Banning Trans Fat in Processed Foods but Not Animal Fat

Banning Trans Fat in Processed Foods but Not Animal Fat
4.73 (94.62%) 52 votes

After the trans fat oil ban, the only major sources of trans fat remaining will be from meat and dairy.

Discuss
Republish

Below is an approximation of this video’s audio content. To see any graphs, charts, graphics, images, and quotes to which Dr. Greger may be referring, watch the above video.

The years of healthy life lost due to our consumption of trans fats is “comparable to the impact of” conditions like meningitis, cervical cancer, and multiple sclerosis. But, if food zealots get their wish in banning added trans fats, what’s next? “[V]ested corporate interests” rally around these kinds of “slippery slope” arguments to distract from the fact that people are dying.

New York Mayor Bloomberg was decried as a “meddling nanny” for his trans-fat ban and attempt to cap soft drink sizes. How dare he try to manipulate consumer choice? But, isn’t that what the industry’s done? In 1950, “[a] twelve-ounce soda…was [the] king-sized” option. Now, that’s like the kiddie size.

Similarly, with trans fats, it was the industry that limited our choice by putting trans fats in everything without even telling us. So, who’s the nanny now?

New York City finally won its trans-fat fight, preserving its status as a public health leader. “For example, it took decades to achieve a national prohibition of lead paint, despite unequivocal evidence for harm.” But New York led the way, banning it “18 years before federal action.”

There’s irony in the slippery slope argument that first, they came for your fries; next, they’ll come for your burger. After the trans fat-oil ban, one of the only sources of trans fat left will be in the meat itself. “Trans fats naturally exist in small amounts in the fat in meat and milk,” as I’ve talked about before. Animal products only used to provide about a fifth of America’s trans-fat intake, but since the U.S. trans fat-ban exempts animal products, they will soon take over as the leading source.

In Denmark, for example, now that added trans fats are banned, the only real trans fat exposure left is from animal products found in U.S. dairy, beef, chicken fat, turkey meat, lunch meat, hot dogs—with trace amounts in vegetable oils, due to the refining process.

The question is: are animal trans fats as bad as processed food-trans fats? A compilation of randomized interventional trials found that they both make bad cholesterol go up; they both make good cholesterol go down; and so, they both make the ratio of bad to good go up, which is bad. So, all trans fats cause negative effects, “irrespective of their origin.” They suspect that removing natural trans fats from the diet too could prevent tens of thousands of heart attacks. But, unlike processed foods, you can’t remove trans fats from milk and meat, because trans fats are there naturally.

The livestock industry suggests a little bit of their trans fats might not be too bad. But you saw the same everything-in-moderation-argument coming from the “Institute of Shortening” after industrial trans fats were first exposed as a threat. The bottom line is that “all sources of trans fat should [probably] be minimized.” The trans fat in processed foods can be banned, and just adhering to the current dietary guidelines to restrict saturated fat intake, which is primarily found in meat and dairy as well, would kind of automatically cut trans fat intake from animal fats.

The reason no progress may have been made on animal trans fat reduction in Denmark is because The [Danish] Nutrition Council that pushed for the trans fat ban was a joint initiative of “The [Danish] Medical Association and The [Danish] Dairy Board.” They recognized that “the economic support from The [Danish] Dairy Council could be perceived as problematic” from a scientific integrity point of view. But not to worry, the medical association expanded the board and funding members to include “the Danish pork industry, the Danish meat industry, The Poultry and Egg Council”, as well as Big Margarine.

Please consider volunteering to help out on the site.

Icons created by Baloon Designs and romzicon from the Noun Project.

Image credit: Daniel Oines via Flickr. Image has been modified.

Motion graphics by Avocado Video

Below is an approximation of this video’s audio content. To see any graphs, charts, graphics, images, and quotes to which Dr. Greger may be referring, watch the above video.

The years of healthy life lost due to our consumption of trans fats is “comparable to the impact of” conditions like meningitis, cervical cancer, and multiple sclerosis. But, if food zealots get their wish in banning added trans fats, what’s next? “[V]ested corporate interests” rally around these kinds of “slippery slope” arguments to distract from the fact that people are dying.

New York Mayor Bloomberg was decried as a “meddling nanny” for his trans-fat ban and attempt to cap soft drink sizes. How dare he try to manipulate consumer choice? But, isn’t that what the industry’s done? In 1950, “[a] twelve-ounce soda…was [the] king-sized” option. Now, that’s like the kiddie size.

Similarly, with trans fats, it was the industry that limited our choice by putting trans fats in everything without even telling us. So, who’s the nanny now?

New York City finally won its trans-fat fight, preserving its status as a public health leader. “For example, it took decades to achieve a national prohibition of lead paint, despite unequivocal evidence for harm.” But New York led the way, banning it “18 years before federal action.”

There’s irony in the slippery slope argument that first, they came for your fries; next, they’ll come for your burger. After the trans fat-oil ban, one of the only sources of trans fat left will be in the meat itself. “Trans fats naturally exist in small amounts in the fat in meat and milk,” as I’ve talked about before. Animal products only used to provide about a fifth of America’s trans-fat intake, but since the U.S. trans fat-ban exempts animal products, they will soon take over as the leading source.

In Denmark, for example, now that added trans fats are banned, the only real trans fat exposure left is from animal products found in U.S. dairy, beef, chicken fat, turkey meat, lunch meat, hot dogs—with trace amounts in vegetable oils, due to the refining process.

The question is: are animal trans fats as bad as processed food-trans fats? A compilation of randomized interventional trials found that they both make bad cholesterol go up; they both make good cholesterol go down; and so, they both make the ratio of bad to good go up, which is bad. So, all trans fats cause negative effects, “irrespective of their origin.” They suspect that removing natural trans fats from the diet too could prevent tens of thousands of heart attacks. But, unlike processed foods, you can’t remove trans fats from milk and meat, because trans fats are there naturally.

The livestock industry suggests a little bit of their trans fats might not be too bad. But you saw the same everything-in-moderation-argument coming from the “Institute of Shortening” after industrial trans fats were first exposed as a threat. The bottom line is that “all sources of trans fat should [probably] be minimized.” The trans fat in processed foods can be banned, and just adhering to the current dietary guidelines to restrict saturated fat intake, which is primarily found in meat and dairy as well, would kind of automatically cut trans fat intake from animal fats.

The reason no progress may have been made on animal trans fat reduction in Denmark is because The [Danish] Nutrition Council that pushed for the trans fat ban was a joint initiative of “The [Danish] Medical Association and The [Danish] Dairy Board.” They recognized that “the economic support from The [Danish] Dairy Council could be perceived as problematic” from a scientific integrity point of view. But not to worry, the medical association expanded the board and funding members to include “the Danish pork industry, the Danish meat industry, The Poultry and Egg Council”, as well as Big Margarine.

Please consider volunteering to help out on the site.

Icons created by Baloon Designs and romzicon from the Noun Project.

Image credit: Daniel Oines via Flickr. Image has been modified.

Motion graphics by Avocado Video

Doctor's Note

If people want to eat trans fat, isn’t that their right? Only if they’re informed about the risks. Stay tuned for a video coming up soon entitled The Food Industry Wants the Public Confused About Nutrition.

For more on the industry pushback, see my last video Controversy Over the Trans Fat Ban.

There does not appear to be a safe level of exposure to trans fat (or saturated fat and dietary cholesterol for that matter). See Trans Fat, Saturated Fat, & Cholesterol: Tolerable Upper Intake of Zero.

If you find these videos about industry influence on public policy compelling, check out my many others, including:

Note: the concept of raising or lowering HDL (so-called “good” cholesterol) playing a causal role in heart disease has come into question. Videos coming up—stay tuned!

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

73 responses to “Banning Trans Fat in Processed Foods but Not Animal Fat

Commenting Etiquette

The intention of the comment section under each video and blog post is to allow all members to share their stories, questions, and feedback with others in a welcoming, engaging, and respectful environment. Off-topic comments are permitted, in hopes more experienced users may be able to point them to more relevant videos that may answer their questions. Vigorous debate of science is welcome so long as participants can disagree respectfully. Advertising products or services is not permitted.

To make NutritionFacts.org a place where people feel comfortable posting without feeling attacked, we have no tolerance for ad hominem attacks or comments that are racist, misogynist, homophobic, vulgar, or otherwise inappropriate. Please help us to foster a community of mutual respect. Enforcement of these rules is done to the best of our ability on a case-by-case basis.

  1. Interesting. I have also ready many websites on super centenarians, people living over 100. When asked what their secrets to longevity are, I am very surprised. Some claim eating bacon every day or eating three raw eggs every day, eating sausages every day, drinking a shot of whiskey or three liters of wine a day, etc., it’s all very interesting. One thing most super centenarians had in common was living a stress-free life. I think health and longevity is all very individual.




    8
    1. I think the examples you mention also had genetic protection of some kind. But if you want an example of where genetics and diet probably played a role, look no further than Jean Louise Calmet, the frenchwoman who lived to be 122 with only a few of her last years spent in a rest home.

      I cite genetics in her case because she smoked cigarettes, but her diet included dark chocolate and wine everyday. She was purported to be a bit of a surly character but I don’t think that shortened her life any. And of course the Okinawans live long, probably because of diet (but there could be a genetic or at least epigentic factor due to a closed island-wide gene pool?)

      All I’m sayin’ is, feed a thousand people bacon all their lives and maybe one will beat the odds of dying before their time. Not so sure about eggs as they do have a wide range of nutrients.

      Personally, I’ve found a suitable wide range of nutrients in Moringa Oleifera powder. I’ve even found a way to take it so it is actually tasty… that is, I mix it with applesauce and look forward to my daily dose.




      4
        1. John, I am unaware of any Moringa studies. However, the list of vitamins, amino acids and minerals have been evaluated and that is what I base my full spectrum nutrition food idea on.




          3
      1. Lonie: Her name was Jeanne Louis Calmet – the famous French viager. She actually outlived the person who bought her house & let her live in it until she died.

        I used to work for an old movie actress who is now over 100. She was in her 80s when I worked for her, and she drank a half bottle (and sometimes a full bottle) of champagne every evening.

        Yes, there will always be those lucky few who manage somehow to outsmart the grim reaper. But since the odds are stacked against us, I’d rather not take any chances & do all I can stay healthy!




        5
        1. Yes, thanks for the spelling correction.

          And another anecdote along the lines of your employer drinking Champagne, I read somewhere that some actors and singers would (will?) take their spirits in the form of an enema… to protect their vocal cards.

          Boy, that’s needing an alcohol fix in the worst way.




          0
        2. Hi Nancy
          And be as fit as possible each of those days! Sure we might live into our 9th decade but hopefully it is with strength, endurance, flexibility, balance and speed!!!




          2
    2. Hello Marco,
      Thank you for your comment. I am a family doctor with a private practice in lifestyle medicine, and also a volunteer moderator for this website. It is difficult to draw any meaningful conclusions from looking at “case studies” — i.e. looking at individuals. It is much more powerful to do a study of centenarians and look at what they have in common. As you say, one commonality is living a (relatively) stress-free life. Another turns out to be diets high in fiber.

      I’m sure you can find an example or two of a regular smoker who lived past age 100, and of a centenarian who eats at least one egg per day, or who eats bacon every day.

      But to me, that does not lead to the conclusion that smoking, or eating eggs or bacon is good for you. You say that “health and longevity is all very individual.” I agree that there will always be individual variation. BUT, my role as a doctor is to try to give my patients good advice. I can’t just throw up my hands and say I can’t draw any conclusions about nutrition. There is very good data on this website about the healthiest things to eat, and about foods to avoid. We need to pay attention to that.

      Dr. Jon
      PhysicianAssistedWellness.com
      Volunteer moderator, NutritionFacts.org




      27
        1. Loneliness is a state of mind. If “they” convince you that you are lonely…then…guess what…you are. Or so you will believe.

          Some people function better and more healthily…if left alone.

          Of course there are more “groupies” than there are “loners”…so the groupies do most of the talking and make most of the rules. They get together and all get “dumb” in the same way…so of course they are right. ;-)

          Of course rules and opinions do not reality make…




          4
    3. Not too surprising really, after all, five of six people playing Russian roulette will survive too. Personally though, I would rather not play than push my luck.




      12
    4. https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/obituaries/fred-a-kummerow-scientist-who-raised-early-warnings-about-trans-fats-dies-at-102/2017/06/03/5d33a946-47d6-11e7-bcde-624ad94170ab_story.html?utm_term=.932c0a0016f9

      Dr. Kummerow’s daily diet included a breakfast of eggs scrambled in butter. He drank three glasses of whole milk a day and regularly ate meat and cheese, along with fruits, vegetables and grains. He avoided processed foods and french fries.




      0
      1. The good doctor was probably blessed with strong genes for longevity.

        He also had a positive mental attitude. Plus he had a strong purpose

        in his life that he worked towards.

        There are so many factors to taken into consideration when you try

        to figure out longevity. The bottom line is that many of us do not

        want to tempt fate by going against the numerous scientific reports

        that Dr. Greger constantly brings to our attention on a day to day

        basis. I think the odds are in my favor to take the advice of Dr. Greger

        and all of the research that he has provided us rather than risk

        following the eating examples of the good doctor who lived to be

        102 years old. We probably don’t have his genetics or his will power.

        As for me, I’ll skip the eggs, butter, meat, and milk and throw my lot




        1
      2. Thanks for that article. It makes a lot of sense to me. If people are healthy on a vegan diet, good for them. But I was a vegan for many years and I started having serious medical issues. I am no longer vegan and I no longer eat high carbs (sugars, grains, starches). I eat chicken, turkey, tuna, salmon, eggs, dairy and TONS of green leafy vegetables (kale, spinach, lettuce) as well as many other non-starchy vegetables. I have one piece of fruit every now and then. I have never felt better!




        1
        1. How do you reconcile your good feelings from eating turkey, chicken, beef, fish, eggs,

          cheese, oils against all of the scientific research that Dr. Greger presents. Are you saying

          that the research that Dr. Greger presents is a LIE ?




          0
          1. Not at all. I enjoy Dr. Greger’s presentations. There is a lot of truth to his research and I follow some of his advice. But it’s not always a one size fits all. Some diets with high carbs, sugar, grains etc do not work for people who have candida overgrowth. It just feeds the candida and can lead to leaky gut syndrome which can deteriorate your health. I think the best remedy is moderation, portion size, exercise, periodic fasting for detox and a positive outlook on life. Just my two cents…




            1
            1. There are some people with excessive plaque built up in their

              coronary arteries and were only able to get the plaque to dissolve

              by going on a non-fat diet, a vegan diet, a no meat – no oils – no dairy diet.

              And their arteriograms showed after going on a whole plant food diet that

              the plaque had disappeared. You can read about it and see the arteriograms

              in Dr. Dean Ornish’s book on treating heart disease. I have spoken with

              Dr. Esselstyn on the telephone and he has had the same success in treating

              plaque build up in the arteries by putting people on a strict whole plant food

              diet with no oils. Anybody who eats meat, dairy, milk, cheese, oils, and

              especially eggs greatly increases their risk of developing plaque in their

              arteries. A person may FEEL good while eating meats, oils, and dairies,

              but while they are feeling good plaque is slowly building up in their arteries.

              Pritikin had huge amounts of plaque blockage in his arteries and he got rid of

              it by going on a whole plant food diet. His autopsy showed that he had

              the arteries of a teenager with no plaque.




              0
              1. That is so true, John. Many different eating lifestyles are great. What’s also great is NOT eating. In fact, fasting is mentioned in the Bible seventy-seven (77) times. We always think of fasting for spiritual reasons, to purify the soul. But fasting helps the body detox. By fasting, the human body has been able to accomplish miraculous healing.
                Jesus Christ multiplied the fishes and the loaves of bread to feed the multitude. I have a feeling He never read Dr. Greger’s website. But one thing is evident, people today are eating too much food (and non-foods), unlike biblical days and NOT practicing fasting on a regular basis.
                Fasting does not cure anything. Fasting prepares and allows the body to heal itself.




                0
  2. Before the FDA banned TFA, the Industries were notified and found a replacement in Palm Oils. This SFA is bad too and Indonesian Rain Forests are being quickly destroyed as well as The Orangutan Population. Please talk about this in relation to TFA, because there is a direct consequence and we need to ban Palm Oils as well. Thank you Dr Greger!




    12
    1. Ted – yes, they add in palm oil trying to palm it off (only slightly intended pun :-) as healthy because its a plant. But also just as unhealthy is coconut oil with over 80% saturated fat in its oil. Even olive oil is 15% saturated fat which many are not aware of. The American Dietetic Association’s website is weak in explaining these types of differences and concerns about oils. (No surprise there – they are spineless). The American Diabetes Association does a better job discussing fats.
      http://www.diabetes.org/food-and-fitness/food/what-can-i-eat/making-healthy-food-choices/fats-and-diabetes.html?referrer=https://www.google.com/
      But neither explains that all oils are a highly processed food. All whole plant foods have their own oil built in – extra fat poured on is not necessary. Brussels sprouts, for example, are 6% fat with Omega 3 fats being present at twice the rate of Omega 6. Check them out here:
      http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/vegetables-and-vegetable-products/2362/2

      I have noticed that food manufacturers are removing the trans fat and replacing it (also) with “high oleic” corn or safflower oil. At least is not palm oil, but I can’t help but wonder if its detrimental to our health. Anyone have any real (scientific) research on these replacement oils?

      Btw, just an interesting piece of information here – it takes approximately 44 olives to make 1Tbs of olive oil. I know people who state they would never eat 44 olives because there is just too much fat in them. Yet pour tablespoons of oil all over their food. This is an interesting example of the ways in which the food manufacturers confuse the issues to the public.
      Thanks, as always, to Dr. G.




      14
      1. Can’t offer anything scientific in re: high oleic corn or safflower, but anecdotally I have a nephew who began growing high oleic peanuts. They were in demand because 1. they are healthier and 2. they don’t go bad like other types of peanuts. I think (but don’t quote me on this without doing the research) peanut patties switched to using the high oleic peanuts.

        Oh, my nephew quit growing that variety due to lower yields and the price premium did not make up for the difference. He has gone back to growing Virginia runners and Spanish peanuts.




        1
        1. Forgot to mention, I eat in some way every day MCT (Medium Chain Triglycerides) oil.

          Mine says it comes from coconut and palm oil. In the fridge, the oil stays liquid and clear so no saturated fats there.

          On the other hand, I pour my extra virgin cold pressed olive oil into a glass bottle to get it out of the plastic it now comes in and refrigerate. It becomes solid and cloudy and I have to thaw it for a bit before it will pour, so as you made note of, it is saturated.




          4
            1. Hah! You are exactly right.

              I stand corrected (written as I prepare to imbibe in a few teaspoons of the wonderful saturated stuff ‘-)




              2
          1. Since the conversation has turned to oils, can anyone comment on the efficacycold-pressed flax seed oil? I bought some (very expensive) and it sits in my fridge. Thought I might use a little in the dressings I make. Cannot cook with it though.




            0
      2. The reason that GMA moved from the banned TFA to Palm Oil was specifically for shelf life. TFA provided that and so does fully Saturated Fats like Palm Oil.




        1
        1. Correction, Palm Oil is only 50% SFA. Still the use by GMA is for shelf life and cost. Still destruction of Indonesian Rain Forest and Orangutan population is a risk. Save yourself, Save the animals and save the planet




          2
      3. Rachel, just was reading this piece on Eurekalert.org and remembered your reference to 44 olives.

        I thought at the time I read that, that I love olives and while I may not eat 44 of them I would eat my fill and also occasionally use olive oil.

        The above Temple University study seems to justify my doing so.

        aside: stories in the news suggests some olive oil has been mixed with lower grades or even other types of oil. They suggest the Italian Mafia is involved so shop carefully. Also, eating olives may insure you get what you pay for as it is hard to substitute for an olive.




        2
  3. WFPB is STILL the only way to go. Thanks for NF.Org and Dr Greger. I can’t thank you enough for the information, guidance and common sense that prevails. Be well friends!




    10
  4. Explain this. Since I stopped eating so many carbs & increased my intake of lean meats & eggs, my total cholesterol has went down. My bad cholesterol has went down & my good cholesterol has went up. My C Reactive protein level went down too. It’s been around 2.5 years since I changed my diet. Starting total cholesterol was around 270. After 6 months it dropped to 224. After 1 year, it was 199 & I just received my latest blood work yesterday & my total cholesterol is 181. If animal fats are so bad then why do my blood levels look better?




    4
    1. What type of carbs did you remove? Taking out sugar, white flour and all sorts of processed goodies will improve your lipid profile. Not to mention, maybe at the same time you inadvertently removed trans fat from your diet (if some of these carbs you mention came from a box). Consuming carbs from beans and starchy vegetables is usually associated with positive changes in cholesterol levels, however some people may have problems with whole grains, especially those that contain gluten.




      8
      1. I never eat starchy veggies. I do eat blueberries & raspberries (about 10 each every day). For the first 6 months, I only consumed around 50 grams of carbs per day.




        1
    2. You are doing the right thing with your diet. There is a tendency to lump processed foods with animal consumption but they are 2 different things.




      1
      1. They may be two different things, but are both harmful to the health of human beings, at least according to science.

        There is lots of great information on this website. Use it!




        3
    3. Hi Greg
      Have you lost weight? Excess fat will cause an increase in cholesterol and it isn’t until you get to a healthy weight that you will see the golden 150 total, 70 LDL.




      1
  5. This is sort of off topic, but the entire skin care industry is also based on a complete pack of lies. They prey mostly on women who are desperately trying to stave off the effects of aging. There are thousands of anti-wrinkle / anti-aging products out there, & not one of them works. It’s all basically snake oil. And yet millions of women buy & use so-called skin care products everyday. It’s become ingrained in our culture; a ‘good skincare regimen’ is considered good personal hygiene in our culture. I’ve actually had people admonish me for not taking better care of my skin because I don’t use any of these products. I read somewhere that the average American woman will spend about $300,000 on skin care products in her lifetime.

    So do we ban them, too, because the entire skincare industry is based on a lie? Or is it more acceptable because it doesn’t necessarily cut people’s lives short? Because it’s only just wasting people’s time & money?




    2
    1. Oh wait… phthalates … fragrance … plastic containers & tubes (PCBs)… so maybe daily use of skin care products can also cut people’s lives short. Do we ban those as well?




      3
  6. Dr. Greger argues, “Mayor Bloomberg was decried as a ‘meddling nanny’ for his trans fat ban and attempt to cap soft drink sizes. How dare he try to manipulate consumer choice! But isn’t that what the industry’s done?” Excuse me, Dr. Greger, but there’s a significant difference between the industry’s offering consumers the choice to buy their product, and the government’s banning their choice to buy it. To characterize both actions as “manipulative” is to ignore a crucial distinction between freedom and coercion. The government’s laws are backed by physical force. If I choose not to buy a king size soda, no one’s rights have been violated. If I do choose to buy it, but the government intervenes to prevent me from buying it, my rights have been violated.

    He states. “It was the industry that limited our choice by putting trans fats in everything without even telling us. So who’s the nanny now?!” By that argument, a food producer would have to tell you everything there is to know about a product; otherwise he would be “limiting your choice” and violating your rights by not telling you. Suppose I’m on a low-carb diet and would like to know how many carbs are in a banana or how many grams of sugar are in an orange. Is the farmer obligated to tell me; otherwise he’s violating my freedom of choice? Of course, a producer is responsible for not misleading me into thinking I’m getting something I’m not, or in not getting something I am, like poison. But he has no moral or legal obligation to publicize every last constituent of his product. There was certainly a time when trans fats were not recognized as harmful, but were instead promoted as beneficial. Today, most people know which products contain them and which do not, and can certainly make their own choices.

    Dr. Greger concedes that the trans fats in animal products have the same deleterious effects as added trans fats, but stops short of calling for a ban on animal products. He states, “So all trans fats cause negative effects irrespective of their origin. . . . The bottom line is that all sources of trans fats should probably be minimized.” Why just “minimized”? Given his call for an outright ban on added trans fats, what argument is there against banning animal products, which contain them? There isn’t any, especially when there is no reluctance to force people to eat only what you think is good for them.




    6
    1. Wayne Dwyer: “there is no reluctance to force people to eat only what you think is good for them.” Actually, it’s not what Dr. G says (as you implied), but what the scientific evidence says is good for them.

      But I agree with you, otherwise. Bans might work in a communist or a socialist regime. Or a dictatorship or an oligarchy. And even then, people will find a way around the system if they really want to.

      However, ideas like those presented by Dr. G and others like him are important in the grand scheme of things. Much like politics, we need to have people pulling on both ends of the spectrum. That’s how people become informed. Like in a court of law, they will have heard all the evidence and listened to all the witnesses and will make an informed decision. After a while when one side has run out of arguments to support their cause and resorts to name calling (pseudo-scientists, crackpots, etc.), the pendulum will swing in favor of the evidence based facts, and common sense will prevail.

      My generation probably won’t benefit that much from it. We’re the ones who were poisoned from the get-go with DDT, lead, & all kinds of other chemicals put into our food system. Women were even advised not to breast feed their own babies around the time I was born. Fortunately for me & my siblings, our mother bucked traffic. She was the only one breastfeeding in the whole maternity ward. I’m not angry about how my generation was basically treated like a grand guinea pig experiment. But I do hope the generations that follow will benefit and have a much better chance than we did. Don’t you?




      6
      1. Correction: Bans in communist / socialist / dictatorships / oligarchies might work but only if they’re heavily enforced. And then only to a certain extent. Because then it always goes underground.




        1
      2. Hi Nancy,

        Thanks for your civil (and intelligent) reply. You wrote:

        “Wayne Dwyer: ‘there is no reluctance to force people to eat only what you think is good for them.’ Actually, it’s not what Dr. G says (as you implied), but what the scientific evidence says is good for them.” (William Dwyer, actually. :-))

        Well, in a dietary dictatorship, someone is going to be forcing others to eat what is good for them (presumably the government). That authority may think correctly (if the evidence supports him) that a certain diet is beneficial or incorrectly if the evidence does not. But do you really want to surrender your right to decide what is beneficial to the government? How’s their track record been lately? ;-)

        Or would you prefer to be treated less like a child and more like an adult who has autonomy over her own life and actions? I think I know the answer to that one!




        4
        1. Sorry, William :-))
          And no, I absolutely do not want to surrender to the government my right to decide what is beneficial for me or anyone else. And especially not a government like ours that has a reputation for taking kick-backs from big industry. They’re a huge part of the problem. Politicians will always be tempted to take money from big industries. That’s the nature of the political animal. Government is there to represent us and what we want. Not the other way around. And unfortunately, the average person prefers a bacon cheese burger to a big, healthy salad.

          That’s why the desire for better eating habits have to become part of our mainstream culture first. Once our culture changes, then a law might be passed (if necessary) to reflect that change. I talked about that a little more in depth in the comment section of the previous video. The collective ‘we’ changes culture in our society. Laws do not. Unfortunately at this point in time, the average person would still rather eat a bacon cheese burger instead of a big, healthy salad.

          I can also understand the passion behind wanting to ban something that causes so much pain and suffering. It’s almost like a knee-jerk reaction, especially when people’s lives could be at stake. But when you think about it, it doesn’t really work. Not even in a dictatorship. People will always find a way to do what they want, especially if the ban is not well enforced. Bans can even have the opposite of the desired effect. It can make people dig in & become stubborn & defiant. For instance, Chinese foot binding continued to thrive under multiple bans by various rulers over 4 centuries before the people decided it was a practice that no longer served a purpose in their society. And even after that, it took a generation for it to die out completely.

          For those of us already on board for the WFPB diet, we just have to stay the course with faith and patience.




          1
          1. I mostly agree with you on the topic of government bans. It’s a fine line. But in this case it is billion dollar industries who don’t care about the health of others but only about their business. From a business standpoint it is also understandable. But because of that there has to be polititians with spine who say: NO! And thats what it is about. If companies polute the local water supplies with toxic chemicals you also don’t say: well you don’t have to drink it. you can also buy bottled water. There needs to be strong politics who regulate these kind of things and say: no you can not use this in your products because it makes people sick or even kill them. When it comes to BIG Business against the people, there has to be a strong voice for the little man who can face the big and powerful.




            1
    1. Thanks for your comment Jim,

      It would be hard to find such data.

      However, what I can tell you from evidence & according to this publication:

      “To our knowledge, the life expectancies of California Adventist men and women are higher than those of any other well-described natural population. Comparable data from several other populations around the same calendar period are shown in Table 5 and support this conclusion. Japanese individuals have often been described as the longest-lived population, but they do not survive as long as California Adventists. (…) Adventist vegetarian men and women have expected ages at death of 83.3 and 85.7 years, respectively.”

      Therefore, we can say that the longest-lived population, generally speaking, and not mentioning individual cases, are the vegetarian Adventists from California.

      Hope this answer helps.




      1
  7. This video is misleading. There is transfats in processed foods, any type of processed foods, meat or vegan, because the processing causes normal fat to turn into transfat. There is no transfat if you cook meat or egg or drink milk, only saturated fat which is harmless. Eating fried potatoes have you get a load of transfat too. Eating margarine or faked butter and you will get a load of transfat. Cooking with vegetable oil and you will get transfat. Eating coconut or butter and you get saturated fat which is harmless in small quantity, and not transfat which is very harmful in any quantity. Eating too much nut and you can get a load of Omega 6 too which is pro inflammatory. The video is misleading by associating processed foods with meat consumption when it is the processing that is harmful.




    2
    1. I found this video excellent at explaining how fat affects us. https://nutritionfacts.org/video/what-causes-diabetes/

      Cognitive dissonance is a very powerful thing. But just like i did you can see the truth of what is healthier for our bodies, what is better for our planet, and what is kinder to the animals we share this planet with.

      I went plant based in Jan 2009. I finally made the connection with the horrors we put the innocent animals through in Jan 2016 and am now vegan (better late than never!). Better for my health, the planet and the animals.




      4
    2. Thanks for your comment Jerry.

      It is important to clarify a few statements that have been made.

      1) Indeed, processed foods, regardless of whether they are vegan or not, may contain trans fat. The example you gave about fried potatoes is a perfect example. According to a 2017 study:

      “French fries and fried potatoes typically contain high amounts of dietary fat (including trans fat) and added salt, which may increase the risk of death, particularly of CVD”

      2) According to a publication from the Journal of the American Dietetic Association, Remig et al (2010):

      “There are two primary sources of dietary trans fats. First, trans fats are formed naturally by bacteria present in the rumens of ruminant animals. Dairy and meat products from these animals contain small amounts of trans fats; consequently it is impossible to completely eliminate trans fats” unless you follow a whole food plant based diet that contains no processed food or oils.

      According to the same publication:

      “Taken together these studies provide a growing body of evidence to indicate that there is no clinical dif- ference in the effects of trans fats from natural and commercial sources. The most important difference between commercial and natural trans fats is in the amount— rather than the type—consumed.”

      3) The American Heart Association (AHA) issued a Presidential Adivsory on dietary fat last week & here is what they state:

      “trans unsaturated fat made by ruminants has adverse effects on lipid risk factors similar to those of trans made industrially by partial hydrogenation. (…) Although most human trials were conducted with partially hydrogenated vegetable oil, emerging evidence suggest the ruminant trans fatty acids have similar adverse effects on blood lipids.”

      4) Regarding saturated fat, the AHA, in the same 2017 publication states:

      “Randomized clinical trials showed that polyunsaturated fat from vegetable oils replacing saturated fats from dairy and meat lowers CVD.

      (…) Saturated fat increases LDL cholesterol, a major cause of atherosclerosis and CVD, and replacing it with polyunsaturated or monounsaturated fat decreases LDL cholesterol”

      5) A Cochrane review from 2015 also found that:

      “The findings of this updated review are suggestive of a small but potentially important reduction in cardiovascular risk on reduction of saturated fat intake. Replacing the energy from saturated fat with polyunsaturated fat appears to be a useful strategy”

      6) A 2016 review from the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health also stated:

      “substituting saturated fat with poly- or monounsaturated fats or healthful carbohydrates (but not refined carbohydrates) lead to improvements in cardiovascular risk factors such as blood lipid levels, as well as lower incidence of heart disease [4–6]. In this Feature, we briefly review saturated fat, and the controversies and evidence supporting limiting saturated fat intake, and moreover replacing it with healthful dietary fats and carbohydrates, to lower CHD risk.”

      7) According to the AHA 2017 review mentioned earlier:

      “A recent systematic review found 7 controlled trials, including the 2 just mentioned, that compared coconut oil with monounsaturated or polyunsaturated oils. Coconut oil raised LDL cholesterol in all 7 of these trials, significantly in 6 of them. The authors also noted that the 7 trials did not find a difference in raising LDL cholesterol between coconut oil and other oils high in saturated fat such as butter, beef fat, or palm oil. Clinical trials that compared direct effects on CVD of coconut oil and other dietary oils have not been reported. However, because coconut oil increases LDL cholesterol, a cause of CVD, and has no known offsetting favorable effects, we advise against the use of coconut oil.”

      8) According to another 2016 analysis by the Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health:

      “Higher intakes of PUFA and MUFA were associated with lower mortality, whereas higher intakes of SFA and TFA were associated with increased mortality.”

      9) According this publication:

      “Nut consumption has also been shown to decrease the plasma concentration of CRP, IL-6 and some endothelial markers in recent clinical trials.”

      It is really important to separate our beliefs from scientific evidence.

      Hope this answer helps.




      5
      1. Your number 9 bullet point link is a good one. Always good to know what the targets are of a nutrient, in this case nuts. Best part is that it is a summation so I don’t have to read a bunch of details. ‘-)




        1
    1. Thanks for your comment Mark.

      According to this review:

      “trans fats are generated from hydrogenation or partial hydrogenation of liquid vegetable oils. This commercial hydrogenation is used primarily for two reasons: to convert liquid oils to solids and to improve the oxidative stability of these fats. Commercial hydrogenation produces most of the trans fats in today’s American diet.”

      Indeed, another study has given an example:

      “French fries and fried potatoes typically contain high amounts of dietary fat (including trans fat) and added salt, which may increase the risk of death, particularly of CVD”

      However, if looking specifically, I found three studies that stated:

      (1) “Baking and stir-frying at normal and/or extreme temperatures do not significantly affect the amounts of trans fats. Likewise, heating oil to the smoking point during stir-frying may decrease the amount of polyunsaturated fatty acids because of oxidative degradation.”

      (2) “To elucidate TFAs accumulation in various edible oils during cooking, six kinds of commercially available edible vegetable oils were heated to 180 °C in glass test tubes. Small changes in TFAs amounts were observed after four hours heating. These results suggested that an ordinary frying process using unhydrogenated edible oils has little impact on TFAs intake from edible oils.”

      (3) “Present data suggest that frequent addition of fresh oil through the frying process minimizes the fatty acid changes contributing to obtain fried foods with less amount of trans fatty acids. The consumption of a large standard ratio (∼ 140 g) of these fried potatoes would implied the irrelevant amount of less than 0.13 g of trans fatty acids.”

      Hope this answer helps.




      2
  8. Thanks for that stat that animal products are now the #2 source of trans fats in the american diet. It’s had to believe that so few people realize that what they put on their plate can have a much bigger healing impact on their body than the pills they get from their pharmacy.




    1
  9. Could Dr Greger’s daily dozen serving sizes be given in weight too? Also, tablespoons are different (20mL for Australia, 15mL for UK, 16mL for US) and I think that even cup sizes are different for metric and imperial systems.




    0
  10. It may be a little premature to suggest (read this article) as a solution for transfats in meat, but when this becomes mainstream meat may once again become a healthy entree for a meal… even for a Vegan.

    For that to happen though, I think some things need to be addressed by those working to make this happen. Either this article or another one I’ve read suggests they are working to put fat into the grown muscle meat to make it taste more like real meat. If they are going to do that, then they need to insure the fat is healthy and remains healthy when exposed to heat.

    Another thing to be addressed is a sugar molecule that is contained in animal produced red meat. That sugar molecule is found in the red meat animal world with the exception of humans. We build anti-bodies against this molecule which keeps red meat eaters in a constant state of inflammation.

    The growing of meat, by taking a plug of muscle tissue from a bovine source and growing it in a reactor of sorts, couldn’t be happening at a better time… if the growers use all the tools available to them.

    That is, using the CRSPR cas/9 method of changing DNA in an animal to not produce anything making the meat unhealthy, they can then take a plug from that now healthful animal and grow Vegan endorsed meat.

    We don’t currently live in the best of times, but the best of times are a comin’.




    1
    1. I just had an interesting thought about lab grown meat.

      Other than the ick factor, if we were to grow meat from human protein, would that be considered cannibalism?




      1
    1. I reviewed PubMed and could find no indications of any dietary treatment for Hyperhydrosis. You are probably well aware of resources, but I reviewed all of these for any hints that nutrition could be used for treatment with nary a one mentioning diet as even an unsuccessful approach
      http://www.health.harvard.edu/staying-healthy/what-to-do-about-excessive-sweating
      https://www.sweathelp.org/hyperhidrosis-treatments/treatment-overview.html
      https://www.aad.org/public/diseases/dry-sweaty-skin/hyperhidrosis#treatment
      However, I do not want you to be discouraged from continuing on a plant based diet. It could be the many benefits of those fruits and vegetables simply haven’t been studied yet OR it could be this condition is less affected by diet than other treatments. However knowing that a whole food plant based diet helps nerve function and certainly can help you deal with the stress of any chronic condition, going plant based makes sense on many other levels. Best of health as you work through this, Devin.

      .




      2
  11. I get into heated discussions with friends and family regarding the risks of eating meat and dairy. Yesterday my doctor friend sent me this article saying he doesn’t “hang his hat” on research like this only but he’s read too many conflicting articles to recommend a meat and dairy-free diet. . What are your thoughts?

    1) Dairy Products and Prevention of Type 2 Diabetes: Implications for Research and Practice
    Maria Kalergis, Sylvie S. L. Leung Yinko, and Roxana Nedelcu




    0
    1. Jo Ann, I’m not aware of any study but I’m sure there are some.

      My personal view is that wild game is leaner and from that perspective is better. However, since red meat game contains the same sugar molecule as our raised red meat animals and that we humans do not have (and thus causes our bodies to send out antibodies for it and creates inflammation) that probably more than offsets any gain from being lean.

      Also, and this is not meant as a scare tactic, but some game animals have something called chronic wasting disease. The raised animal meat may be the better choice in the long run as it is tested against prion disease.




      0
  12. Trans fats are still in many products; just check the food labels. There are still listed hydrogenated and partially hydrogenated “fats”. The companies are not using the term “fat” or “trans fat” But they are still there; canola oil being the biggest culprit. *** I would like to see a Dr. Mercola video on the process of canola oil.*** I have seen a “you tube” video and it explained that all canola (rapeseed) oil is a trans fat and most vegetable oils too. Any fat or oil processed at very high temps are / or turn into a trans fat. I eat coconut oil; however, with my diet, I really don’t eat much oil at all. My fats come naturally with nuts, seeds, avocados, dairy (very little dairy) and meat protein.




    0
    1. This reply is from Me: A Mom. The video, I would like to find it again as I don’t remember the name; however, it actually went into great detail of the process from the plant to the factory on the making of canola oil. It was very detailed and interesting.




      0
    1. Barbara: There are some really good reviews showing the fatal flaws of the PURE study. You can read them at the following links. ‘darchiterd’ says that there is also another good review from Dr. Kahn, but I can’t find it. Dr. Greger pointed people to Katz review below on the NutritionFacts Facebook page and Dr. Greger has spoken very highly of PCRM in the past. Both of these reviews provide a lot of clarification. (Warning: There is a lot of overlap.)
      From PCRM: http://www.pcrm.org/media/news/pure-study-killer-carbs-or-poor-living-conditions
      From Dr. Katz: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/diet-health-puzzling-past-paradox-pure-understanding-david?trk=mp-reader-card&utm_content=bufferf15a6&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

      Well respected poster on NutritionFacts, TG, also wrote the following:

      …it is worth bearing in mind that McMaster University has a history of producing studies which show dairy foods in a favourable light and/or which defend saturated fat consumption. What is more, they receive grant funding from the Canadian dairy Industry (and occasionally the US Dairy Council). Dairy Farmers of Canada calls McMaster University a “partner”.
      https://www.dairyfarmers.ca/who-we-are/our-partners

      Consequently, I tend to look closely at the study design of anything coming out of McMaster. In this case, comparing outcomes for people across different countries eating carbs with people eating fat etc, can often end up simply comparing the mortality rates of poor people in underdeveloped countries who eat primarily cheap low quality carbs with the mortality rates of people in wealthy developed countries whose diet is generally richer in fats etc. Not controlling for such factors would be expected to produce results exonerating saturated fats or implying that they are healthful. In fact, saturated fat and cholesterol apologists have been doing this same sort of thing for years. Plant Positive discusses this misleading approach here
      http://plantpositive.squarespace.com/blog/2012/3/25/tpns-40-41-playing-games-with-your-heart.html

      Like TG, the first two reviews above also point out the flaw of comparing two different economic groups with access to different amounts of calories and health care. What’s great about TG’s post is that he points out that this strategy has been used for *years* in order to twist the data and confuse people. Plant Positive is a great resource. If you haven’t checked out that work yet, it is worth doing.




      0
  13. I agree Thea. The study doesn’t specify exactly what the subjects ate. For all we know the carbs = potato chips and coke while the fat = nuts and avocados. Carbs does not necessarily = whole food plant based, unless it specifies such.

    Dr. Ben




    1

Leave a Reply

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

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This
[i]
[i]