood have permanently downregulated endogenous choline genes/enzymes and that is why they have a hard time quitting meat – quite simply it is a very physical addiction, hard to break like heroin.

  • annon
  • Phil

    Aren’t healthy saturated fats (ex. coconut milk) ok if you’re on a low carb diet (20% of your foods are from carbs) since cholesterol isn’t oxidized on a low carb diet?

    • Sorry, but why would you target only 20% carbs? While paleo and vegan folk will argue percentages endlessly, this is pretty low for most kinds of energy needs. A healthy lifestyle includes moving your body and healthy carbs are the best fuel for that, due to conversion to energy. Your body has a much harder time converting fat into energy.

      • Linda N

        Agreed, James. Having said that however, some people might indeed have to go on a relatively low carbohydrate diet for a while to rebalance. Insulin resistance due to obesity comes to mind here.

        • Yes, but we have to speak in generalities when we’re discussing here. There are always edge cases that require special treatment. Vegan can’t work for everyone, but based on current research, well-planned vegan diets will provide very solid nutrition and much less chronic disease than either the SAD or what is currently called paleo to make it more palatable.

    • Toxins

      Hi phil, coconut milk and oil actually raise cholesterol levels. In addition, about a third of the saturated fat is long chain. Cholesterol oxidation is not necessary for heart disease to occur.

      LDL does not have to be oxidized to enter the endothelium and become foam cells, the beginning stages of heart disease.
      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2877120/

      Nonoxidized LDL’s typically precede accumulation in aortic lesions, thus LDL does not have to be oxidized.
      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1850639/

      In human models,LDL is higher on a saturated fat rich diet, saturated fat increases insulin production, the accumulation of liver fat was also present on a saturated fat diet.
      http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/95/5/1003.long

      Please see here for more

      http://nutritionfacts.org/?s=coconut

    • Arjan den Hollander.

      http://plantpositive.com/ , watch even parts and you will never go low carb again ^^
      ( I liked his Taubes series much better that his bro science series Toxins, well till part 8 at least ^^)

      • Toxins

        His taubes series is really good, as well as the “drivers of the heard” and the cholesterol confusion series.

  • Matthew Smith

    Dr. Greger at NutritionFacts.org shows that a vegan diet is “maybe too effective” at treating heart disease, obesity, and most numbers (“biometrics”) of internal medicine, inside and out. A diet without animals can even reverse cancer and has immediate and lasting effect on heart disease. This site both recommends no saturated fat from animals and recommends limited plant saturated fats and less cholesterol just from animals and more fiber just from plants. Walnuts, which are almost entirely fat and have saturated fat, are so heart healthy not eating them is a risk factor for heart disease. Eating Cocoa several times a week can reduce your risk of heart disease by half, although Dr. Greger doesn’t like the industry funding of dark chocolate research. Dark Chocolate is also high in saturated fat. This site, and many people who post here, do not recommend olive oil or coconut oil (one of the most purchased grocery items on Amazon.com) because they add calories without nutrition or have dangerous amounts of saturated fat. Pistachios, almonds, walnuts were very hearth healthy. Meat is very heart unhealthy, and cholesterol from diary and meat should be eliminated or drastically limited according to this site and Kaiser Permanante. On the nutrition label, less than 20 grams of saturated fat a day are recommended. Perhaps we should get half that from nuts, seeds, and dark chocolate. Diary has been linked to prostate cancer. If that’s true, there doesn’t seem to be any safe animal product. Eating less plant fat, while maximizing health benefits of plant fats like nuts, maybe is healthier than eating a high fat plant diet, based on the fact that posters here do not find coconut oil and olive oil. Less meat and diary has been linked to lower amounts of disease and can treat disease at any point in life, and beans, nuts, cocoa, green or matcha tea, berries, whole grain, fresh fruits, veggies, the best spices, mushrooms, nori, flax seed meal, less of more plant based meals all year, could add life to your years and value to your life.

  • Miranda

    First,
    let me say that I have a Master’s in Nutrition and am a licensed nutritionist.
    I am also no stranger to the sway food/chemical/pharmaceutical industry
    conglomerates impact our lives via what they pay the goverment and what we see
    at grocery stores and in advertising. That being said, of course the dairy industry wants to drive
    sales, all businesses want to drive sales. I may be digressing here, however, unlike this video,
    there is a lot of evidence supporting a high-fat, low-carbohyrate (grain) diet,
    namely a ketogenic diet or high fat, paleo-type diet for improving overall
    health (50-80% of calories from fat). Low fat diets tend to be to high in
    grains, gluten and added sugar which is fueling our chronic disease epidemic.
    This year, as a country, Sweden openly rejected low fat diets:
    http://healthimpactnews.com/2013/sweden-becomes-first-western-nation-to-reject-low-fat-diet-dogma-in-favor-of-low-carb-high-fat-nutrition/

    This eating style helps the body tap into it’s fat stores for energy (ketosis)
    and not rely on sugar (glucose) for energy. Benefits include better satiety,
    better blood biomarkers and ketones are a preferred source of energy for the
    brain (see Dr. Perlmutter’s website, author of Grain Brain or Dr. William
    Davis’ website, author of Wheat Belly). I am not saying that fat should solely
    come from animal products as they are acidifying, but rather from a variety of
    100% grass-fed, full fat dairy (because grass-fed is higher in omega 3 fats vs
    conventioally raised animals), avocados, olives, a variety of nuts, coconut
    milk/oil, MCT oil, chia seeds, flax oil, 100% pastured eggs, etc. This also
    encompasses a diet high in fruits and vegetables, at least 30% raw, little to
    no grains, high-quality meat products (again, pasture raised) and plenty of
    water. Anecdotally I have witnessed my own HDL increase to 65, LDL stay the
    same, triglycerides plummet to less than 50, inflammatory markers decrease and
    fasting glucose stabalize at 82. This also reflects what is demonstrated in
    studies:
    Long-term effects of a ketogenic diet in obese patients: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2716748/
    Low-Carbohydrate Diets: http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/carbohydrates/low-carbohydrate-diets/

    Meta-analysis’
    are also disproving the AMA’s (American Heart Association) guidelines. From
    March 2014 in the Annal of Internal Medicine: Association of Dietary,
    Circulating, and Supplement Fatty Acids with Coronary Risk: A Systematic Review
    and Meta-analysis: http://annals.org/mobile/article.aspx?articleid=1846638
    reviewed 49 observational studies and 27 randomized controlled trials concluded
    “Current evidence does not Cleary support cardiovascular guidelines that
    encourage high consumption of poly-unsaturated fats and low consumption of
    total saturated fats.”

    I hope this is food for thought.

    • Thule

      You said:

      “This eating style helps the body tap into it’s fat stores for energy (ketosis)
      and not rely on sugar (glucose) for energy. ”

      No, it doesn’t “help” the body — You are starving it of its natural fuel, to be in permanent ketosis is by no means what nature intended.

      And is strongly linked to many autodegenerative diseases.

      See this one just to begin:

      http://nutritionfacts.org/video/alzheimers-disease-grain-brain-or-meathead/

      • Matthew Smith

        I really like your comment here. Did you know that Dr. Adkins was fat? Did you know that he died of heart disease? You have shown that people can live without cholesterol. Are vegetarians real? Could it mean you eat one meal a day without meat? Do you think veganism is extreme? Are you proud of your diet? Would you share some of your fasting asceticism with everybody by saying you can say you are a vegitarian if you go without meat one meal a week to start? I was hoping if you are so self-denying you share your humble with the rest of us by giving us a place to start. Just they say to exercise five minutes a day at a moderate pace would be better than one half an hour a day because not a lot of people can do that. If you would share you kind indulgences by saying going with less meat would be better of us more of us would be like you. When the threshold is too high people will just eat pork! Everybody wants to be like you. So cool.

        • Thule

          @Matthew, frankly I would think that you were very sarcastic there, if wasn’t because I see your other comments on this site.

          First, despite that the Atkins foundation tries their best to hide it, it is well know how Dr Atkins died, so yes I knew it.

          Second of course vegetarians are real. :)

          India is largely a vegetarian country, and East Asian countries have large segments of vegetarians, pretty usual among Buddhist and Jainist, even if is just a cultural legacy, as happens in India. And they were vegetarians for thousand of years, isn’t a new thing.

          We as a species are naturally herbivores, as all primates — there is nothing extraordinary in eating as you were designed to.

          I don’t get from where you get any fasting asceticism on my part? Since you are interested, I am vegan. Nothing of meat any day of the week or anything like that, nor any other animal products.

          I never liked meat tho, none in my father side of the family do. So I have the advantage that before being vegan I was a natural, ovolacto vegetarian. Mostly lacto vegetarian, I didn’t eat a lot of eggs, neither I liked fish… Because all this for me is pretty easy being vegan. Yet, I would do it anyway because of health reasons (if you check the data as you are doing here, there is only one reasonable way to go) And also, I would keep from contributing to nightmarish industries. I don’t think we have the right to do what is being done to billions and billions of animals. We kill them, but what goes around comes around, people are paying the price for it.

          • Matthew Smith

            I didn’t mean to be sardonic, I really think vegans like you are cool. Frankly, some of your prestige drives people away, or rather we are surprised at your stoicism. Thank you for telling me there are vegetarian cultures, like in India. They must be a culture of cool people. They must also be very healthy! Would you welcome people to eat less meat like you, for partial health benefits or do you not proselytize? I find you inspiring. I frequently find myself questioning how a doctor would actually recommend the diet. Dr. Ornish had such great success, but most doctors are too floored by your integrity to believe they too eat mostly plants.

          • Thule

            You don’t need a lot of stoicism to change your diet, try substitutes first. Instead of dairy, try the many varieties of plant milk in the market, so with meat and other products. There are even vegan cheese and ice cream, a lot of varieties. Check labels tho, to make sure they don’t have coconut oil, but if you are between dairy ice cream, and cheese, vs vegan version that might include coconut oil… still this one would be the better option. (Just as last resource) Try versions without that kind of oil if you can.

            Take a look to this:

            http://www.pcrm.org/health/diets/kickstart/kickstart-programs/

          • Matthew Smith

            Thank you so much for your recommendations and your links. I can quick start my life at any time with them and if ever anyone had heart disease these could be a go-to guide. I have heard that some people plan on converting to devotion on their death bed. This is an okay strategy, but what about sudden death? I am planning on converting to veganism if I have heart disease, but Dr. Greger said that half of heart diseases are sudden. What a similar situation! The less meat I eat the healthier my heart is. Thanks to your help, I have put a vegan plan in place for myself for heart health. Thank you for peace.

      • Miranda

        This actually could be an extremely long response but I am replying from my phone so I don’t want to type an essay. I will argue that the body does need a small amount of glucose, but runs very well on ketones. There is also a varying degree of ketosis- ranging from mild to severe. A mild range would still incorporate 50-100 grams of carbs/day. Ancestorally, I will also argue that our predecessors were not baking of bread, drinking soda or making noodles. They also didn’t get 3 square meals a day (check out intermittent fasting). Just these things require the body to adjust to tap into the fat stores for energy. It’s very efficient. On a cellular level more mitochondria are created. This is indeed a form of ketosis. Fast forward today- we have obesity, diabetes which are sugar regulating disorders. These people have plenty of glucose and are parodoxilly starving. They have plenty of body fat but have trained their bodies (aka hormonal cascade) to rely on sugar so much that it can’t even access it’s own fat for energy. These people literally feel starving all of the time. Enter to ketogenic diet. It works wonders.

        • Linda N

          Thank you Miranda for your post. All views need to be aired here. Today’s diets do indeed promote sugar regulating disorders. One can indeed be obese and malnourished at the same time. See it all the time.

        • Thule

          Our ancestors, as all primates were eating plant food, which is complex carbohydrates. That is the natural fuel for the body. If you starve it of its natural fuel, before dying would use anything, like trying to use fat in a very inefficient conversion. And you are in an unhealthy starving mode.

          Regarding diabetes, it is exactly the opposite of your tale. You can completely reverse type II diabetes with a WFPB diet. No insulin needed anymore. It heals it and prevent it. While animals products trigger it. The direct relationship between high meat, eggs and milk consumption and diabetes — the rich western diet. Every place since, as they adopt the same diet, gets diabetes, heart disease and cancer among other degenerative diseases, exactly as happened in the West before.

          Dr Greger:

          ” Plant-based diets (especially whole foods) may successfully prevent, treat, and even reverse type 2 diabetes (see also here, here).

          Excluding meat, milk (see also here), and other animal products may reduce the risk of diabetes and gestational diabetes by boosting our hormone-binding proteins, helping to prevent obesity, and reducing exposure to arsenic, BPA, dioxins, nitrites, and PCBs.

          Eggs may be particularly risky – eating only one egg a week may almost double the odds of getting diabetes. Fish, especially salmon, is one of the primary sources of PCBs and other industrial toxins, which may play a role in the development of diabetes.

          Indian gooseberries (amla), coffee, soy, flaxseeds, green tea, pulses (dried beans), chamomile tea, purple potatoes, a href=”http://nutritionfacts.org/video/broccoli-sprouts-vs-supplements/”>broccoli sprouts, whole grains, vinegar, and beans may be protective. Beans may be especially beneficial when replacing meat or refined carbs, such as white rice. Cinnamon, depending on the variety, it may be either too toxic for consumption at high doses or ineffective at treating diabetes. Diabetes drugs, on the other hand, have been found to increase the risks of heart attack, heart failure, and death, and regular exercise and weight-loss may work just as well against diabetes. Erythritol is a nontoxic sugar substitute. By eating plant-based and living a healthy lifestyle, 90%-95% of type 2 diabetes is avoidable. If left untreated, diabetes can cause blindness. Untreated type 1 diabetes can even be fatal. Babies fed baby formula seemed to have a higher risk of obesity, type 1 and type 2 diabetes

          Dr. Greger covers diabetes in his full-length presentations:
          • Uprooting the Leading Causes of Death
          • More Than an Apple a Day: Combating Common Diseases
          • From Table to Able: Combating Disabling Diseases with Food ”

          For all the embedded links in the article, check http://nutritionfacts.org/topics/diabetes/

          • Miranda

            I agree with all of that. The Ketogenic diet encompasses lots of vegetables, some fruit, lots of non-animal fat choices as well as animal meat/fat. I listed the foods included in an earlier post.

          • Miranda

            Except these things:
            Ketogenic diets have been shown in a number of studies to be more effective, faster and easier to follow than diets that are low glycemic and have 55% calories from food to treat diabetes
            http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1743-7075-5-36.pdf

            Eggs are not dangerous and do not promote diabetes. And actually the body makes about 80% of our cholesterol so the diet only plays a small role in cholesterol levels. This site cherry picks data. Further, higher cholesterol levels are cardio protective for older women. Also there are different types of cholesterol with some being more atherogenic than others and lipoproteins that are worse than others EX LP(a) AND our ancient blood testing from PCPs doesn’t routinely test inflammatory markers which are directly correspond with cardiac events like CRP or homocysteine nor do PCPs routinely check insulin levels which happens to be a faster indicator of blood sugar dysregulayion. Oxidized proteins and cholesterol stick to arteries. Oxidation is largely from excess blood sugar (carbohydrates) floating around creating advanced glycated end products; caramelized blood. A1C actually measures this.
            Oh, here’s the egg articles from Harvard and webmd.
            http://www.m.webmd.com/diabetes/news/20141009/eggs-type-2-diabetes

            http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/eggs/

          • largelytrue

            “And actually the body makes about 80% of our cholesterol so the diet only plays a small role in cholesterol levels.”

            Given the academic credentials and professionalism that you claim, this comment displays a profound lack of curiosity about the mainstream position to which you must respond. Dietary cholesterol is not proposed to be dangerous simply because it is absorbed and added to the serum concentration. That is a straw man. Dietary cholesterol is proposed to raise serum LDL in good part because it alters hepatic circulation of LDL, meaning that less serum LDL is cleared by the liver, meaning that endogenously produced cholesterol builds up in the blood:

            “Once LDL receptors become saturated, the removal rate of LDL is proportional to the number of receptors. Whenever the number of receptors is reduced, plasma LDL levels must rise. Experiments in animals indicate that the consumption of a high fat diet decreases the number of LDL receptors in the liver (123, 124). We believe that this mechanism operates through feedback suppression as described above. That is, when excess dietary cholesterol accumulates in the liver, the liver responds by decreasing the production of LDL receptors (Fig. 13C). The entry of dietary cholesterol into the liver is mediated by a receptor, termed the chylomicron remnant receptor, whose activity is genetically distinct from the LDL receptor (125). The chylomicron remnant receptor is unaffected by cholesterol accumulation (126), and it causes cholesterol to accumulate to high levels in the liver when the diet contains excess fat.

            The combination of saturation and suppression of hepatic LDL receptors contributes in a major way to the buildup of LDL in plasma when a diet rich in saturated fats and cholesterol is ingested. Insofar as such a diet also may increase production of LDL in the face of a fixed or declining removal capacity, the LDL level would rise even higher.”

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3513311

            Given that the work toward illuminating this kind of mechanistic pathway was awarded a Nobel Prize, I find your apparent ignorance of it quite baffling.

            There is also of course the empirical evidence that dietary cholesterol raises serum cholesterol, and a likely explanation why some schools of public health and NGOs don’t think it raises serum cholesterol very much is because they are looking at extant variation in a population that already has elevated cholesterol as a result of diet, and forgetting that there is a regime of diminishing marginal effect:

            http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/55/6/1060.long

            “Eggs are not dangerous and do not promote diabetes.”

            If your statement to the effect that dietary cholesterol cannot effect serum cholesterol levels very much is based on a tacit admission that raised LDL is generally a bad thing, then the paper cited above also challenges your beliefs about the non-harmfulness of eggs. Egg yolk feeding was the source of dietary cholesterol in many of the controlled feeding studies used at the base of Hopkins’ meta-analysis.

          • Toxins

            Great post! Thanks for your well thought out and evidence based contributions.

          • Linda N

            Miranda: Sadly these posters cannot listen. And apparently with that mind set, they feel free to imply that since your thinking is not what they call mainstream with respect to cholesterol etc. that you may not have the credentials you claim to. (Where have I heard that before?!) If Dr. Gregor says it, it has to be true. If a non vegan or anyone else with a different view says it, it has to be false. Regardless of their knowledge or credentials.

          • Matthew Smith

            Thank you for your post. I think you need fiber to feel full. I think your body really counts fiber. Really fills you up. Maybe without fiber a person really is starving!

    • largelytrue

      “Meta-analysis’ [sic] are also disproving the AMA’s (American Heart Association) guidelines. From March 2014 in the Annal of Internal Medicine: Association of Dietary, Circulating, and Supplement Fatty Acids with Coronary Risk: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis: http://annals.org/mobile/artic… reviewed 49 observational studies and 27 randomized controlled trials concluded
      “Current evidence does not Cleary support cardiovascular guidelines that encourage high consumption of poly-unsaturated fats and low consumption of total saturated fats.”

      Plant Positive gave a brief response to this particular meta-analysis: http://plantpositive.com/blog/2014/3/23/recent-articles-by-drs-chowdhury-and-dinicolantonio.html

      healthy-longevity, another blogger in a similar genre to Plant Positive, covered the study more extensively: http://healthylongevity.blogspot.com/2014/03/saturated-fat-heart-disease-meta-analysis.html

      His language is a bit more tortuous and his work is a bit dryer, but his quantitative analysis is generally more sophisticated than that of PP.

  • DanielFaster

    If only I had a nickel every time Toxins and Thea shoot down paleo-ish posts from “licensed nutritionists” (I’ve heard of Registered Dietitians or RDN’s, not aware of any ‘nutritionist’ license) and refer the readers to http://plantpositive.com/ . . . (see below) . . .

    • miranda
      • MIranda, are you actually suggesting the flake-fest healthimpactnews.com you linked to (which is a cover for a nut-job religious fundamentalist) is a source that anyone should pay any attention to? Regardless of the license application form you linked to and whether you have any credentials or not, you’re not helping your case by citing the previous Sweden example. The guy who writes that ENTIRE site has a BA in Bible studies and an MA in linguistics. Puhleez. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but the study he cites is from another paleo-promo Swedish blog.

        • miranda

          Okay, I apologize for that. I was searching for the information to show that it was adopted in Sweden and typing this up at work, so my time was limited. I don’t always like healthimpactnews.com either. Here are some other sources to refer to instead about Sweden adopting the high fat diets:

          http://www.diabetes.co.uk/diet/low-carb-high-fat-diet.html
          http://journals.lww.com/nutritiontodayonline/Abstract/2014/05000/The_Swedish_Review,__Dietary_Treatment_of.7.aspx
          http://www.webmd.com/diabetes/news/20140916/high-fat-dairy-diabetes

          • Thule

            But the Scandinavian countries doesn’t have any stellar numbers in hearth disease and cancer. And also what’s new? Sweden eating few vegetables, grains and legumes..? It was always like that. Their statistics will keep as bad as they always were.

          • Miranda

            The ideology recently changed about 6 months ago. It would make sense for a country to choose support what would be healthiest for it’s citizens, but it can’t force people to eat that way.

          • Matthew Smith

            I had thought that the Sweds have a very Western like diet and drink fruit juice as a health choice. The Western diet is taking over the world! Is this a good thing? Yes, more of the world is now obese than starving and more people live in suburbia than in rural areas. Many less people are hungry than before and people have more wealth. I think people on Western diets, offered healthy information, make healthier choices than people who are poor and not offered health choices. Giving people options I think is actually good for right now for life extension. In Dr. Greger’s cited example of vegetarians of Uganda, he showed that their diet of only vegetables and roots, the people didn’t have a single case of heart disease. However, as a country, they currently have a median life expectancy of only about 55 in Uganda. The doctor who described and used this diet lived to 93. Using the plant based diet as prevention could combine both life styles. I think fast-food mostly makes money selling french fries and salad and really only makes money selling ice cream. I would like to acknowledge my mom for her deep devotion to life, oh, that the Earth loves the wealth of plants. As the western diet spreads, there is going to be more heart disease and obesity related death. The plant based diet here can help. Just one bottle of fenugreek spice could help many Americans lose five pounds with a small amount of exercise.

  • justin

    is saturated fat from plants anything to worry about? i eat a lot of nuts and seeds this time of year. I’ve never actually seen anything that specifically says all saturated fat is bad, just that of animal origin.

    • Lawrence

      Hi justin,
      Check out these videos from William Harris, M.D. long-time vegan doctor and co-founder of the Veg. Society of Hawaii. I think you will find ample discussion of whole-food plant fats that will help you make an informed decision about your diet choices.
      http://www.vegsource.com/harris/My%20Videos.htm

  • Ken

    Dr. Greger: Can you review the research studies (many of which were done in Europe) cited by Dr. William Li MD who says that hard cheese particularly Gouda, Edam, Emmenthal and Jarlsburg prevents cancer and atherosclerosis.

    Contributor: William Li MD

    Dr. William Li is President, Medical Director, and Co-founder of
    the Angiogenesis Foundation, and is a highly-sought international
    lecturer, advisor, and Fortune 500 consultant for his predictive
    insights into medical breakthroughs. –

    The following information is stated on his web site.

    “The Surprising Truth about Cancer, and an Arsenal of Weapons to Fight It

    A Surprising Weapon

    But this arsenal also contains surprising weapons. Here is one: Cheese.

    Eating certain types of hard cheeses, including Gouda, Edam, Emmenthal,
    and Jarlsburg, can lower your risk of developing cancer. Why? Because
    these cheeses contain a form of Vitamin K called Vitamin K2 (the
    scientific name is menaquinone) that is both antiangiogenic and also
    kills cancer cells directly. The studies indicate that eating as few as
    two slices of these hard cheeses a day can lower your overall risk for
    cancer, including lung cancer and prostate cancer. You can find these
    cheeses in your local grocery store.

    You might be wondering whether eating cheese frequently is such a good
    idea? Well, in this case, it turns out that vitamin K2 also protects
    the heart by preventing hardening of the arteries. Many of the medical
    studies I’ve cited were done in Europe where cheese is regularly eaten,
    even on a daily basis, including breakfast. Personally, I think the
    research is so compelling that we should all find ways to add vitamin K2
    into our diets. If you are a cheese lover, Gouda and the other types I
    listed above are good choices. For people who are lactose intolerant or
    who just don’t like dairy, chicken is another good source of Vitamin
    K2. Not the whole chicken, but the dark meat like the thighs and
    drumsticks. There many tasty chicken recipes that let you substitute
    dark meat for white breast meat.” – See more at:
    http://www.eattobeat.org/frontlines/3/the-surprising-truth-about-cancer-and-an-arsenal-of-weapons-to-fight-it.html#sthash.nimh5Ikj.dpuf

    • DanielFaster

      There are much better/healthier sources of non-animal, cruelty free, environmentally responsible vitamin K, e.g. kale, spinach, Swiss chard, mustard greens, parsley, broccoli, Brussels sprouts, asparagus, avocado and my fave, the culturally popular/unpopular natto! http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10874601 Available frozen in most Asian grocery stores, throw the sauce packets away (never mind the ingredients listing the soy beans are always plain and those scary ingredients are only in the flavor packs) and use your own soy sauce, mustard, miso, ketchup etc.

  • Lawrence

    My takeaway from this video comes from the Harika paper. Bangladesh had the lowest fat intake (11.1%) of 40 countries. Judicious ‘modernization’ of their diet plan to improve micro-nutrient intake seems like a good target to shoot for to lower total fat intake while maintaining a well-planned WFPB diet. Here’s a look at what they eat in Bangladesh:
    http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/ag126e/AG126E05.htm

    As for the claims that some people cannot thrive on a WFPB diet, Dr. Michael Klaper, M.D. has some interesting thoughts on this topic that I (a layperson) find thought-provoking and probably correct:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0tJyb1wTxg4

  • RonB

    The facts that someone has an interest doesn’t mean he is wrong…
    I prefer more scientific arguments.

  • DanielFaster

    Latest from PCRM:

    Low-Carb Dieting Takes Another Blow

    People who consume more whole grains live longer, according to a new study
    from Harvard. Researchers analyzed the diets and mortality of more than 118,000
    men and women from both the Nurses’ Health Study and the Health Professionals
    Follow-Up Study and found that, after an average of 25 years follow-up, more
    whole-grain intake was associated with lower death rates and that every
    whole-grain serving was associated with a 5 percent lower risk for death in
    general and a 9 percent lower risk for death from heart disease. Whole grains,
    for this study, were defined as the whole grain (whole wheat, oats, brown rice,
    etc.) as well as its pulverized flour form (whole-wheat flour, oat flour, brown
    rice flour, etc.), which may be found in products such as breads and cereals.
    The benefits were independent of other lifestyle factors, including exercise
    and other dietary choices.

    These findings support other studies (see https://pcrm.org/health/medNews/low-carb-diets-increase-heart-disease-risk) that
    show avoiding healthful carbs and consuming more animal products increases the
    risk for dying.

    Wu H, Flint AJ, Qi Q, et al. Association between
    dietary whole grain intake and risk of mortality: two large prospective studies
    in us men and women. JAMA Intern Med. Published online January 5,
    2015. http://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=2087877

  • Matthew Smith

    Margarine is a plant-based food, it contains plant oils. However, it has trans fats, it is a trans fat derived product. Is Margarine, with its trans-fats, healthier than butter with its cholesterol and saturated fat? Margarine may soon be banned by the FDA, or at least is now in a nebulous category as a food that uses trans fats that cannot be served in the restaurants. Perhaps you could use extra virgin olive oil as a spread or shortening, which is slightly recommended by Dr. Greger. It is not a matter of which is healthier for you, butter or margarine, but which is worse. The saturated fat in butter and its cholesterol raise LDL, the trans-fat in margarine very much hardens arteries. Maybe even peanut butter should be your spread. Maybe there is no healthy fat except for that which naturally occurs in some plant foods.

    • Thea

      Mathew: re: “Margarine is a plant-based food, it contains plant oils. However, it has trans fats…”
      This is true of traditional margarines. However, in the past few years, a couple companies have come out with plant based margarines that are free of trans fats. Two American brands are: Smart Balance and Earth Balance.

      As you noted, it is still not very healthy. However, if you are indulging in a special treat, like a favorite dessert for a birthday or something, and you need to use margarine, there is definitely the option of a a plant based margarine that does not have trans fats.

      Just a thought for you.

      • Matthew Smith

        Thank you! I like your comment. Do you think canola or rape seed oil is healthy? It is said the healthiest oils are olive, sunflower, and canola. Maybe non of them are healthy compared to what you can find in a sheet of Nori and flax seed meal. Patiently, olive oil is neutral or only slightly recommended here. This site recommends a very low fat and very low saturated fat diet with nuts and seeds as a treat. This is very much the opposite of many fad diets! (Low gluten high Adkins). I think this site would more recommend oatmeal, and whole grain rice than lean ham and a cut of steak.

        • jj

          Oil despite its plant origin is not healthy. If one wanted to use a little oil for some reason canola sounds like a good mix of fats but its chemical extraction and processing makes it very unhealthy.

        • Thea

          Mathew: re: ” Do you think canola or rape seed oil is healthy?” I don’t think *any* oil is healthy. Period. In fact, I think oil is less healthy than sugar. But even though I don’t think sugar is all that healthy, I still eat it. (More than I should!) I look on oil the same way. It’s not healthy. But as a rare treat in the context of a very healthy diet (that normally doesn’t have any oil), it shouldn’t be a problem.

          To understand why no oils are healthy, I *highly* recommend the following talk by Jeff Novick: From Oil To Nuts. I’ve watched this talk multiple times and keep picking up new info. And I’ve shown it to many family and friends:
          http://www.amazon.com/Oil-Nuts-Essential-Facts-Oils/dp/B003UYAQIY/ref=sr_1_1_twi_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1420838132&sr=8-1&keywords=from+oil+to+nuts+jeff

          Here is a free excerpt from the talk where Jeff compares oil to sugar. If you like this bit, you will love the whole talk.
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbALgjmZUek

          All that said, if I had to pick an oil to use in a recipe, I would pick say canola oil over olive. You will find out why in Jeff’s talk. :-)

  • Derrek

    What do I say to ppl who recommend a high fat diet or paleo? Why is 80/10/10 best diet? Any evidence?

    • Veganrunner

      Hi Derrek this website is full of videos that support a plant based diet. Under each video there is a sources cited area. All research will be the evidence you request.

  • Jacob Dijkstra, M.D.

    In the acknowledgement of the referenced article by Aranceta and Perez-Rodrigo we find
    the following statement: “The preparatory meetings for this series
    of reviews on fat and health were funded by Puleva Food. Neither Javier Aranceta
    nor Carmen Pe´rez-Rodrigo have conflicts of interest to disclosure” (the grammar
    mistake is theirs). The website of Puleva Food identifies a company producing a
    large variety of milk with various supplements. No conflict of interest???

  • Bruce Cropley

    Off topic: I’m curious what your position is on fasting?

    • Matthew Smith

      I know you are not polling me, but Dr. Greger has a video on how a restricted calorie diet can add many years to your life. “Eat until you are eight tenths full,” is a common expression among some 100 year old cultures. You could also eat peanuts, whole grains, green tea, or spinach, for a similar benefit. I thinking fasting has many definitions. Some go without eating meat once a week or for 40 days in lent (Cathloics), or do not eat for two meals in a row (Mormons) some go without eating for 24 hours once a year (Jewish peoples) or more often, the most extreme people, the orthodox do not eat meat or milk most of the year on any Saint Days. Being mostly Vegan, these people should have many heart benefits. The people of India are mostly vegetarian but they do not consider themselves to always be fasting, Hindu people will never eat the cow, as it is Devine to them. Fasting is healthy. Christ said to not show off your fast, although the religions and the religious leaders sure should. Christ knew many people fasted, at least then. I think all the vegetarians and vegans here are to be complemented on their fast and thanked for allowing us to benefit from reading their writing as it adds to our lives. I am hoping to share in their diet for the health benefits, learning from such heart healthy people. I sure wish I had the will power to fast like that. http://lds.about.com/od/basicsgospelprinciples/f/fasting.htm

      • Bruce Cropley

        I’m happy to get useful information from anyone, so thank you :) I was thinking of people who promote not eating any food for one or more days, e.g. once a week. I’m not interested in the “weight loss benefits” as I am already on a WFPB diet, so I’m lean by definition ;) So my question is should I consider fasting as a way of increasing my health?

  • Bruce Cropley

    Off topic: The video http://nutritionfacts.org/video/algae-based-dha-vs-flax-2/ seems to cut off before it is finished.

  • unf13

    The only thing that worries me why so many vegans (especially raw ones) end up having health problems? it doesn’t make sense. For example, maybe you have heard of Victoria Boutenko (author of ’12 Steps to Raw Foods’ and other books) and her family. Not long ago she admitted to eating eggs and fish because of health problems after being vegan for 10 years..

    Maybe our optimal diet should be patterned after that of chimps (our closest DNA relative from mammals and primates) or something like that?

    I’ve recently watched a few documentories about their life. They are about 90% vegan. But they hunt other species (including other monkeys) and eat eggs and insects too though they have plenty of plant foods choices around. Doesn’t that mean that if animal foods were the root of all evil chimps and baboons would instinctively avoid it? The Mother Nature always proves to be wise so there must be an explanation to that.

    • jj

      There is a big problem with a 100% raw food diet. The body needs nutrients that are not bio-available from raw food. Legumes and grains need to be well cooked. These are very important for good health. Perhaps someone will direct you to videos that explain the matter better.

    • largelytrue

      “The only thing that worries me why so many vegans (especially raw ones) end up having health problems?”

      One might speculate. For one, anecdotal evidence is not really that good and can give you a distorted picture of the world even when the cases are true. Many people will be keen to report on people who report that they abandoned a vegan diet for health reasons, regardless of whether those health reasons are solid and solidly connected with veganism. The story feeds other dietary ideologies.

      Raw foodism is highly restrictive, and as far as I know is not really based on sound science when rejecting cooking. It’s harder to implement healthfully and it is attractive to some people who perhaps are not so great at implementing it, or so attracted to restricted diets in itself that they do other weird things. Some few people may have food intolerances of the sort that they have problems when their grocery store becomes effectively limited to a few fruits. Veganism itself won’t work if you don’t have half a brain; you can’t get your B12 from a feeling of smug superiority or a dogmatic dietary ideology.

      “Doesn’t that mean that if animal foods were the root of all evil chimps and baboons would instinctively avoid it? The Mother Nature always proves to be wise so there must be an explanation to that.”

      This is dichotomous reasoning. Animal foods aren’t the root of all evil but there aren’t particularly good reasons to consume significant quantities of most animal foods. I don’t know why you think Mother Nature is always wise. Baboons will instinctively try to eat the Western diet of junk food when they get the chance, just as bears are known to seek out campers’ food once they have tasted it and know what its all about. Humans instinctively seek out a diet of junk foods too because they are calorie dense. It’s not good for us as modern people with an abundance of high-calorie nutrient-deficient junk, but it would have been good for fitness in an environment where the chief dietary barriers to reproduction were things like starvation before sexual maturity.

      Maybe it’s better to eat 5-10% energy from select animal foods such as insects or mussels, but there’s really not much systematic evidence in favor of this idea — and in some important ways, it’s much easier to work out a basic pattern for home cooking that has 0% animal food. AND, the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, which is often charged with bias in its curriculum due to food industry influence, has nonetheless stated clearly that well-planned vegan diets are not deficient for any stage of the life cycle: http://www.eatright.org/About/Content.aspx?id=8357

  • Rob

    Was there a link between the actual study mentioned at the beginning and the dairy industry?

  • Derrek

    How would you respond to people who think organic, free range eggs and organic meat is healthy? Then they use a source like this: http://rawfoodsos.com/2010/07/07/the-china-study-fact-or-fallac/ to try to debunk The China Study. And they don’t believe cholesterol causes heart disease. Here’s there source they use: http://chriskresser.com/cholesterol-doesnt-cause-heart-disease

    • guest

      It’s just what you think. they are using smoke and mirrors and industry funded Drs who get paid to make pro-meat studies and then jive the numbers to show no correlation . Dr g talks about this disingenuous confusion tactic in several videos like this.
      http://nutritionfacts.org/2015/10/29/why-some-dietary-cholesterol-studies-fail-to-show-harm/

      Chris Kesser is another low carber that has come under fire for openly admitting diets high in meat and saturated fat cause insulin resistance. He knows you can’t suppress the truth for long and he finally embraced it and now advocated potatoes and other resistant starches. So for having the balls to say saturated fat is bad and causes insulin resistance, I give him credit.

  • Yvan Pearson

    Please reconcile your work with Gary Taubes’ work. You guys should be forced into a room together until a consensus is reached for the sake of the public.

    • Thea

      Yvan: If you are dealing with someone who intellectually dishonest, it would not be possible to come to a consensus. If you are interested in a discussion that directly addresses Taubes’ “work”, I highly recommend taking a peak at Plant Positive’s work. All of his videos really address Taubes directly or indirectly. But here are 50 videos that mention him by name:
      http://plantpositive.com/display/Search?moduleId=19496100&searchQuery=gary+taubes

      The Plant Positive videos are not only interesting, but entertaining.

    • guest

      Dr G takes on Gary Taubes on his website atkinsexposed.org.

      Here is a quote form that site talking about Gary Taubes the dishonest Charlton.

      “The piece was written by freelance writer and
      Atkins advocate[45] Gary Taubes (who reportedly scored a book deal from
      it–and a $700,000 advance).[46] The Washington Post investigated his
      pro-Atkins article and found that Taubes simply ignored all the research
      that didn’t agree with his conclusions.

      Taubes evidently
      interviewed a number of prominent obesity researchers and then twisted
      their words. “What frightens me,” said one, “is that he picks and
      chooses his facts…. If the facts don’t fit in with his yarn, he
      ignores them.”[47]

      The article seemed to claim that experts
      recommended the diet. “I was greatly offended at how Gary Taubes tricked
      us all into coming across as supporters of the Atkins Diet,” said John
      Farquhar, a Professor Emeritus of Medicine at Stanford. When the
      Director of the Center for Human Nutrition at the Washington University
      School of Medicine was asked to comment of one of Taubes’ claims, he
      replied, “It’s preposterous.”[48]

      “He took this weird little idea and blew it up,” said Farquhar, “What a disaster.”[49]

      “The
      article was written in bad faith,” said another quoted expert. “It was
      irresponsible.”[50] “I think he’s a dangerous man. I’m sorry I ever
      talked to him.” Referring to the book deal, “Taubes sold out.”[51]

      What
      the researchers stressed was how dangerous saturated fat and meat
      consumption could be, but Taubes seemed to have conveniently left it all
      out. “The article was incredibly misleading,” said the pioneering
      Stanford University endocrinologist Gerald Reaven who actually coined
      the term Syndrome X. “I tried to be helpful and a good citizen,” Reaven
      said, agreeing to do the interview, “and I ended up being embarrassed as
      hell. He sort of set me up… I was horrified.”[52]”

      end quote

  • planned plant parenthood

    Given that many self-described vegans try to be careful to not become Omega 6/3 unbalanced, but that most nuts (Almonds, Peanuts,) and Avocados are very High in Omega 6s — How can vegans, especially their children growing up, be assured — they are getting enough FAT in their diets, and converting ALA to EPA & DHA — Without maxing out on Omega 6s (Inflammatories)? In other words, if we want to avoid avocados, peanuts, and nuts, to avoid very high Omega 6 imbalance to 3s, as most plant-based researchers now recommend — then where do plant-based children need to get their fat? How much fat do children need for DHA and brain growth and function? The corollary question is therefore: Does ALA convert at a much higher rate to EPA & DHA, once on a plant-based 1:1 Omega 6:3 balance diet? Some studies show yes, other studies point to – no? But who knows who’s eating ‘oil’ on these studies? Because, being vegan, doesn’t mean they don’t consume vegetable oils – which is the No. 1 offender for Omega 6:3 imbalance. What’s a plant-based parent to do, but worry about developing brains? Thank you!

    • Joseph Gonzales R.D.

      Thanks for reposting this question. I think even though some of those foods you mentioned have more omega-6’s they do not take into account the entire daily diet. For example, once beans, whole grains, and tons of fruits and veggies come into play the ratio of fats balance out a bit. Their are many conversion factors and I think to be safe taking a DHA/EPA supplement is best if that is a concern. Note that children are a different ball game. They certainly need that fat and energy to grow if they are following a vegan diet. The best place for info on kids is perhaps the Vegetarian Nutrition dietetic practice group and the Vegetarian Resource Group.

      You ask extremely important questions. i am going to make a Ask the Dietitian Q&A about this and post soon. In the meantime. See these links for more info. Vegetarian Resource Group.

      Some vegetable oils like canola and flax have a good ratio of essential fats. More to come…

      Thanks,
      Joseph

  • pat 222

    I understand that saturated fat from animals is bad. Is the saturated
    fat from organic cold-pressed, unrefined coconut oil as bad as the
    saturated fat from animals? I’ve read that saturated fat has some
    beneficial effects.

    • Joseph Gonzales R.D.

      Hi pat thanks so much for reposting this question. Dr. Greger points out the differences in this video. From the transcript “Unlike saturated animal fats, coconut oil doesn’t cause that spike inflammation immediately after consumption of animal foods, which makes sense because as you’ll remember it may be the dead bacterial endotoxins in animal products ferried into the body by saturated fat that are to blame. ”

      I am not sure of the benefits from saturated fats. Feel free to post any studies here to support that claim and we can look and see why the researchers came to that conclusion. Here is more info on saturated fat, if interested. Thanks again for your post!

      Joseph

  • t1planteater

    Dr. Greger! There’s been a few articles floating around the uk at the moment in regards to this ‘study’ http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2014-09/d-ssc091214.php that suggests, ” in contrast to animal fats in general, fats specific to dairy products may have a role in prevention of type 2 diabetes.” ?!?! Would it be possible to have some light shed on this? Or maybe you could point me towards a video you have already done on this. Surely this study is misleading…. dairy preventing type 2 diabetes?!

  • Ron Evans

    You didn’t provide evidence that saturated fat is bad. And if that evidence is merely that it raises cholesterol, then please provide evidence that this is bad. It’s not enough to say “that’s how it’s always been and what most doctors believe.”

    • guest

      Yes he did, what video are you watching? Here’s a quote for you from Dr Gs video on Lipotoxicity.

      “Fat cells filled with saturated fat activate an inflammatory response to
      a far greater extent. This increased inflammation, along with eating
      more saturated fat, has been demonstrated to raise insulin resistance
      through free radical and ceramide production. Saturated fat also has
      been shown to have a direct effect on skeletal muscle insulin
      resistance. Accumulation of saturated far increases the amount of
      diacyl- glycerol in the muscles, which has been demonstrated to have a
      potent effect on muscle insulin resistance. It doesn’t matter if the fat
      in our blood comes from our fat, or their fat.”

      Is that bad enough for you? Lots more were that came from. Humans are evolotionary herbivores and saturated fat affects herbivores negatively. That’s why heart disease is our number one killer. Most of us are herbivores acting like omnivorous to our own detriment. Like Dr Mcdougall sez “most people have no chance”. That’s because most deny our herbivorous evolution.

  • gcottenc

    Hello! The BMJ published a new study http://www.bmj.com/content/351/bmj.h3978 which concludes that “Saturated fats are not associated with all cause mortality” The media http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/11796834/Butter-unlikely-to-harm-health-but-margarine-could-be-deadly.html quotes it and says that “Butter [is] unlikely to harm health, but margarine could be deadly”. What do you think?

    • guest

      Did you even watch the video? You just posted two studies that do the exact thing Dr G is talking a bout in this video? You are adding the publics confusion about the dangers of saturated fat. You on the egg board dole?

  • Tashi Ito

    Just noting, this continues to be published… now on the front webpage of Expo West 2016: http://newhope360.com/fats-oils/i-can-t-believe-it-s-not-butter-s-unhealthy

  • Gaia

    I wonder if the study referred to here http://www.webmd.com/food-recipes/20120120/natural-trans-fats-less-unhealthy-than-manmade-variety that argues that trans fats found in dairy are not as bad as manmade trans fats is part of that dairy industry initiative? any thoughts Dr Greger?

    • Tom Goff

      I think so. Certainly the DJ Baer quoted in that artcle has had financial links with the the Minnesota-South Dakota Dairy Foods Research Center, Brookings, and Dairy Management, Inc., Rosemont, Illinois.
      http://www.journalofdairyscience.org/article/S0022-0302(01)74483-9/references

      This is a complex area but an editorial in 2008 noted of some comparative studies
      “the diets with 3.7% of energy from TFA, whether from ruminant or industrial sources, each had similar adverse effects on blood lipids and lipoproteins, including increases in LDL cholesterol, decreases in HDL cholesterol, and increases in the ratio of total to HDL cholesterol (although power to achieve statistical significance for some comparisons was limited because of dropouts). However, consumption of 1.5% of energy from ruminant TFA did not have significantly different effects on blood lipids or lipoproteins than did consumption of the low-TFA (0.8% of energy) diet.”
      http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/87/3/515.short

      So there may be a threshold effect. However, high dairy consumption is going to also deliver high levels of SFA, animal protein etc which will adversely affect health.

  • Blaice

    You know what is sad, many will say a little won’t kill you (in reference to animal products), but what they don’t understand, is you are ALREADY getting a little bit. Do you eat nuts? If so, you are getting around 15% of your calories from them in the form of saturated fat. Avocado? Exactly the same percent. Eat any coconut? Even more. Sesame seeds = 3%. Tofu around 4% and tempeh a whooping 18%? There are so many foods with naturally occurring saturated fat, that an argument about “not getting enough, or not getting too much” is absolutely ridiculous.

  • vfran

    I have a friend who is on the “Bullet proof diet”. She drinks coffee with ghee in the morning and adds oil to everything to increase the fat value since they have stated this and a large quantity of vegetables and moderate meat intake is good for you. What do you say about this?

  • danieltb

    1. Please ask a seemingly healthy person (maybe even a public figure like Dr. Mercola) who eats a high-fat diet to prove their hearts aren’t clogged: I really want to know if it is true high fat diets invariably cause atherosclerosis.

    2. Given the popularity of low-carb-high-fat-high-animal-protein diets, one would expect there should or is going to be a tsunami of people suffering from atherosclerosis in the near future.

  • Davy

    Butter we buy today is it extracted before paturization or after? If after, haven’t the fat molecules been damaged by heat? If so this would be bad like eating plastic.

  • surfur18

    I have an acquaintance who recently posted this link–> http://www.wort.lu/en/lifestyle/global-health-study-no-link-between-butter-and-heart-disease-57767085ac730ff4e7f62d71 http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0158118 <– Basically stating, butter isn't bad for you. Unfortunately, I am not well versed in understanding and interpreting scientific literature and want to know from the perspective of research experts, is this study legitimate? Thanks!

  • Dean Hoffman

    The biggest problem with health information is “Confirmation Bias.” Any researcher can find supporting evidence for ANY argument (Google made this easy). Example: Let us cherry pick one thousand people who all lived to one hundred years and were smokers, and I can “prove” that smoking will help you live to one hundred years old. This bias is the nonsense taking place in over 90% of the research today. Confirmation Bias is why people with different political beliefs will each interpret the SAME FACTS as supporting their cause. The only way to filter these people out is to find the ones that admit it is a problem and confess that even if they try not to have any confirmation bias it is impossible. Confirmation Bias is an uncontrollable human tendency (even with the best intentions). If someone cannot admit this, then they are not only fooling you, they are fooling themselves. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

  • Robert Haile

    I live in a Blue Zone and eat a plant based diet. On a recent trip to the USA, I found myself in social situations with family and friends with very little to eat. I refused to be a “food Nazi” and found myself on one occasion with a skewer of some vegetables but mostly meat. I felt guilty and tried to eat the meat but it tasted awful like pure fat, besides images of happy cows mooing on the way to slaughter, jungles being torn down, and the environment failing. It reminded me of being 11 and pretending a cigarette actually tasted good, but then not repeating the experience. I now realize that meat and fatty substances( I won’t say food.) are an acquired taste we develop when we are young and can not refuse. People just don’t realize that we are not being martyrs when we refuse meat, butter, dairy, etc. It is not just healthful and good for the world to eat plants. Plants taste better.

  • Cynthia Cashin
  • Neal Hemmelstein

    What about Conjugated Linoleic Acid (CLA)? Does it, indeed, have anti-carcinogenic effects? Does it enhance the immune system? Does it lower insulin resistance? Does it lower cholesterol and triglycerides? Does it increase metabolic rate and enhance muscle growth?

  • Guillaume Rumeau

    bonjour dr. Greger. First of all. Thank you for your website and your great research contributions 9and dedication. love it. Not sure if this is the right post, but i’m on it, so i’ll leave my comment here i guess. as per dairy consumption. Well, i am french, and in my familly, as in many in my country (at least in the countryside). We do it a fair amount of cheese. Though we don’t stuff ourselves with it. no excessive amounts. But daily. One “small’ detail, the cheese we eat is made from raw milk, from cows or goats 9or sheeps also) that graze quite freely in the valleys and mountains nearby (my familly is from the Jura, alpine region, and provence). Cheese seems to be part of what some would call “those horribly bad foods you should avoid”. I must say that none in my familly or others, that follow the same regimen, raw cheese daily (yes, every day) suffer from these terrible dairy related deseases that are mentioned. or not to the extent you may find in other industrialized countries (US, UK, etc..). Raw cheese, from some serious research institutes (INSERM, CNRS etc…that are serious french research institutes you might probably have heard of) have studied the benefits of these kind of traditional raw milk cheeses (which process and product origin is worlds appart from the industrial process of well…processed foods/cheese…). On the microbiota/immune system, allergies, colds, colon cancer also, weight gains/loss etc…And eaten reasonably of course, the benefits seem to be there and not just some cheese industry hoax. (most of these cheeses existed for centuries if not a couple of thousands of years or so). i understand that you are probably overwhelmed by comments and questions etc…But i wonder what you think about that. if treating this type of traditional raw milk cheese as the devil is not excessive (if not a mistake even..). Thank you Dr. Greger.

    • docbeccy

      Bonjour Guillaume, I am one of the site’s moderators. Although the site is not dogmatic about a vegan diet Dr. Greger and other’s like him are quite passionate about the ill effects of any dairy in the diet as it’s primary purpose is to grow a small calf into a several ton adult animal. Since the animal is lactating it by definition is in a high hormonal state even without the addition of bovine growth hormone, often given in the U.S. to promote lactation. Likewise, due to our high density manufacturing practices the cows are exposed to an enormous amount of pathogens therefore they are always on huge amounts of antibiotics to keep them “healthy” which of course is also in the milk. It is a lesser known fact that in this country the majority of the antibiotics consumed go to farm animals vs. humans. Of course, the humans consume the antibiotics later on but without benefit of a prescription for the drug. Added to that our obese society can do without a food group that is 70-90% fat so you can see why advising people to avoid all dairy wipes out all those problems. That said, I recently attended a lecture by another lifestyle medicine pioneer in the field, Dr. Andrew Weil, MD. He does consume cheese but is extremely selective of what he will eat. He contends that cheese made from animals that only freely graze at the highest of elevations to avoid the pollution fall out that contaminates the fields at lower elevations is less contaminated with pesticides and heavy metals, devoid of antibiotics or exogenous hormones and the milk of a lower fat content. Since it is extremely hard to get these rare cheese he contends has decided for himself that this treat is OK. Likewise, you have to make the same informed decisions for yourself. I hope this is helpful.

      • Guillaume Rumeau

        Chère Beccy, thank you for your kind and prompt answer. i did not expect any :) considering the number of comments you may have to respond to. I appreciate it. Well, my choice was pretty much made since i was born with regard to cheese eating. It is just part of my culture, and i guess i am lucky that this type of “rare” raw cheeses are actually common, and the norm in France. But, yes, they do obey to a very strict quality regulations and specifications (grass fed, specific geographical origins of the cattle which give each of our more that 350 kind of cheeses their very specific flavor and texture, always fee grazing, very strict controls on any antibiotics (if any) etc…Also, their is a big difference between milk (for drinking), and a raw milk cheese that has matured for months if not more than a year (thus developing specific types of beneficial bacterias you won’t find in milk, specially pasteurized and idustrialised). So, the end product is worlds appart from a typical american (or other) processed cheese.Again, this type of “produits du terroir” are rare elsewhere, or too expensive to purchase on a regular basis. Unless producers start doing them, and “convert” the main public to its, yes, very peculiar taste :). Thank you again, and keep up with this great work. Bonne journée. Guillaume

  • Ellen

    Dr. Mark Hyman (and his Fat Summit) promotes eating fat. Who do I believe? Him or Dr. Greger? Both seem to have their opinions backed up by scientific data. Very confusing.