Coconut Oil & Abdominal Fat

Coconut Oil & Abdominal Fat
4.47 (89.31%) 101 votes

A review of the evidence on the effects of coconut oil on weight loss and belly fat.

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.

I was surprised to see, in this popular infographic, that there was evidently promising evidence that coconut oil could help with obesity. Well, if you pump the stomachs of rats with purified medium-chain fatty acids—one component of coconut oil—they end up eating less food. But, you don’t know if there’s any relevance to humans until you put it to the test.

Researchers compared breakfasts with the same amount of dairy fat, coconut-oil fat, or tallow (beef fat), and “no…effect…[on] hunger, fullness, satisfaction,” or how much they then went on to eat at lunchtime. So, where did this whole idea that coconut fat was somehow different come from? Well, six years ago, an “open-label pilot study” was published. They asked 20 men and women to eat two tablespoons of coconut oil a day for a month, and the men appeared to lose about an inch off their waist. Now, “open-label” means that the participants knew what they were eating; there wasn’t like some placebo control. In fact, there was no control group at all. So, you don’t know if the effects would have just happened anyway, without the coconut oil. There’s a well-recognized effect in dietary studies, where just being in a dietary study under observation tends to lead to a reduction in caloric intake—because you know they’re going to weigh you, and looking over your shoulder. But, there had never been a controlled study of coconut oil and waistlines in men and women until 2015.

About a hundred men and women were given about a tablespoon of coconut oil a day for three months, and lost nearly an inch off their waist after three months, compared to control. What did the control group get instead? Nothing. There was no placebo. And so, they were comparing doing something with doing nothing. And, when one does that, there’s often a placebo effect, regardless of the true efficacy of the treatment. And, they also suggested the coconut-oil group may want to take their dose with fruit. And, if they did end up eating more fruit, that, in and of itself, may help—as, despite its sugar content, fruit consumption tends to be associated with “anti-obesity effects.”

What we need to see, if coconut oil has some special effect, is to give people a spoonful of coconut oil versus some other oil, and see if there’s any difference. And, when you do that—two tablespoons of coconut oil a day, versus two tablespoons of soybean oil a day—no significant difference in waistlines. But, what did happen was a significant increase in insulin resistance in the coconut-oil group, which is what eventually causes type 2 diabetes—despite being told to increase fruits and vegetables, cut down on sugars and animal fat, and despite an exercise program of walking 50 minutes a day, four days a week.

The only other placebo-controlled study of coconut oil and waistlines was published in 2017, and no significant changes in weight or waist or hip measurements, total fat, belly fat, nor butt fat. No benefit to coconut oil for obesity over placebo shown in any study to date.

So, how can coconut oil proponents get away with saying otherwise? Well, they like to talk about studies like this, showing that Pacific islanders who ate more traditional coconut-based diets were slimmer than those eating more modern diets with fewer coconut products. But, guess what they were eating instead? “The modern[ized] dietary pattern [was] primarily characterized by high intake[s] of sausage [and] eggs and processed foods.”

Please consider volunteering to help out on the site.

Image credit: greekfood-tamystika via Pixabay. 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.

I was surprised to see, in this popular infographic, that there was evidently promising evidence that coconut oil could help with obesity. Well, if you pump the stomachs of rats with purified medium-chain fatty acids—one component of coconut oil—they end up eating less food. But, you don’t know if there’s any relevance to humans until you put it to the test.

Researchers compared breakfasts with the same amount of dairy fat, coconut-oil fat, or tallow (beef fat), and “no…effect…[on] hunger, fullness, satisfaction,” or how much they then went on to eat at lunchtime. So, where did this whole idea that coconut fat was somehow different come from? Well, six years ago, an “open-label pilot study” was published. They asked 20 men and women to eat two tablespoons of coconut oil a day for a month, and the men appeared to lose about an inch off their waist. Now, “open-label” means that the participants knew what they were eating; there wasn’t like some placebo control. In fact, there was no control group at all. So, you don’t know if the effects would have just happened anyway, without the coconut oil. There’s a well-recognized effect in dietary studies, where just being in a dietary study under observation tends to lead to a reduction in caloric intake—because you know they’re going to weigh you, and looking over your shoulder. But, there had never been a controlled study of coconut oil and waistlines in men and women until 2015.

About a hundred men and women were given about a tablespoon of coconut oil a day for three months, and lost nearly an inch off their waist after three months, compared to control. What did the control group get instead? Nothing. There was no placebo. And so, they were comparing doing something with doing nothing. And, when one does that, there’s often a placebo effect, regardless of the true efficacy of the treatment. And, they also suggested the coconut-oil group may want to take their dose with fruit. And, if they did end up eating more fruit, that, in and of itself, may help—as, despite its sugar content, fruit consumption tends to be associated with “anti-obesity effects.”

What we need to see, if coconut oil has some special effect, is to give people a spoonful of coconut oil versus some other oil, and see if there’s any difference. And, when you do that—two tablespoons of coconut oil a day, versus two tablespoons of soybean oil a day—no significant difference in waistlines. But, what did happen was a significant increase in insulin resistance in the coconut-oil group, which is what eventually causes type 2 diabetes—despite being told to increase fruits and vegetables, cut down on sugars and animal fat, and despite an exercise program of walking 50 minutes a day, four days a week.

The only other placebo-controlled study of coconut oil and waistlines was published in 2017, and no significant changes in weight or waist or hip measurements, total fat, belly fat, nor butt fat. No benefit to coconut oil for obesity over placebo shown in any study to date.

So, how can coconut oil proponents get away with saying otherwise? Well, they like to talk about studies like this, showing that Pacific islanders who ate more traditional coconut-based diets were slimmer than those eating more modern diets with fewer coconut products. But, guess what they were eating instead? “The modern[ized] dietary pattern [was] primarily characterized by high intake[s] of sausage [and] eggs and processed foods.”

Please consider volunteering to help out on the site.

Image credit: greekfood-tamystika via Pixabay. Image has been modified.

Motion graphics by Avocado Video

Doctor's Note

Have you heard that there was something special about those medium-chain fatty acids, though? Check out What About Coconuts, Coconut Milk, & Coconut Oil MCTs?

What about the bump in good cholesterol? Got a video on that, too! Coconut Oil & the Boost in HDL “Good” Cholesterol.

Other coconut oil videos include:

What can really help with weight loss? I’ve got dozens of videos, but Eating More to Weigh Less and Paleopoo: What We Can Learn from Fossilized Feces are a good place to start.

If you haven’t yet, you can subscribe to my videos for free by clicking here and to my audio podcast here (subscribe by clicking on your mobile device’s icon). 

224 responses to “Coconut Oil & Abdominal Fat

On NutritionFacts.org, you'll find a vibrant community of nutrition enthusiasts, health professionals, and many knowledgeable users seeking to discover the healthiest diet to eat for themselves and their families. As always, our goal is to foster conversations that are insightful, engaging, and most of all, helpful – from the nutrition beginners to the experts in our community.

To do this we need your help, so here are some basic guidelines to get you started.

The Short List

To help maintain and foster a welcoming atmosphere in our comments, please refrain from rude comments, name-calling, and responding to posts that break the rules (see our full Community Guidelines for more details). We will remove any posts in violation of our rules when we see it, which will, unfortunately, include any nicer comments that may have been made in response.

Be respectful and help out our staff and volunteer moderators by actively not replying to comments that are breaking the rules. Instead, please flag or report them by submitting a ticket to our help desk. NutritionFacts.org is made up of an incredible staff and many dedicated volunteers that work hard to ensure that the comments section runs smoothly and we spend a great deal of time reading comments from our community members.

Have a correction or suggestion for video or blog? Please contact us to let us know. Submitting a correction this way will result in a quicker fix than commenting on a thread with a suggestion or correction.

View the Full Community Guidelines

    1. Coconut is not really that good tasting , and you certainly don’t want to use margarine . According to M.W Gillman of the Harvard Medical School in his study on margarine each teaspoon is associated with a increase in Heart disease risk . While butter showed no increase what so ever . Butter has nutrients ,Vitamin A , butyric acid which fights inflammation and arachidonic acid which helps your immune system .




      9
      1. buster, could you please explain why you even bring up margarine, other than to mention a food or food-like item that is probably even worse than butter?




        30
      2. Buster, All the unbiased science that I have read indicates that butter is a terrible food for human consumption, not only for the saturated fat, but also for the milk protein and other ingredients that stimulate cancer growth. Please read the extensive work of T Colin Campbell.




        42
        1. Yes I have read Campbell’s book but don’t really recall much about butter . I looked up Esselstyn on his page and he said that heart disease disappeared in the Scandinavian countries under the war in early 41 to about 45 , he claims there was nothing to eat except whole grains , vegetables and fruit as the Germans “took” all the meat out of those countries . However doing a bit of digging this weekend I found out that is not true either , Margarine was the main fat consumed in those countries until the war broke out and due to submarine presence there were no imports of the ingredients to make margarine and coconut oil was one of the main ingredients in that margarine . So early in the 40’s margarine production ceased but butter was available and by 44 they were consuming 18 kg per capita per year . Now according to Esselstyne heart disease and diabetes and a lot of other diseases disappeared also at that same time . Bottom line no disease and a lot of butter .
          journal.openedition.org/aof/7100




          9
          1. Campbell wrote a fantasy novel sitting in his bedroom in the U.S.

            Look at the countries that consume a lot of dairy products, including McDougall potato country Ireland. Most have long and healthy life indeed. Go figure.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_milk_consumption_per_capita

            And countries that consume a lot of saturated fat and cholesterol rich foods live very long.

            https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/27/health/life-span-south-korea-women.html

            Women in France, Japan and Spain also were expected to live longer. Currently Japanese women live the longest, but their progress will probably stagnate, the study said.

            South Korea also led the list for longevity in men, followed by Australia, Switzerland, Canada and the Netherlands; men from all of those countries were expected to live beyond 80 on average.




            3
            1. People in this country, eating animal fats and junk can often live long lives into 90s. However they do it with meds and usually have very poor quality of life. I wouldn’t want to live to 100 if quality of life sucked meaning I couldn’t even climb the stairs, walk my dog, clean my house go for a cycle, etc.. Without good health and ability to take care of myself, I see no point in prolonging it.

              Go to nursing homes and you’ll find lot of very old bedridden people who have suffered strokes, heart attacks, etc. etc. But they can keep them alive far into their 90s with drugs … that is until their money runs out.




              35
            2. Gee, Jerry. rich countries with advanced health care systems also display long life expectancies. Who would have thought it?

              Rich societies can also afford to have diets rich in animal foods, fats and processed foods. They have long life expectancies despite consuming unhealthy foods not because of it.

              As for your claim that ‘countries that consume a lot of saturated fat …… live very long’, this simply sn’t true. In fact, the countries that consume the most saturated fat aren’t exactly notable for having long life expectancies. According to the only serious study of international patterns in fat consumption
              “n 2010, mean global saturated fat intake in adults was 9.4% of energy intake (%E) (95% uncertainty interval 9.2%E to 9.5%E), with marked variation across regions and countries (table 3⇓, fig 2⇓). A 5.5-fold variation was identified across the 21 Global Burden of Diseases Study regions (from 4.3%E to 23.5%E), and a 12-fold variation across the 187 countries (from 2.3 to 27.5%E). Highest intakes were identified in Samoa, Kiribati, and similar palm oil producing island nations; as well as Sri Lanka, Romania, and Malaysia (eTable 3 of data supplement)”
              http://www.bmj.com/content/348/bmj.g2272

              They don’t consume a lot of saturated fat in Japan or Korea ceither, certainly compared to the US.

              None of these things support you claims but I don’t suppose that will affect your beliefs in the slightest.




              22
            3. Jerry Lewis, not true. Switzerland and The Netherlands are not only the leading countries in consumption of dairy, but also the highest rates with breast cancer and prostate cancer. Go figure what cheese does to you.




              0
          2. buster, I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you’re simply confused, and not deliberately trying to mislead people, but Dr. Esselstyn didn’t speak about “Scandinavian countries” in general, but specifically about Norway. Your link is about Denmark. The data for both countries from WW2 are different.




            20
              1. Does an increase of 200 % in fish sound like the diet that Esselstyne was telling you they had or was he fibbing just a wee bit . They were already eating a lot of fish before the war .
                Did the Germans take the meat like Esselstyne says which is to imply theft or did they pay almost double for the livestock leaving shortages for the domestic market ?




                0
                1. Thanks for your response, buster.

                  First, I didn’t see you acknowledge your error. You mentioned Esselstyn speaking about what happened in “Scandinavian countries” during WW2 and gave a link to an article about Denmark, when in fact he was talking specifically about Norway. Then you proceeded to say that all Scandinavian countries were the same, when this is clearly not the case.

                  Second, your earlier point was about butter, and having failed now you switch to fish. And what is your current point exactly? Are you expecting me to defend what Esselstyn had said? You are the one who brought it up to begin with. Anyway, the rise in fish consumption may suggest that fish was better for the Norwegians than other animal foods, including milk and butter. However, total animal fat consumption in Norway plummeted during the war. Would you like to make your point clearer, or having totally failed with your earlier attempt, are you now focused on damage control?

                  And what on earth are you trying to prove with your question about the exact cause of the diet shift?




                  12
          3. Interesting tibids, Buster. So Esselstyn is doing “study” on the Scandinavian countries while they were eating butter.

            Same as Campbell doing “study” on China while they are eating saturated fat and conclude that yeah, they are very healthy.




            1
          4. Cool. Also, Campbell and Esselstyn completely ignore the health benefits of a massive reduction in sugar during the war. Further, Campbell related affluence with increased meat consumption and bad health, but the increase consumption of sugar that is also related to affluence in China, during his study is not discussed very deeply.




            0
        2. buster is promoting dairy. That is his sole purpose of being here. His claims are absurd and grossly inaccurate, he doesn’t realize people here are too educated to buy his propaganda, but I guess people like Dr. Greger are such a big threat to people like buster, that they feel the need to try anyway.




          17
          1. S is throwing some more mud . Let me see NFO wanted to find out why there is so much more autism these days . So they thought why not check out dairy? I bet that is why we have so much more autism . So they take their 19 crackshot researchers and start investigating for 2 weeks no less .
            They just could not make a case .
            Now they could have asked me , I could have pointed out that milk consumption has gone down since 1950 from 290 pounds to 45 pounds .
            What was it about milk Sherlock that made you think it was that .
            What about the fact that up to 80% of women bottle fed their babies in the 70’s to 90’s , naw that did’t have anything to do with it , now did it?
            What about the known causes of thyroid diseases that are linked to soy?
            What about the fact that soy formula is known to cause double the enzyme activity compared to milk in infants?
            What about the obesity are you blaming that on milk or is that sluggish thyroid from all those soy formulas?
            What about the fact that NFO openly endorses cocoa while there is slavery involved in that trade .?
            and I am the bad guy




            1
            1. Lol, buster, NFO wasn’t like “why not check out dairy?” The way it works is that when relevant studies are done, they review them and deliver them to the public. In fact, Dr. Greger could have stopped after the first video where the results appeared to be outstanding in favor of a dairy free gluten free diet for the specific case of autism, but he didn’t. He showed what the studies were missing and then went onto show other studies done which did not see significant results but also showed what those studies were missing. The end result on that was that they needed a longer thorough study to get a definite answer. I think it was great that they showed this because a lot of parents with autistic children (and individuals with autism) read about these things and want answers. Giving them a thorough look into the collective evidence of a GF/dairy free diet for autism helps them understand and decide if they want to try it.

              LOL, so one of the most well researched M.D’s and his team of researchers could have asked you, a dairy industry affiliate? You certainly have no problem with ego.

              There are other videos on autism here that have nothing to do with dairy, btw. But I guess you’re mainly attracted to the dairy topics because you’re here to defend your industry.

              Omg, now you’re getting into fair trade vs. slave labor issues?! This is a website about health, finding responsible, ethical, sustainable ingredients is up to us. Dr. Greger also talks about the benefits of honey which is a very cruel and unsustainable industry (luckily one can get the benefits straight from flowers as opposed to bee labor). The point is, is this is a science-based site and there is nothing biased about it.

              You are getting more and more desperate buster. Why not just allow yourself to LEARN (the studies on milk are overwhelming) and care and feel and get into a responsible, moral business instead. Ironic you should bring up slave labor when you’re in the industry of the most HORRIFIC slavery, torture, and murder which I’m sure you’ll disgustingly deny with no avail. Is money really more important to you than all of these things? Even more important than human health? Or is your self-serving denial THAT powerful?




              13
        1. Lavanga, Earth Balance is very unhealthy. It contains palm oil which raises bad cholesterol. I believe it is worse than coconut oil in this way. Palm oil is also considered a potential carcinogen. It’s also one of the cruelest (both directly and indirectly) industries on the planet as well as one of the most unsustainable – it is one of the biggest threats to our planet right now and one of the leading causes of deforestation while simultaneously violated both human and animal rights in big ways.
          Earth Balance has a lot of propaganda on their palm oil in claims of sustainability, but it is all industry propaganda. For example, the RSPO was created by the biggest palm oil buyers in the world. Other similar organizations are equally corrupt. And EB cherry picks and leaves out information and are very clever in their word choices and thoughtful in how to put a spin on things. Propaganda through and through.
          Earth Balance also contains flax oil which is very unstable and while whole/ground flax is heat stable in baking, flax oil is one of the most unstable oils and should definitely not be cooked with if one is cooking with oil.

          If you’re going to use a vegan butter, there are better options. Miyoko’s Creamery vegan butter is a healthier option than EB and tastes more like the butter we’re all used to. It’s palm oil free and has very pure ingredients. They also have a recipe on their website and there are other recipes out there. I made my own based off of a friend’s adjustment of a recipe from Miyoko’s website and it came out amazingly and you can make a lot at low cost as well as choose the oils you’d prefer to use, but coconut oil is essential for the recipe.

          There’s also a vegan margarine by Zen Buddha (I think I’m getting the name right) that uses raw hemp, olive, and coconut oils and I think maybe nutritional yeast, I don’t remember. I could never try it because it’s hard to get in the U.S. I believe their company is located in Montreal, Canada or Quebec, I don’t remember.

          Of course if one is going to use any margarine or oil, it should be done sparingly.




          7
          1. I’m trying to figure out something tasty and convenient to put on toast. I figure just about all my choices are unhealthy, but what it is the bottom line effect if I have a tablespoon of EB or something similar (Miyoko’s is tasty but $$$) every few days as part of an overall healthy diet? What about peanut butter? (Not a fan of almond butter except in recipes.)




            0
            1. Gary – Miyoko’s Creamery butter is made with coconut oil which is higher in saturated fat than cow butter (90% saturated vs 60% saturated). Earth Balance, likewise, has palm oils which are just about as saturated as coconut oil.
              I also like to have a little something to spread on bread and, also, corn on the cob in the summer time. I came up with this idea: Use an avocado as your base. Squish it all up. Add some nutritional yeast which gives it a buttery flavor and spread on your bread or, in the summer time, corn on the cobb. Works really well and it remains a whole food, not an oil product. Have fun with it!!




              2
      3. Coconut is trashed by the vegans although it is a plant food because coconut contains saturated fat but harmless, but the vegans cannot “approve” one plant food and then “disapprove” other saturated fat / cholesterol foods which are mainly animal foods. So they lump altogether and coconut becomes victim of vegan trashing, although it is a very beneficial food that they will miss.

        Same goes with the low fat theory which vegans promote because you will have a higher than 100 cholesterol (although not sky high) if you eat animal foods. The result is that vegans get sick with cholesterol level under 100 let alone 60-80 that some vegans are proud to have (and proud to be sick).




        2
        1. Jerry

          Why do you continually post these ridiculous falsehoods and nutty claims that have already been refuted multiple times? These posts make you appear like an obsessive crackpot..

          The ‘low cholesterol making people sick’ statement is typical example of the false claims made by charlatans selling dangerous diets and tby he poor loons who belive this stuff. The opposite is the truth – having very low cholesterol slashes heart disease risk.

          “patients reached very low cholesterol – lower than 50mg/dL. This is comparable to the levels we are born with, but is only achievable in adulthood through medication – lifestyle and exercise alone would not drop levels so low.

          The researchers found lowering levels of cholesterol reduced the risk of heart attack, stroke, angina or death from heart disease, and that for every 39mg/dL reduction in LDL, the risk reduced by 24 per cent.

          Professor Ray added: “This study not only confirms that LDL can trigger heart problems, but also suggests reducing it in adults to very low levels – to those of a new-born baby – is both safe and beneficial.”
          http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/newsandeventspggrp/imperialcollege/newssummary/news_16-12-2016-12-53-13

          The continuing stream of falsehoods and crackpot theories that you insist on posting here are a constant threat to the health of casual visitors to this site seeking accurate science based information about nutrition, diet and health.




          27
            1. Making fun of user names now? Wow you are immature. Not sure why at least some of your idiotic, harassing posts aren’t deleted by monitors but if any are reading, could you at least not allow those kinds of posts?




              12
              1. Shaylen Snarski, now the guy whom I make fun because his ID showed up as TAT and it fits his profile very well, is laughing while you are angry. What gives?

                Should I call you by Shaylen Snarski or S because Shaylen Snarski is what is shown in my email?




                0
                1. Jesus Jerry Lewis – is there anything or anyone you don’t attack, demean, and denigrate? You have already previously posted – numerous times – that you are here to troll and don’t believe anything that this site has to say. What a vicious character you are.




                  6
        2. Jerry, not going to read or comment on your entire post, but I will comment on the “vegans trash coconut oil,” which is as far as I was willing to read. Once AGAIN, vegans are those who do not use animals, it is not a diet. That is why there is no definitive way vegans as a whole eat, other than not consuming animal products. There are so many vegans who use oils including coconut oil, consume processed foods, etc.
          People who are more WHOLE FOODS plant based are those who avoid oils. Although I consider myself WFPB but do not entirely omit oils, I just don’t regularly use them and do so sparingly when I do because I’ve LEARNED about what they can do to arterial function and other factors. Some of us are willing to learn and want to learn, not just sit stubbornly in our preconceived ideas or previous indoctrination.




          14
          1. I should qualify my statement further. It is most of the vegans on this board including the doctor who are against coconut. Just read the comments section.

            Re: Some of us are willing to learn and want to learn, not just sit stubbornly in our preconceived ideas or previous indoctrination.

            Should I roll on the floor and laugh?




            0
            1. Jerry… you might as well be spending your time rolling around on the floor and laughing. Who specifically on this site is a vegan? Naturally there are some, you know I am as I have told you I am. And veganism is an amazing thing – we shouldn’t be using fellow sentient beings let alone enslaving, torturing and murdering them. But veganism is not a diet. Plant based refers to a diet of plant foods, vegan refers to a way of life without using animal for food, clothing, labor, etc. Your continuous disregard between the difference of vegan and plant based as well as your continuous accusations that all plant based eaters are vegan even when they tell you otherwise is as disrespectful as it is idiotic. You’re acting like a child over not getting their way so you’re trying to find a way to somehow discredit it all or at least cover it all up, which you’re deluded into believing you actually can, by accusing everyone of being vegans all in on some big conspiracy to try to save cows and increase our kale stocks or something… lol. It’s really desperate and incredibly childish.




              8
                1. Wow, you just bravely stare hypocrisy in the face, don’t you? The only one who actually trolls and blows up these message boards – with the same repetitive nonsense at that – is you, Jerry.




                  3
      4. This is mostly untriue Buster which is probably why you don’t provide any references to support your claims. However, in some countries you can still buy margarines containing trans fats and butter will probably be a less unhealthy choice than those.

        In the famoius Lyon Diet Heart study, for example, my understanding is that they replaced butter and cream with margarine and heart disease risk plummeted,
        http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/103/13/1823

        Then there is the Harvard study which found that replacing dairy fat – and butter is basically dairy fat – with vegetable fat and polyunsaturated fat (typivcally found in margarines), heart disease risk dropped sinificantly

        ” When dairy fat was replaced with the same number of calories from vegetable fat or polyunsaturated fat, the risk of cardiovascular disease dropped by 10% and 24%, respectively. Furthermore, replacing the same number of calories from dairy fat with healthful carbohydrates from whole grains was associated with a 28% lower risk of cardiovascular disease.”
        https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/2016/10/25/dairy-fat-cardiovascular-disease-risk/

        This why most health/medical/nutritional authorities recommend replacing butter with healthier margarine alternative eg

        “Margarine usually tops butter when it comes to heart health.
        Margarine is made from vegetable oils, so it contains unsaturated “good” fats — polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fats. These types of fats help reduce low-density lipoprotein (LDL), or “bad,” cholesterol when substituted for saturated fat.

        Butter, on the other hand, is made from animal fat, so it contains more saturated fat.”
        https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/nutrition-and-healthy-eating/expert-answers/butter-vs-margarine/faq-20058152

        Really, when you post misleading statements like this. recommending butter in place of margarine, you should be upfront and declare that you are paid to promote dairy products in onlie fora like this.




        10
    2. Any phyto lipid is better for one’s health than any animal lipid.

      The current health crisis (tsunami?) is certainly not due to over-consumption of coconut oil.




      7
      1. And the false theory about saturated fat causes all kind of havoc to world health.

        https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5044790/

        DebMandal and Mandal10 report that, in the United States, coconut oil was one of the major sources of dietary fats, aside from diary and animal fats, prior to the advent of the American edible oil industry in the 1940s. Despite the wide use of these tropical oils in less endowed countries, Enig11 reports however that, the coconut oil industry has suffered more than three decades of abusive rhetoric from consumer activist groups and organisations such as Centre for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) and the American Soybean Association (ASA) and other members of the edible oil industry, as well as from those in the medical and scientific community who learned their apparent misinformation from these groups. Needless to say, palm oil has suffered a similar fate. According to Chong and Ng12, the principal allegation levelled against palm oil is that it is a highly saturated fat and its consumption supposedly raises the levels of blood cholesterol, thereby increasing the risk of coronary heart disease.
        From the above, it is clear, that the saturated fat content of both coconut oil and palm oil have been the basis of the vilification campaigns against their use. Enig11 traces the origins of the anti-saturated fat campaign to the late 1950s, when a researcher in Minnesota announced that the heart disease epidemic was being caused by hydrogenated vegetable fats. The edible oil industry’s response at that time was to claim that it was only the saturated fat in the hydrogenated oils that was causing the problem. This was followed by various forms of anti-saturated fat/anti-tropical oils campaigns (from the 1960s through to the mid-1980s) by individual researchers, some multinational companies and even governmental agencies in the United States. Chong and Ng12 however, noted that, the anti-palm oil (anti-tropical oil) campaigns in the United States were conducted more for economic gains than for genuine concerns of the health of the Americans. Sadly, this adverse publicity of tropical oil in the United States, has spread worldwide, even to countries in the developing world, with heart disease prevalence far lower than that of the United States.




        1
        1. Jerry

          You have posted this nonsense before . Ghana is a major producer of coconut oil. It is hardly surprising then that an obscure Ghanaian journal would publish a ridiculous article like this promoting coconut oil consumption.

          If I remember correctly, this article is itself based on an article by well-known crackpots Enig and Fallon of the self-styled Weston Price Foundation. I first came across their article in the conspiracy nut magazine Nexus (which I used to read regularly at one point – highly entertaining). It is nonsense from beginning to end.




          16
          1. Of course as expected, you will discredit anything you don’t like and call it originated from the meat industry or address each point raised in the articles and numerous references that they cited. No wonder why your name is TAT.

            tat
            Tat Noun. 1. Rubbish, junk. Abb. of tatty.

            Used to refer to the kind of junk sold by crafty Cockneys to unsuspecting tourists in central London.
            E.g. “You can’t wear that old cardigan, it’s tat.” {Informal}




            0
            1. Jerry

              If you insist on post ingabsurd justifications of coconut oil from coconut producers who in turn quote American crackpots, of course your sourcres are going to be criticised. And so they should be. You should be embarrassed by posting such evident tripe.




              15
      2. Navy, no doubt that plant fat is better than animal fat. But I don’t know what tsunamis have to do with debunking health claims made in order to sell a product.




        0
    3. Yep its yummy but I only use it for oil pulling occasionally. Being in menopause hormone fluctuations can cause tooth pain for no apparent reason. I stop running to the dentist after being told nope nothing wrong just hormones. So now i will oil pull so far its worked.




      0
  1. At 2:46, Dr. Greger says “no significant difference in waistlines”.

    However, I’ve just noticed that in the abstract of this study, the researches say “…but only group C (coconut oil) exhibited a reduction in WC (waist circumference)
    (P = 0.005)”.

    Looking at the actual data, while the soybean oil group had a non-significant increase of WC (in cm, from 96.4 ± 5.1 to 97.0 ± 6.5, P=0.39), the coconut oil group had a significant decrease (from 98.8 ± 6.7 to 97.4 ± 7.0, P=0.005).

    Of course I realize that all the above doesn’t necessarily make coconut oil something we want to add to our diets, especially given the worsening in insulin resistance in the coconut oil group, but what exactly am I missing here?




    8
    1. Ishay, I don’t have access to the full research paper, so I can’t comment on the specifics of that particular research paper. However, the abstract does say that “Energy intake and amount of carbohydrate ingested by both groups diminished over the trial … “, but it doesn’t indicate whether there were differences between the two groups, which I would think would be a significant factor to consider. Maybe the Coconut oil group ate fewer overall calories than the S group.

      It doesn’t make logical sense to me to eat any kind of refined extracted oils! Why not just eat Whole Foods whenever possible?




      14
      1. WFPB-Hal: Thanks for your response. We agree on your statement about whole foods vs. extracted oils, but that’s completely beside the point.

        From the study: “Individual dietary counselling for all participants was provided by a nutritionist throughout the entire experimental period of 12 weeks. Subjects were instructed to follow a diet that was balanced in respect of macronutrients with increased consumption of fruits and vegetables and reduced consumption of simple carbohydrates and animal fat. Participants were also advised to drink adequate amounts of water and to reduce or eliminate alcohol consumption and smoking. Under the supervision of a fitness trainer, all of the participants took part on 4 days every week in a physical activity program comprising elongation followed by 50 min walking. Both, the physical trainer and the nutritionist were not aware of the distribution of the individuals between the study groups.”

        So it appears that your guess about differences between the groups is wrong.

        Also, my concern is that the researches did report a significant reduction in waist circumference in the coconut oil group, which directly contradicts what’s being said in the video. Unless, again, I’m missing something, which I truly hope I am.




        3
        1. Ishay, Thanks for your elaboration. Like I say, I don’t have access to the whole research paper. And for me to put confidence in the results stated in the abstract, I would prefer to see both groups have their food controlled so that they each have the same caloric intake. I think we all know that dietary “counseling” is not a very rigorous way of controlling food intake.
          And not having access to the full paper, I can’t explain why there seems to be a discrepancy between what the video says and what is said in the abstract. My point is, even if this study did show a difference in WC, to me, it’s irrelevant as to whether we should eat or not eat coconut oil!




          7
          1. I agree. I’m not planning to start consuming coconut oil (or any other oil for that matter) either.

            As to food control, you are right of course, it would be better than counselling. But it was a randomized controlled trial, so it would be hard to imagine why two groups of people selected in a randomized manner, all given the same kind of counselling, would end up with significantly different behavious on average between the groups. That’s my understanding, at least.

            The fact that it’s a randomized controlled trial is why Dr. Greger mentioned it in the first place, isn’t it?




            4
    2. Good eye—that’s a classic deception. As pointed out in Common Scientific and Statistical Errors in Obesity Research, “a researcher should never use the nominal significance of a pre–post difference within a group to make inferences about differences between groups.” That’s why we have control groups! This is one of the dozens of things I’m excited to cover in my How to Read Medical Journal Articles webinar as soon as I can make some headway on the new book project. Stay tuned!




      29
      1. Thank you so much for your response, Dr. Greger!

        So apparently I was missing something – that’s a relief! I’ll definitely look more into it. My personal opinion, though, is that if you believe the researchers have made a mistake in their analysis, this should be somehow explained in the video. Otherwise, one is left to wonder where the discrepancy is coming from.

        Anyway, thank you once again for the amazing work that you and your team do and for giving people this incredible amount and quality of information.




        13
      2. I would still like to see how the conclusion of “no significant difference in waistlines” has been established from the data collected in that study, by the way.




        3
      3. Dr. Greger, I used to love to read through the comments and would often learn other interesting points by those following a WFPB diet. Now, I find I can not get myself to go through these because of all the trolls on your site constantly spouting misinformation. I don’t enjoy reading the back and forth that constantly happens between these trolls and NF supporters. Is there any way you can have some guidelines that if certain people constantly post misinformation and are not supportive of WFPB research that they get kicked off. Some dissenting conversation is fine, but it’s so overboard now and a drag on your site. Just a thought…




        3
    1. Komrad Koloxzyvkxzyqx, I would rather see the good Dr Greger spend his valuable time sharing valid nutritional research with us, than wasting his time responding to an uneducated critic who has been refuted many times already.




      34
        1. Darwin Galt has 20 thumbs up. You only have 2 thumbs up Jerry. Why don’t you go bother the people over at the Mercola forum. Can’t you tell that the people on this forum don’t like you.




          10
          1. Re: Darwin Galt has 20 thumbs up. You only have 2 thumbs up Jerry.

            So you are into thumb counting. LOL. The other day, there is a respectable poster named Alef who post a critical post about Dr G and he had 51 thumb up. You and a number of people come up with conspiracy theory that Paleo people must come to this board to give him thumb up. So do you have a theory now that vegans give Darwin thumb up?




            1
            1. Holy freaking crap Jerry, that is not at ALL what anyone said. TG said something about people having a stance on a subject in the same way Paleo people do, I personally did not agree but didn’t read his full post thoroughly. And it was ONE person accusing something manipulating the like button and no one else, just one. Also, it was not a post critical of Dr. Greger but rather a post critical of a conclusion on a topic. You have no shame in twisting things to the point of actually lying… Hmm, maybe you do work for the ag industry in some way after all, kind of eerily similar to the way they do things.




              4
        1. Kay, I think it is rude, immature, and disrespectful for a person to post the exact same comment over and over again, week after week after week.

          Especially when he has been given valid explanations by several people many times already! That’s a telling sign that he has ulterior motives and is not at all interested in a real answer.




          19
    2. I stopped reading the Healthline critique where they start to defend fish oil as a good omega 3 supplement. Also they site the EPIC-Oxford study that featured a bunch of unhealthy processed food eating vegans to prove that a little meat eating is healthier then being a vegan. I couldn’t be bothered with these articles.




      21
        1. Please tell me about Denise Minger’s qualifications. My understanding, from an article she wrote a few years ago, is that statistics is her hobby and she isn’t a researcher or doctor of any kind. Perhaps my memory fails me, or maybe she has since gone to medical school, so please let me know if she is professionally qualified.




          20
          1. Denise Minger doesn’t seem to understand the difference between “critical thinking” and “cherry-picking”. Obviously, Dr. Greger chooses not to accept the conclusions of bad, flawed, or weak studies. That isn’t cherry-picking. That’s just being smart. He does include studies that show there might be benefits to consuming various foods but only if there are no negative consequences. One shouldn’t use the same level of skepticism on all conclusions that come out of the scientific community. Is it really necessary to be so concerned about the consequences of adding watercress to the diet in the attempt to improve athletic ability? No, because there really are no negative side effects. What’s the worse that can happen? You’re just adding more vegetables to the diet.




            25
            1. Hi, Chris P. I agree with your assessment of the situation. Dr. Greger points out the flaws in studies, which is how science is supposed to work. Scientists publish research so that it may be reviewed and evaluated by their peers. Not all scientific research is of equal quality, and not all results are equally valid. Sadly, studies are sometimes deliberately designed to produce a particular outcome that is favorable to the financial interests of sponsors, while others are simply poorly designed and executed. Such studies deserve to be disregarded.




              7
          2. Rebecca – Denise Minger is an English major. She describes herself on her blog site which you can find here:

            And she self-describes this:
            “My post-college education strategy has been simple. I approach the field of nutrition like learning a new language: total immersion-style. You didn’t learn your native tongue by sitting in a classroom following grammar lessons; you learned it by jumping into an initially confusing world and feeling your way around until it all started making sense. ”
            While I don’t disagree with the value of jumping in and immersing one’s self in the topic of their interest, what’s lacking here for Ms. Minger is that she has NO science education/background. Her degree – which she fails to post and acknowledge in her self-description – is English. If one is going to critique scientific articles and data – which she says is her “thing” – then she should at least have the basic scientific background and education. Without the basics, I can’t see why anyone would take her seriously. Her argument is akin to saying “Medicine is my ‘schtick’ and I’ve learned it by digging into articles and library books.” I don’t know about anyone else, but I would not ever want to be treated by any “physician” whose education was conducted in that manner. I wouldn’t take that person seriously as someone who might have accurate information. And the same with Ms. Minger.
            If she wants to play with the big boys and girls – i.e., those with extensive education and scientific background and experience – she should compete on the same level playing field: go get your scientific credentials. Then you might be taken seriously. Otherwise you’re like Jerry Lewis – just a big mouth.
            Or, . . .as they like to say in Texas, . .. “Big hat, no cattle.” :-).




            2
          1. Because this is one of rare cases when dr Greger is wrong. Unfortunately many people can stop supplement fish oil because they think that metanalysis cited by dr Greger is accurate.




            3
            1. With the high levels of pollutants and heavy metals, many people avoid fish these days. I feel they are wise to do so. Fortunately EPA/ DHA supplements can be made from the same source where the get theirs: algae. And farmed safely, without all the pollutants.

              https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24261532 “Three studies showed that ingestion of micro-algae oil led to significant increases in blood erythrocyte and plasma DHA.” ALA is an inefficient source. But EPA/DHA from algae appears to work well.




              8
              1. You should know that algae oil contains a tiny amount of DHA and almost no EPA. Of course vegans will say that their body is “special” and don’t need a lot of DHA/EPA.

                And you should know that there is an organization called IFOS that certifies fish oil that it contains no pollutant, is not rancid and contains the amount of DHA / EPA as claimed. Is there such an organization for algae oil?

                http://www.nutrasource.ca/ifos/resources/faq-consumer.aspx




                2
                1. Omg Jerry, you shamelessly lie, either that or you are clinically deluded and you believe your own imaginings. Concentrated algae oil is actually the DIRECT source of EPA and DHA. Fish only contain EPA/DHA (and only some fish, at that) second hand due to their consumption of algae.
                  But all one would need to do is take the supplement and get their blood tested. Simple stuff. When I got my blood tested (and I do not supplement), my levels all came back good. Before I got my results I actually told the blood guy that I was vegan when fish oil was brought up, and before I could let him know I already knew of algae supplements, he told me about them and that they work great.




                  8
                2. Sorry for multiple posts, but I have to comment. Jerry, you’re always accusing people of “believing” everything they hear, yet you’re putting your faith in an organization like IFOS? I don’t know enough about them to actually comment on it, but I do know that often, organizations can be corrupt. There is no way to actually get all of the toxins out of fish oil based on my collective research. I’m sure the third party certifiers still help in getting out the “purest” stuff though, or at least I would imagine so. But algae oil wouldn’t actually need such inspections because micro algae is grown in tanks, not in polluted waters. It’s a very sustainable, clean practice.
                  Fishing is one of the most destructive practices on the planet today. Some scientists believe the ocean will be completely depleted in our lifetime and not long from now.
                  Currently you can find seal cubs starving to death off the coast of California due to deplete fish populations. But they’re only one of MANY marine animals suffering horrific fates due to human greed for “seafood” and supplements.




                  6
              2. swarren, not that much has been studied on the natural conversion of ALA into EPA/DHA, most of the claims that our bodies do an “inefficient” job at doing so are promoting supplements, mainly fish oil supplements or fish liver oil supplements (same thing, but they seem to advertise them differently). I have good DHA/EPA levels and do not supplement with algae or any other oils, I just consume ground flax daily at two tablespoons a day. Also, from everything I’ve read, the significance of blood levels of DHA/EPA aren’t fully understood. Added EPA/DHA supplements can decrease brain shrinkage though, as studies have shown. I believe my healthy diet is sufficient enough for this and I’d love to see a study done comparing those on a WFPB diet supplementing with algae oil compared to a WFPB diet without supplementation compared to a SAD with supplementation compared to a SAD without it. That would be awesome.
                In the meantime, Dr. Greger has good reason to suggest to patients (especially those pregnant or breast feeding) to take the safe form of DHA/EPA (which is algae oil) for optimal brain health. And there are plenty of algae oil supplements out there. I do hope they become purer though. Far too many contain palmitate, an especially unhealthy derivative of the horrifically unsustainable and cruel palm oil industry, as well as other unhealthy fillers. Although I believe palmitate can also be (but rarely is) derived form coconuts, either way though, it isn’t healthy.
                I did find Nutru’s dropper bottle of DHA/EPA to be impressively pure and free of palm oil though.

                I also want to add that not only are the algae supplements safer, but (apart from any added palm oil depending on the brand) so much more sustainable! The fish oil industry actually had to shut down for a period of 2 years I think (going on memory, maybe it was one year) because they would have been out of business due to the depleted oceans. If everyone is so worried about fish oil supplementation, claiming it’s necessary, what are they going to tell their kids and grandkids when there are no fish populations so that they too can have this “essential” supplement? Of course at that point, supplementation will be the least of everyone’s worries. Algae oil is the only lasting solution, and safer at that.




                2
                1. Thanks for the reply. I don’t have time to dig up the study Dr Greger used to show ALA conversion rates vary widely between individuals, and decrease with age as well. I agree with your advise, however. I use ground flax on my oatmeal but recently added algae based EPA/DHA daily when my blood tests came back a little low. They look good now.




                  0
            2. Konrad, you have been given the resources this site has to offer regarding the topic of omega 3s a few times over now. If you feel that Dr Greger is “wrong”, why do you persist? Why not just go ahead and take the word of an English major , Denise Minger, and take the fish oil? Go ahead!
              I prefer to get omega 3 from ground flax seed or from algae sourced products as Dr Greger recommends rather than support the fishing inustry in any way.




              13
            3. Konrad – You just go ahead and do whatever you feel is best for your nutritional health. Everyone here will support you in that.
              Likewise, it would be nice if you would grant the rest of us here the right to do the same for our individual reasons without the attack and nag factor.




              1
        2. Dr. Greger clearly goes over all the evidence on omega-3’s and explains which one’s work, and why. Short chain from plants such as flax, are what are good for the heart, skin, hair, etc. Long chain from algae or fish (who have it because they eat algae) is what is good for the brain. Dr. Greger explains in detail why he recommends algae oil supplementation instead of fish oil. Definitely videos worth watching if you haven’t already.




          6
          1. Of course we can convert the short chain into long chain, naturally. I seem to do absolutely fine with this and choose not to supplement with algae oil.




            5
      1. Netgogate- but did you miss the surprising outcome of the Epic study? What they found was that the biggest overall health risk was high blood sugars, not cholesterol numbers.
        The healthiest people eat few animal products, but also pay attention to blood sugar control.

        Dr. Gregor himself, in a 2002 seminar, said that vegans who had high homocysteine or a bad omega 3 vs. 6 ratio had the same or worse heart disease rate as non vegetarians. He said B12 levels are important also. So there are a few numbers besides cholesterol that matter.
        I think the current practice of only being concerned with cholesterol is far too simplistic. So I applaud Dr. Gregor for addressing these other important factors.




        3
        1. To elaborate, in that lecture Dr. Greger explains that the missing link for vegans in regards to keeping low homocysteine levels is B12 whereas in non-vegans it’s folate. Both folate and B12 are essential and keeping homocysteine levels low.
          Also, with the omega 3 to 6 ratio, he refers to the standard American diet rich in refined foods which is rich in refined vegetable oils overwhelmingly high in omega 6 while not intaking enough whole plant foods which contain ALA omega 3. In that lecture he recommends ground flax everyday, I think in the lecture he said two tbsp and then in another video on here here says 1 tbsp. I personally take two a day. He also explains in the lecture that long chain omega 3’s do not compete at all with omega 6, but in other videos explains that the short chain are the ones that are good for the heart. He also explains that given the choice, our bodies will grab the omega 3’s we put in it before the omega 6’s, but the problem was overwhelmingly receiving omega 6 through processed foods containing processed vegetable oils and not eating enough omega 3 rich foods.




          3
        1. Everyone who has gone on a whole plant food diet has improved their health. Dr. Greger is to be praised for his dedication and desire to help people avoid disease. As for you Jerry, take your 30 pieces of silver and go troll on Mercola’s webpage.




          21
          1. Your fear of learning new things every day is similar to your paranoid about everything going on in the world. I have pity for you rather than have any animosity toward you.




            1
            1. Jerry you don’t have the emotional capacity to pity or feel sorry for anyone because you are a narcissistic, egotistical individual that wants to attack and tear down the works of Dr. Greger.




              12
          2. John, why would he troll there? Mercola, a hack who promotes supplements and animal products and is living in a mansion for it, says everything people like Jerry want to hear and want others to hear. Jerry has no need to go there, Mercola isn’t a threat to him. But Greger, someone who recites real science and offers the long misled public an education as opposed to propaganda, most certainly is. People like Jerry are odd, they get angry when their preconceived ideas are disproven. Not everyone seeks the truth or wants to learn, many prefer the dark for various reasons and can get irrationally angry when that becomes threatened.




            7
    3. konrad

      Why do you keep posting this? This must be what the third or fourth time? You have already been answered many time.

      Give it a rest. We already have one obsessively repetitive poster. That particular job vacancy is already filled.




      10
    4. Konrad, you keep (if I’m not mistaken, I believe it’s you) bringing this up. Are you trying to promote the article? Seems like it could be a promotion tactic to keep posting about it here. But I could absolutely be mistaken, maybe you’re genuinely curious. As I’ve said before, I do not believe Greger would waste his time responding to what is essentially just a blog by a completely unqualified person with no credentials.




      4
        1. I’m sure he knows about it and may have already read it. If there was anything relevant to the article, he would have commented on it. Maybe one day he will just to help others understand. If you’re worried that she’s right, I would just keep in mind all the things people have explained in their comments to you about her and the website, and be confident in the unadulterated science Dr. Greger brings to the table. To simplify, people like Denise Minger essentially ask that readers take their word for things and cite cherry picked sources, Dr. Greger walks us through the actual sources and even teaches people how to review studies themselves. He’s never biased. Look at one of the latest series of videos for example. In a gluten free and casein free diet for autism, he could have just showed people the incredible results of the first study, but he instead explained the flaw in the study and went on to show us what all the collective evidence currently has to say.
          I also highly recommend his book “How Not To Die” if you haven’t read it already.




          0
          1. I have not heard what is wrong with Denise Minger reasoning on “How not to die”. For example nobody indicated fallacy of this reasoning.
            “Similarly, citing the EPIC-Oxford study as evidence that animal protein increases kidney stone risk, he states: “subjects who didn’t eat meat at all had a significantly lower risk of being hospitalized for kidney stones, and for those who did eat meat, the more they ate, the higher their associated risks” (page 170).

            The study actually found that, while heavy meat eaters did have the highest risk of kidney stones, people who ate small amounts of meat fared better than those who ate none at all — a hazard ratio of 0.52 for low meat eaters versus 0.69 for vegetarians “




            0
            1. I did not read Denise Minger’s material, nor do I have any interest in doing so as I value my time. But I do know about the overwhelming studies about what meat consumption does to the human body and the overwhelming evidence that those with the least amount of animal protein intake live the longest. I also know that Minger has no qualifications and no authority of the subject of science, statistics, health, or anything else she’s writing about.
              I believe one can be self educated, but when it comes to statistics and reviewing and explaining scientific studies to the public, credentials are kind of a big deal…
              Also, I have read many responses to your posts asking about Denise Minger’s paper and there have been many people explaining what is wrong with her review and why it isn’t even relevant. Did you read all the responses? Maybe you missed some, it’s hard to keep up with the order of comments sometimes. Even some or at least one (going by memory) volunteer at NF responded to you as well.
              If you want to keep pressing Dr. Greger to answer your questions, that is your prerogative, but I do believe people have explained why her review is wrong as well as unqualified in the first place.




              0
            2. Konrad – Denise Minger has a degree in English. She’s unqualified to be taken seriously in the educated scientific community. Just like I wouldn’t take my car to be fixed to someone with no training in car mechanics, I wouldn’t get my nutrition-science information from someone like Ms. Minger. I’m sure she’s a nice and bright person. . . but she has no training. If her blog advice was about English and writing I’d take her seriously in a heartbeat. But nutritional science? not ever. She has no qualifications.
              There are plenty of people around who have lots of scientific background whose information I would listen to before her. Mostly what she has is a big mouth.
              As they say in Texas: “Big hat, no cattle.”




              1
    1. Of course coconut oil brings numerous benefits and has no harm.

      There are very bad misconception that:

      – If you eat fat then you will be fat. Actually, getting fat has nothing to do with your fat intake, albeit within reason of course.

      – If you eat saturated fat or cholesterol rich foods then it will raise your cholesterol. Actually quite the contrary. If you eat saturated fat such as in coconut oil, or cholesterol such as in crab, shrimp, oyster, bacon, tallow, etc., your lipid profile actually improves if it means anything in the first place.

      – Because fat is sticky and tends to clog your sewer then it will clog your arteries :) Nothing is further from the truth, your body is not a sewer and it does not act the same way.




      6
    2. I read the article on coconut oil. The article is in favor of consuming coconut oil. No thanks. My whole plant food diet is doing just fine for my low cholesterol results. I always err on the side of caution….I am not going to take a chance on any kind of oil. I can still hear Dr. Esselstyn’s mantra — no oil…..No Oil…..NO OIL… !!!!!




      13
    3. Jasnelgrove, Dr. Greger has a video on here about coconut oil and cholesterol. Coconut oil does raise overall cholesterol, both the good cholesterol AND the bad cholesterol. It’s better than butter though.




      6
  2. I am expecting that the good doctor will blast coconut oil right from the start just looking at the title. But instead he tried very very hard dismissing all trials and even if the trials were not done properly, none of the trials showed that coconut oil causes people to gain weight. At the end of the video, there is a vain attempt to associate coconut oil with insulin resistance.

    Just from a personal point of view, I know at least 20 people within my immediate family and close friends who consume MCT coconut oil and coconut fat for frying on a daily basis and everyone sees benefits such as clear mind, good lipid, good sleep, and not a single person any any problems. And I read countless of blogs where people tell of using coconut oil with big success such as even those with Parkinson’s disease.

    It is this kind of fake theories about saturated fat and cholesterol and coconut oil in particular that causes all kind of problems to world health, in particular in poor countries such as countries in Africa, the Philippines, etc.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5044790/

    DebMandal and Mandal10 report that, in the United States, coconut oil was one of the major sources of dietary fats, aside from diary and animal fats, prior to the advent of the American edible oil industry in the 1940s. Despite the wide use of these tropical oils in less endowed countries, Enig11 reports however that, the coconut oil industry has suffered more than three decades of abusive rhetoric from consumer activist groups and organisations such as Centre for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) and the American Soybean Association (ASA) and other members of the edible oil industry, as well as from those in the medical and scientific community who learned their apparent misinformation from these groups. Needless to say, palm oil has suffered a similar fate. According to Chong and Ng12, the principal allegation levelled against palm oil is that it is a highly saturated fat and its consumption supposedly raises the levels of blood cholesterol, thereby increasing the risk of coronary heart disease.
    From the above, it is clear, that the saturated fat content of both coconut oil and palm oil have been the basis of the vilification campaigns against their use. Enig11 traces the origins of the anti-saturated fat campaign to the late 1950s, when a researcher in Minnesota announced that the heart disease epidemic was being caused by hydrogenated vegetable fats. The edible oil industry’s response at that time was to claim that it was only the saturated fat in the hydrogenated oils that was causing the problem. This was followed by various forms of anti-saturated fat/anti-tropical oils campaigns (from the 1960s through to the mid-1980s) by individual researchers, some multinational companies and even governmental agencies in the United States. Chong and Ng12 however, noted that, the anti-palm oil (anti-tropical oil) campaigns in the United States were conducted more for economic gains than for genuine concerns of the health of the Americans. Sadly, this adverse publicity of tropical oil in the United States, has spread worldwide, even to countries in the developing world, with heart disease prevalence far lower than that of the United States.




    4
    1. Why take coconut oil when a diet of aurugula, kale, spinach, beans, vegetables, and fruits will keep you in good health. I don’t need coconut oil, my whole plant food diet is doing great for me and it is doing great for thousands of others who follow Dr. Greger and Dr. Esselstyn’s advice about oils.




      15
      1. John. have you looked at where do your daily outburst of anger come from? And the Alzheimer’s and dementia and mental health issues that will follow? If you consider being angry everyday not just to me or some people on this board, but also to other cultures in the world, is a normal thing then more power to you.




        2
        1. Oh come on Jerry. Every time somebody points out that your claims are false and clearly refuted by the scientific evidence, you accuse them of being angry.

          And we all know where the Alzmeimer’s, dementia and mental health risks rreally eside don’t we?

          “A number of cohort studies that measured total blood cholesterol in mid-life found that participants with higher levels of total cholesterol or hypercholesterolemia had an increased risk of developing dementia in late-life compared with the participants who had normal or low cholesterol levels (Beydoun et al., 2010; Kivipelto et al., 2002; Mainous et al., 2005; Notkola et al. 1998; Reynolds et al., 2010; Solomon et al., 2007; Solomon et al., 2009; Whitmer et al., 2005).”

          and

          “Of all the different types of fatty acids, the findings are most consistent for an increased risk of cognitive decline with a higher intake of saturated fatty acids.”
          https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4107296/

          So, the two things that you loudly promote here day after day after day – high saturated fat consumption and high blood cholesterol levels – actually increase the risk for cognitive problems. And what do we find in your posts? Clear evidence of mental health problems. For one thing, this actual repetitive behaviour itself

          “A person with Alzheimer’s may do or say something over and over ….”
          https://www.alz.org/care/alzheimers-dementia-repetition.asp

          For your own sake, get yourself checked out Jerry




          12
      2. I agree. Colorful, delicious real foods loaded with micronutrients for me. It’s a happy way to live, and there’s another upside: I don’t feel a compulsion to read countless blogs or troll the internet. Real life is good!




        14
  3. Glad you addressed this. There is a lot of hype over coconut oil which just doesn’t seem to go away. One guy wrote a book on it claiming cures from A-Z and encouraged people to eat tablespoons of it! Knew it was BS!




    20
    1. Glad of what? The good doctor has tried very very very hard to trash coconut oil and studies after studies show that it does not cause weight gain. Go figure.




      3
      1. Dr. Greger just shows studies that state the opposite yet you refuse to acknowledge that. Why don’t you address what the studies actually show? I doubt you even watched the video.




        16
        1. Whenever a study says something that vegans don’t like then they will discredit it. But whenever it fits their agenda then any observational study or even theory written by a guy sitting in the U,S, about what people in China eat, is good. Go figure. LOL.




          1
          1. It’s either gross or sad or annoying that you can’t see the massive irony in your statement, Jerry. I can’t decide which… maybe a little of each. First of all, pretty sure most people here are plant based, not vegan. Not even everyone here is entirely plant based, for that matter. But the irony lies in the fact that you explained exactly what you do here, and it’s all you do… The best and latest science is put in front of us so we can learn it, not even be told, but actually LEARN, and when the evidence says that which you don’t like, you piss and moan about it. You must not have a very interesting life that you would spend this much time on a website just to complain and try to sway people into believing your deluded beliefs (and you actually think you can sway them despite the science being in front of them… that alone says something). Either that or you have a serious head problem. Maybe both. Either way, you’re clearly very threatened by scientific evidence or you wouldn’t be here. In your case, it’s my guess that it just angers you because you’re so attached to your chosen way of eating and seeing things. But who knows, maybe you do have personal interests apart from that, in animal agriculture.




            12
          2. What a bizarre fantasy world you live in Jerry. Science, evidence and reason obviously have no place there

            You obessively repeat falsehoods which any smart 10-year-old with access to the internet and an ability to use Google can expose in minutes. But not you apparently. Why? Is it because you believe all the evidence has been ‘faked’ as you claimed before?.Or do you just not care about evidence in the first place?




            9
            1. TG, when I was discussing the science of humans thriving on a plant based diet vs. animal foods with someone I know, I gave them links to relevant sources such as WHO, Harvard, etc. (wish I had known about this site then), and they in turn shared with me to promote their argument, a blog filled with ads entitled something like “10 reasons humans need meat.” As you can imagine, the “reasons” were as ridiculous as the title, actually more ridiculous, and thoroughly unscientific with no cited sources. The person who shared this “source of information” with me is actually intelligent and educated (not on this topic of course). My point is that when it comes to evidence, even the intelligent will ignore what they don’t want to hear and cling to senseless things that promote what they want to believe. It’s maddening. But I don’t think intelligent people would repeat the same arguments once their’s were refuted time and time again, on the comments board of a virtual encyclopedia of scientific evidence no less. Only special people like Jerry would do that… or those desperate to promote industry propaganda.




              3
  4. Thanks for the the link, I seemed to have missed the last lot of programmes, and I too would be interested from Dr Greger, mods etc.

    I don’t use oils myself, but tried olive oil for a month, after a “Trust Me I’m a Doctor” episode recommendation. I didn’t enjoy adding so much oil to my diet, taste or texture, unless it’s in the form of hummus, but even I don’t eat hummus everyday. I prefer to eat nuts, avocado for my healthy oils.

    Re:Coconut Oil. I recently (27th Dec) ate a few of someone’s energy balls, coconut oil, almonds, dates. Tasted nice, although very rich and the coconut oil was obvious to a non-oil eater, as it’s the coating of the mouth and feel, I’m not use to, or really like. The energy balls were served with an almond and chai warmed milk drink, which again was nice, but rich. My daily tipple is hot water with lemon. Mentioning the addition of the milk drink, because within an hour of the drink and energy balls, my body rejected and empty the lot out of me. Not a study and could just be that it was all too rich for my clean system? But in future, if the mouth feel is a little too rich, I think it’s best I don’t eat or drink anymore. I was aware of the richness in my stomach, then a little cramping, but was surprised how my system rejected it all so quickly. I can eat almonds, and dates whole, so can’t be a reaction to them.

    Interestingly I am about to do the test on cholesterol for eating almonds, did you see that episode of “Trust Me”? Don’t know if it’s still available, could have been on a year or so ago. Basically Dr Mosely highlighted that for some people, almonds can raise cholesterol. They don’t know why this happens to some and not others, but he suggested taking a cholesterol test when your system is clean of almonds, then eat almonds for a month and retest cholesterol and see if it’s affected. As Dr Mosely is a NHS doc, then my doctor is happy for me to test. I’ve decided 15 almonds a day is enough, and will continue to eat 1/2 an avocado nearly every other day. I eat whole plant nearly 100%, but if out and about and offered a biscuit, pastry etc, I have eaten every now and then. Be rude not to. But during my almond month test, I will not eat anything that is not just fruit, veg, grain or pulses. As the test is at my request, not my doctor’s, so not much point doing it, if I include a food that could affect or not the results, I just wouldn’t know.




    6
  5. Dr. Mark Hyman is still getting onto Dr. Oz promoting grass fed cow’s milk butter and coconut oil. Why does he still believe this stuff is healthy? He used to be a WFPB doc, I think.




    3
    1. I don’t listen to anything Dr. Oz promotes. He seems to promote anything that puts $$ in his pocket & whatever will get people to watch show. I understand wanting more viewership but promoting krap ? Seems he’d care more about his reputation.




      10
          1. I will never understand the nit picking arguments against a WFPB low oil diet. Just show me a study where someone reversed their chronic disease on anything BUT a low fat WFPB diet! There are none. This is the only diet that reverses disease, so why argue with it? People just won’t wake up (yet). Old habits die hard, I guess.




            15
            1. Debrashapiro, I am a vegan and WFPB and I do not consider myself low fat at all. I get lots of fat from whole plant foods and don’t worry about it at all when it’s from whole foods. On the rare occasions where I have oil, I do so very sparingly. I have reversed a lot of ailments in my personal life after going vegan and then WFPB vegan not low in fats from whole foods and am extremely healthy. I personally don’t believe that all fat is created equal, I think that whether it’s animal or plant sourced makes a world of difference. This is my experience and I don’t knock anyone on a low fat WFPB diet in the least! I’m happy for anyone who does well on whatever cruelty-free diet they choose. My point is only that WFPB is the most important factor, not necessarily being low fat. Maybe for something people they need to watch their fat intake from even healthy whole plant sources depending on personal health, I’m certainly not trying to advice anyone here, just sharing my experience.




              6
              1. That’s right! There is a huge difference between whole food fats and plant oils. We should not be arguing. There is a huge obesity problem in the US now and so I believe most people would benefit from a lower fat content diet. This is the diet that Dr. Barnard and Greger, McDougall and Esselstyn all recommend. Closer to a 80/10/10 ratio (carbs/protein/fat). Most omni’s and vegans still get about 30% or more of their calories from fat. Being obese is associated with many types of cancer as well as HTN and diabetes. To reverse diseases like diabetes, you do need to lose the myocellular lipids. Of course nuts, avocados, and seeds are great sources of fat. I just try to be mindful and not eat an excessive amount of these to maintain my healthy weight.




                4
      1. Dr. Oz always struck me as a Greger/Bernard/Campbell/Esselstyn wannabe. No oil, WFPB is working for me, and nothing the 2 shills (you know who you are) have to say about it is going to change that. I don’t agree with Dr. Greger 100% of the time (like his views on fasting and vaccines), but I’m always willing to hear him out. After 4 months of WFPB with no oils, oil makes me feel sick now anyway. But my fibromyalgia is gone, so who am I to argue with no animal products? Not to mention a BP of 104/64. Down 43 pts.

        I always thought that coconut oil promotion was garbage. Saturated fat is still fat. I used Cronometer once, and was astounded at the amount of fat in my diet, even though I had added none refined. Just a small handful of seeds/nuts on my cereal, and 1/4 an avocado on my vegetable salad, and I was up to 25%. Everything else I had that day was beans and grains, fruits and vegetables. I don’t need to chuck coconut oil on top of an already 25%.

        Funny thing, I thought a no oil diet would make my skin feel all dried out, but I’m having less problems with dry skin that I had 4 months ago.




        7
        1. Thank you for your testimony on a whole plant food diet and the rejection of oils. Your testimony helps to reaffirm in my mind and in the minds of many readers of this forum that we are on the right track in listening to Dr.
          Greger and taking heed to the research that he has shown us. I would like to encourage others on this forum to speak up and share how a whole plant food diet has helped them.




          7
    2. Grass feed butter is healthy that is why .
      journals.openedition.org/aof/7100
      go to first graph number 1 , shows 18 kg of butter per year and no heart disease according to Dr Esselstyne .




      2
      1. buster, I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you’re simply confused, and not deliberately trying to mislead people, but Dr. Esselstyn didn’t speak about “Scandinavian countries” in general, but specifically about Norway. Your link is about Denmark. The data for both countries from WW2 are different.




        11
        1. all the Scandinavian countries were the same , it was much talked about if you lived there like my wife’s family ,why is nobody sick ? they asked ? there was almost no need for doctors during those years and Esselstyne says those countries and then he says Norway , same thing in Finland and Sweden




          1
          1. “all the Scandinavian countries were the same” – you don’t have a source to back up that statement, have you?

            Look at the graphs in this video:

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_a1N_j39sqQ&t=13m4s

            “Denmark didn’t have any reduction in heart disease mortality during the war”

            It’s funny how one saturated fat and cholesterol denialist says that despite the decrease in animal food consumption, there was no reduction in heart disease, while the other says that there was no decrease in animal food consumption, and yet heart disease rates dropped during the war – and they are both totally wrong.

            Who needs facts when you have products to sell, right buster?




            11
            1. For the sake of clarity, and for those interested in the facts rather than promoting their business, the main important points are:

              1. Norway saw a significant reduction in the consumption of all animal foods except fish during WW2, and a corresponding decrease in heart disease mortality.

              The army of occupation imposed restrictions, which meant a substantial reduction in energy intake and consumption of fat, meat and milk, and an increase in consumption of fish, cereals, fresh vegetables and potatoes.”
              http://www.epi.umn.edu/cvdepi/photograph/mortality-from-circulatory-diseases-in-norway-in-1927-1948/

              2. Denmark had neither a reduction of dairy and eggs consumption during the war, nor a decrease in heart disease mortality during that period.

              The mortality from arterio-and cardiosclerosis declined in Finland, Norway and Sweden during the “lean” years of the war. It is clear that this is associated with a reduced consumption of eggs, butter and other foodstuffs rich in cholesterol… In Denmark, where the total fat consumption increased no fall was noticed in the death rate from arteriosclerosis during the war… There is much which goes to show that in Denmark, Sweden and the U.S.A. the consumption of eggs, butter, milk and other animal fats is at present too high and may involve serious risks for public health.”

              In Denmark, as a result of failure of the export market, the local consumption of butter and eggs rose considerably and, unlike the rest of Northern Europe, no significant reduction in the incidence of arteriosclerotic deaths was noted.”

              Thank you, buster, for encouraging me to look deeper into this and reveal the differences between Denmark and other Nordic countries during World War 2, with regard to both diet and heart disease mortality. This is a tiny drop in an ocean of information that demonstrates the critical role of saturated and animal fat in the development of heart disease.




              7
              1. Your welcome Ishay .
                By the way your first point Esselstyne never mentioned any increase in fish consumption and certainly not 200% and still no heart disease.
                Point two you should study again as it was only the capital of Denmark studied , not the whole country , very different in the northern parts and rural areas. There was very little sugar, oil, white flour anyplace in the north much like Norway people ate fish .
                Doctors in the north went from 30 patients a day to maybe 1 if they were lucky , but that is something that has been told to me for the last twenty years by my grandfather in law so you need not consider that evidence as you can’t find on pubmed




                0
                1. buster:
                  I’m not responsible for what someone else says or doesn’t say. However, Esselstyn is right that there was a drop in meat, dairy and total animal fat in Norway during the war. To me, it’s not surprising that adding vegetables, cutting back on dairy and replacing meat with fish could lead to less heart disease.

                  Regarding your comment:

                  Point two you should study again as it was only the capital of Denmark studied , not the whole country , very different in the northern parts and rural areas.

                  This is just your statement without reference, so nothing to respond to here.

                  And regarding this one:

                  so you need not consider that evidence

                  You are absolutely correct.




                  1
          2. buster

            Your statement that “all the Scandinavian countries were the same…Norway, same thing in Finland and Sweden.” suggests that you might benefit from reading up on what happened in that part of the world during World War II. If the German troops helping themselves to the dairy, meat and oil supplies is the issue, you might check which countries were actually occupied, which was neutral (and not occupied) and which was engaged in fighting on both sides at different periods, during the six year catastrophe.




            7
      2. WAIT… someone in the dairy industry is saying that “grass feed butter” is healthy?! I am shocked, truly shocked. Amazed even. I’m gonna have to ignore every scientific fact I’ve ever learned now and listen to buster about his industry and why the products he sells are healthy. SHH! Everyone quiet! I’m listening…




        7
      3. Grass fed butter isn’t healthy we know that.

        Ad wasn’t Esselstyn talking about WW! not WW2 anyway? The same principles probably apply though – death rates plummeted under conditions of strict rationing when total fat consumption substantially declined
        “Unlike the consumption of margarine, that of butter declined from 8,1 kg per capita in 1914 to 3,2 kg in 1916 and then rose sharply to 14,5 kg in 1918, as butter was rationed to counteract the loss of margarine. This led to an increase in butter consumption as rations were set at 250 g of butter per person per week (Beretning til Indenrigsministeren, [Report to the Minister of the Interior], 1919: 92). It was, however, not enough to outweigh the absence of margarine, and conjoined, the consumption of the two products fell from 23,9 kg per capita to 14,9 kg in 1918.”
        http://journals.openedition.org/aof/7100

        pretending that your link somehow shows that grass fed butter is healthy, is mistaken even deceptive. As is your continued failure to disclose in your posts that you are employed to promote dairy products onlie. Your poarticular dairy company wouldn’t sell grass-fed butter by any chanceP




        8
        1. TG, as far as I know, Caldwell Esselstyn usually mentions Norway during the Nazi occupation of WW2.
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOP_cMcaIYU

          Also, it’s interesting to note the special case of Denmark, that had been a major exporter of dairy prior to WW2. While their production declined during the war, export halted almost completely, so consumption of butter and eggs apparently increased. Consequently, unlike in other Nordic countries, there was no decline in heart disease mortality in Denmark during the war.

          The mortality from arterio-and cardiosclerosis declined in Finland, Norway and Sweden during the “lean” years of the war. It is clear that this is associated with a reduced consumption of eggs, butter and other foodstuffs rich in cholesterol… In Denmark, where the total fat consumption certainly declined but where the butter and egg consumption increased no fall was noticed in the death rate from arteriosclerosis during the war…”

          In Denmark, as a result of failure of the export market, the local consumption of butter and eggs rose considerably and, unlike the rest of Northern Europe, no significant reduction in the incidence of arteriosclerotic deaths was noted.”




          6
          1. Thanks Ishtay

            Yes, Esselstyn mentioned Norway in the context of WW2 but I thought that he also mentioned the WW1 Danish experience? However, my copy of Esselstyn’s book is back in Australia and I might well be confusing his comments with McDougall’s.
            https://www.drmcdougall.com/misc/2012nl/jul/lessons.html

            However Buster’s link was to an article about Denmark and he specifically states that Esselstyn said there was no heart disease in Denmark during the war. If Buster is correct on that (?), Esselstyn would have been referring to WW1.not WW2.




            2
            1. “However Buster’s link was to an article about Denmark and he specifically states that Esselstyn said there was no heart disease in Denmark during the war.”

              This is what buster posted, unless you’re referring to a different post:
              “I looked up Esselstyn on his page and he said that heart disease disappeared in the Scandinavian countries under the war in early 41 to about 45” – there was no mention of Denmark in his comment, and the years correspond to the second war. Then his link was indeed about Denmark, which explains the confusion. His assumption that “all the Scandinavian countries were the same” in this context appears to be false.

              But perhaps, who knows, someone documented the evidence in their bedroom, which would mean, obviously, that butter is back.




              2
              1. Thanks again Ishay. Yes, I was responding to Buster’s original post where he wrote

                “journals.openedition.org/aof/7100
                go to first graph number 1 , shows 18 kg of butter per year and no heart disease according to Dr Esselstyne “




                1
        2. The whole grass fed thing was an advertising puff invented to push animals foods. There is nothing natural about penning animals in a field so that thy have to eat grass/hay bales soiled with their own urine and faeces. This is why sheep struggle to get their heads through the wire to eat the clean grass the other side. In the wild these animals roamed and so they did not have to costume vegetation fouled by their own leavings, but hey, paleofreaks, chow it down.




          9
          1. gillian23, don’t forget the fun fact that on the very rare farms where animals roam within a certain area, that wildlife is massacred being shot down from a helicopter so as to not compete with the grass which otherwise there wouldn’t be enough of. Wild horses are one of many who are targeted. Predatory animals are also massacred in this way for the sake of this “free range” farming, such as wolves.




            5
  6. Its remarkable that some advocate coconut oil for leaky gut, considering the medium chain fatty acids found in coconut oil (caprylate, laurate, and especially caprate) have been studied for decades as drug absorption enhancers. They disrupt the tight junctions between enterocytes to increase absorption of large molecules, including proteins and short (20-base) DNA strands. Some reviews from the pharmaceutical development literature: 1, 2, 3, 4.




    14
  7. Recent Trust me test purports to prove that coconut oil raises HDL cholesterol despite heavy saturated fat content. Butter had negative effect as expected while olive oil was neutral.




    3
        1. So this is what you wish to billions of people in the world who eat coconut. So you wish them all dead. You are worse than ISIS. John go and get this guy/gal.




          0
          1. Wow, for someone with no filter, Jerry, you sure can’t take a joke! You’re here trolling all the time and promoting dangerous lies to people, so it was a joke… aimed at you.




            5
    1. First of all your vicious post and anger are indicative of a low fat diet. Secondly, you are right that I change physically, losing more fat as I am eating fat.




      2
        1. S – Thank you for your comment. Jerry Lewis has been absolutely nasty, vicious, denigrating, attacking. And now, when that same negativity lands in his lap he is incensed and insulted. What? Really?
          Jerry Lewis clearly has a character disorder of some sort. His social skills are at an extremely low level. People like him are described in the literature as “destructive personality”. This won’t change. He is who he is and people like him create misery and negativity wherever they go. People like him are happiest when they are miserable and can’t see how they’ve created this for themselves. Pathetic.




          0
      1. Thanks for the laughs, Jerry! Of course I don’t wish death upon you, but from what you post here, you are on a mission of self-destruction. The irony is all the information you really need is right in front of your eyes, but all that coconut oil is blurring your vision, it seems.




        11
          1. Someone points out that a lifestyle is destructive and that means that person is wishing death upon these people? Are you even TRYING to sound sane anymore?




            4
  8. When I was trying to fix my brain, I had tried eating coconut oil in smoothies and in cooking and in peanut butter, but I kept throwing up.

    I actually like coconut itself, but the oil just didn’t agree with me.

    However, this is about weight loss and I am currently trying the bio-hack of stimulating behind my ear with a Micropulse ICES M-1 Device and I lost an inch around my waist and hips in a few days. It is based on a bio-hack found with a different NASA researcher, whose product I think is called a Modius or something like that, but that device is electrical stimulation and the other NASA researcher, who invented the ICES device said that his device is 10,000 times more efficient than electrical devices, because electrical devices have trouble penetrating the skin.

    I am only on Day 4 of a two month self-trial, but I was already happy with the inch lost. Apparently the Modius stimulates the hypothalamus and works with 70% of people, so I feel like the ICES might work even better.

    But this is just my non-nutritional bio-hack two cents.




    0
  9. No doubt the coconut industry has a lot of lobbyist, etc. to promote the product like sugar industry did. Now, decades and POUNDS later, people have gotten wise to sugar. How long will it take to expose this “coconut is good for everything” myth? There is probably someone out there claiming it works better than Viagra. Just dip your johnson in a jar 2 x a day! And rub it on head to grow hair! My dog’s groomer told me she used it for skin abrasions instead of witch hazel or other traditional treatment on her and her kids and pets. I bit my tongue.




    8
    1. Personally, I don’t even think it moisturizes skin that well like the claims. I find shea butter does a much better job or other oils like argan or rose hips. I don’t really like the feeling coconut oil leaves on my skin once it’s absorbed, either. Definitely not my moisturizer of choice personally, though others love it. But I imagine it would be absolutely useless at best, on skin abrasions. Yikes.




      5
  10. The Coconut Oil Miracle
    https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/268184.The_Coconut_Oil_Miracle
    explains the science behind the unique chemical composition of coconut (and oil is used to refer to the whole flesh, milk pressed from it etc. not just the greasy stuff you might think of as oil).

    There is a lot of science in this book and I can’t believe that all of it is ‘wrong’ and ‘cherry picking’. It quotes studies and literature that shows coconut oil can help with lots of things like nutrient absorption, immune function and there is a section on its effects on weight and cholesterol and how it isn’t the evil “animal-fat” in disguise that you might think… but rather a nice good plant…




    4
    1. All fat can help with nutrient absorption from my understanding, so of course coconut oil (or a whole coconut) could do that. Dr. Greger has another video on coconut oil here on whether it raises cholesterol. Going by memory, coconut oil does raise good cholesterol but also raises bad, but butter is worse for cholesterol. So if memory serves, REPLACING animal fat like butter with coconut oil can lower cholesterol, but simply adding it in addition to your regular diet, it can raise it.
      From my understanding, plant oils do contain numerous compounds, some vitamins (often vitamin e in the case of oils like sunflower and olive), phytonutrients, etc. But if one chooses to use them, it should be sparingly because they are a whole fat and can negatively impact arterial function.




      6
    2. This book was written by a bloke who now makes his living selling coconut oil and writing books about it . I don’t know where his “Dr” piece of paper came from but before he changed to selling coconut oil he apparently made a living as a professional clown. He wrote books about that too. He called himself Dr Dropo then.

      I would really question the credibility of anything this person claims.




      2
  11. Taken from Healthline:
    Some evidence suggests coconut oil can reduce the symptoms of type 2 diabetes. A 2009 animal study found that a diet rich with medium-chain fatty acids, such as coconut oil, could help prevent obesity and fight insulin resistance — both of which lead to type 2 diabetes. A more recent study using rats showed a reduction in blood glucose levels.

    Researchers also found that medium-chain fatty acids could lower fat buildup and sustain insulin action in fat tissue and muscle.

    There’s a downside, though. The rodents also showed greater fat buildup and higher insulin resistance in the liver. More research is needed on the relationship between coconut oil and type 2 diabetes.

    A separate animal study published in 2010 found that rats with diabetes that consumed coconut oil had lower cholesterol levels and improved glucose tolerance.




    2
    1. Well, heroin can help with some symptoms of heroin addiction too,

      But heroin causes heroin addiction in the first place.

      While studies do show that coconut can help with some symptoms/markers of diabetes, it appears to make others worse (as your quote showed); And high saturated fat diets do appear to increase risk for type 2 diabetes. And cardiovascular diease for that matter. As a panel of leading sicntists and reserachers recently observed:

      ” A recent systematic review found 7 controlled trials, including the 2 just mentioned, that compared coconut oil with monounsaturated or polyunsaturated
      oils.97 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.”
      http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/circulationaha/early/2017/06/15/CIR.0000000000000510.full.pdf




      1
  12. Dear HealthAdvocate: You mention studies but give no citations just dates. These studies may not be well designed or at all convincing. These are many interested in making money promoting coconut oil, so careful review of claims and study design are needed to give any credence to studies. This is especially true with a subject such as coconut oil is so controversial and so heavily marketed.




    7
  13. The idea of measuring the waist circumference to see if coconut oil works may be flaw. When losing weight, losing abdominal fat first, that is, burning belly fat before fat from other other parts of the body, depends on factors like genetics, history, condition, etc.. You would get different results with different people though waist circumference is what most people are interested.




    4
    1. Well I believe that the claims that specific in saying that coconut oil targets abdominal fat and that’s why they tested for this. Those are the claims I always read but didn’t pay much attention to, that coconut oil “melts belly fat.”




      2
    1. I worded my question poorly. I was wondering if whole coconuts would cause insulin resistance as well. But I’m thinking that probably isn’t the case. I would be curious to know more about how coconut milk compares to coconut oil though.




      0
  14. Can you clarify if this study includes coconut milk, which is the precursor of coconut oil. I love to put coconut milk in many of my recipes. It just makes the food tastes much better.




    2
    1. Coconut in general is safe and beneficial in any form. But just as any food, you want unprocessed coconut, as virgin as possible and non hydrogenated coconut. Hydrogenation will change coconut fat into transfat.

      I read that the coconut milk brand from Thailand called Arrow is safe. I use coconut milk from Trader Joe. In fact, I use it everyday as cream for my morning coffee.

      http://www.coconut-oil-central.com/hydrogenated-coconut-oil.html




      1
    1. MCT oil is the best part of coconut oil. I buy the virgin MCT standalone to put into my coffee. I don’t like anything premixed together because I don’t know the dosage.




      0
  15. The Nutrition Facts moderators really need to start intervening in the comment section. The amount of trolling from the same people week in week out is getting out of control. Their main goal seems to distract from the message Dr. Greger is promoting and bring people down endless rabbit holes and into useless debates.




    15
    1. M85, thank you for your comment. I agree totally. I have written to NF via the help section about specific issues with the trolls on a few occassions. It is getting beyond tiresome. Suffering the abusive repetitive retorts from these same people day in, day out is not amusing, nor is it edifying for the reader simply seeking information relating to their question. NF forums used to exude a very positive and encouraging atmosphere for new and returning visitors alike. Not any more… it’s not healthy.

      M85, as an aside, did you check out “Darryl”s post above regarding the effect of coconut oil on the lining of the digestive system essentially (if I read it correctly) causing leaky gut? Really interesting. I know I felt better within days of eliminating animal products and oils from my diet.




      12
    2. Totally agree M85, it has gotten ridiculous. In fact, I just read Jerry Lewis making a post simply to mock someone’s user name… why is that allowed here? Definitely interferes with the integrity of the comment section.




      12
    3. M85 – I, along with the other posters, agree with you. I really wish Dr. Greger would step in and get some active Moderators. The majority of the “conversation” on the site today was taken up with talk back to trolls and defending Dr. Greger. We really do need the Moderators to step it up. It’s plain to see the absence of previous posters who used to contribute to an active and positive conversation. They don’t bother to chime in anymore. The relentless attacking by Jerry Lewis and a couple of others has turned this “conversation” into something to avoid.
      This dialogue stream is quickly becoming a negatively polluted river.
      Wake up Dr. Greger!




      2
  16. Bit of a paper tiger here. Why would anyone eat fat to lose weight? Gram for gram it is twice the calories of carbs. If it is a health benefit we are looking for then there is an argument that coconut oil is alone amongst the non animal fat oils as not being inflammatory. Is it?




    2
    1. There is an awful lot of nonsense circulating on the internet about fats, oils and inflammation. Many of the claims are deliberately misleading or based on old animal studies. As this review on fatty acids and inflammation notes:

      “The impact of specific fatty acids on inflammation may be central to how dietary fats affect health. Three key fatty acid–inflammation interactions are briefly described. First, the evidence suggests that saturated fatty acids induce inflammation in part by mimicking the actions of LPS. Second, the often-repeated claim that dietary linoleic acid promotes inflammation was not supported in a recent systematic review of the evidence. Third, an explanation is offered for why omega-3 (n–3) polyunsaturated fatty acids are so much less anti-inflammatory in humans than in mice.”
      http://advances.nutrition.org/content/6/3/293S.full

      Coconut oil is high in saturated fats and is thefore likely to be highly inflammatory while other vegetable oils are not.

      It is important to be careful about claims regarding inflammation. There are various measures and tests for inflammation – pick the right tests and you can make any foodstuff appear to be non-inflammatory.




      2
  17. THIS IS A QUESTION ABOUT OAT MILK CHOLESTEROL
    I know oat helps to lower cholesterol. Cholesterol binds to the oat fiber and is eliminated. But what about oat milk? The fiber in oat milk is cut in several very small parts in the blender. Does this broken fiber still work to help reduce cholesterol?
    Thank you!




    2
  18. Hi, AndreaBG. Although intact whole grains are better for feeding our beneficial intestinal bacteria, it might be that ground up fiber reduces cholesterol better, because it has more surface area to absorb water and trap cholesterol for elimination. I don’t know that this has been specifically tested, and so I don’t have a definitive answer for you, but the literature I found suggested this is possible. I hope that helps!




    1
  19. I’m not necessarily disagreeing with the information in the video, but I’ve read so many other article – also citing scientific studies – the coconut oil helps obesity and may help diabetes. Here’s just one example from Healthline:
    Some evidence suggests coconut oil can reduce the symptoms of type 2 diabetes. A 2009 animal study found that a diet rich with medium-chain fatty acids, such as coconut oil, could help prevent obesity and fight insulin resistance — both of which lead to type 2 diabetes. A more recent study using rats showed a reduction in blood glucose levels.

    Researchers also found that medium-chain fatty acids could lower fat buildup and sustain insulin action in fat tissue and muscle.

    There’s a downside, though. The rodents also showed greater fat buildup and higher insulin resistance in the liver. More research is needed on the relationship between coconut oil and type 2 diabetes.

    A separate animal study published in 2010 found that rats with diabetes that consumed coconut oil had lower cholesterol levels and improved glucose tolerance.




    0
    1. Animal studies are notoriously inaccurate, and sometimes wildly divergent from human studies and day-to-day reality. I’d base my diet on human studies – clinical, epidemiological, etc. As well as personal experience.




      0
  20. Hello. I just wanted to know if Dr. Gregor has any updated opinion on Juice Plus+ Whole Food supplements? There were a couple very old videos but nothing recent.
    Thank you,
    MariH




    1
  21. In how not to die, Greger discusses how an alkaline environment is useful in reducing kidney stones, but said in a probiotic video that an acidic environment was important for gut flora production. Do I start drinking lemon water or…?




    0
  22. I would love to see Dr. Greger research and share his findings on the “Budwig” treatment protocol for cancer and specifically explain how emulsifying flax oil and cottage cheese, with a handheld blender, removes the dairy component as suggested by its advocates, including alternative cancer clinics which promote consuming the concoction as crucial to putting cancer in remission. Is good science behind it or, are the claims baseless and misleading believers? Put Budwig to the test! :)




    1
  23. Dr. Greger cherry picked this presentation because Table 4 where coconut oil was compared to safflower oil he said no differences. However, he didn’t point out that the waistlines of coconut oil eaters went down -0.4 and the waist line of safflower oil eaters went up +0.9. Compared to all other measurements which were the same, this waist difference is significant. I love and read everything Dr. Greger sends in his News and videos, just like I do Dr. Joseph Mercola and Dr. Mark Hyman. ALL cherry pick to support their positions. It’s a natural thing to do. The reader needs to discern what’s appropriate for the reader and blend the best of all three.

    Our ancestors were not vegans nor vegetarians. How would they have ingested the vitamins, minerals and amino acids only available from land and animals? They didn’t have Supplements back then.




    0
  24. Here’s a study to add to discussion (I’m not taking a ‘side’ as science works best with an open mind and data is always evolving). I only scan comments as they’ve become far more negative vs constructive. But for what’s its worth these are sections from the ‘Discussion’ of study I’ve linked below:

    “To our knowledge, this is the first study not only to compare the effects of these three dietary factors in mice, but also to perform genome-wide expression profiling and metabolomics analysis of livers from animals fed a soybean-oil enriched diet. Our results indicate that, contrary to expectation, PUFA-rich soybean oil is more obesogenic and diabetogenic than coconut oil which consists of primarily saturated fat.”

    “Furthermore, our results show that soybean oil is able to induce these negative metabolic effects even in the context of coconut oil, which is rich in medium-chain triglycerides (MCTs) which have been shown to be anti-obesogenic, anti-inflammatory and insulin sensitizing.”

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4511588/




    0
  25. The way the narrator speaks is unsettling. It sounds like he’s grunting. His hesitation for effect is forced and annoying. Please use a different narrator.




    0
  26. Please help me!!  I have been diagnosed with Parkinson’s.  What is the cure/treatment for Parkinson’s?  In addition, I have folliculitis (facial redness) and arthritis of the finger joints. I’m 66 years old and live about 30 miles east of Albuquerque New Mexico. This condition does not run in my family. Thank you very much for all your help.  God bless you.




    0
  27. Please help me!!  I have been diagnosed with Parkinson’s.  What is the cure/treatment for Parkinson’s?  In addition, I have folliculitis (facial redness) and arthritis of the finger joints. I’m 66 years old and live about 30 miles east of Albuquerque New Mexico. Thank you very much for all your help.  God bless you.




    0

Leave a Reply

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

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This