The U.S. government is poised to withdraw longstanding warnings about cholesterol
Saw this on FOX Business as I was working out in the gym. Any MDs want to weigh in on this? They just realized they were talking out of their ass for 40 years? What’s the skinny?
They figured out that eating cholesterol doesn’t give you cholesterol, just like eating pork doesn’t turn you into a pig.
NM. DP based on faulty site message.
So one of those Egg Council creeps got to them too, huh?
the corpse of Ancel Keys should be dug up and killed again.
Good, now everyone can STFU about my butter.
I blame the early cholesterol hysteria for part of my Dad’s issues later (although he could have just not buttered everything :smack:). Before he had any cholesterol issues it prompted the switch to margarine as a one for one replacement. That was back when margarine was basically transfat and yellow dye. With the benefit of hindsight, the results were what we’d expect now with all that transfat in his system.
mmmm bacon cooked in butter with extra eggs…
Ha! Have you taken a look at the original food pyramid? They were wrong on just about everything. Don’t forget your 4 daily servings of white bread!
Also, while you might want our MD’s to weigh in, they’re not necessarily more qualified any more than you or me.
Hasn’t this been fairly well-known for awhile? I guess they’re now making it official, but I seem to recall hearing at least a decade ago that dietary cholesterol has little to do with blood cholesterol levels. IANA doctor, though.
At least the original food pyramid made recommendations. Now, the official food pyramid says “Eat lots of starches, unless starches are bad for you, and in that case eat very little of them”.
And yeah, this is old news. It’s been known for decades that dietary cholesterol has very little direct relationship with cholesterol levels in the body. What complicates matters is that fat, especially saturated fat, can contribute to bodily cholesterol levels, and foods high in cholesterol are often also high in saturated fat.
That’s how science is supposed to work. New evidence says the old understanding was wrong, so they change it.
Yep but also remember that “facts” in nutritional guidelines was flawed in the first place and pushed by big sugar, grain or whatever.
I draw your attention to a Scientific American article that goes onto say salt aint that bad.
This week a meta-analysis of seven studies involving a total of 6,250 subjects in the American Journal of Hypertension found no strong evidence that cutting salt intake reduces the risk for heart attacks, strokes or death in people with normal or high blood pressure. In May European researchers publishing in the Journal of the American Medical Association reported that the less sodium that study subjects excreted in their urine—an excellent measure of prior consumption—the greater their risk was of dying from heart disease. These findings call into question the common wisdom that excess salt is bad for you, but the evidence linking salt to heart disease has always been tenuous.
Oh the food pyramid is another one that big grain unduly influenced!
Damn you, Big Egg!
Bravo to you fair poster. One of my favorite episodes ever.
yeah, until they change their minds about that too. I’d like to see a study on the effects of saturated fat intake in the absence of stuffing your face with sugars and starches.
This federal panel renewed the dietary cholesterol warning five years ago. Apparently they have decided that the weight of the evidence now tilts the other way.
Pharmaceutical commercials have been characterizing cholesterol levels as having two sources (diet and genetics) for the last several years. Overall, I think it’s fair to say that it’s old news that genetics can influence one’s levels, but the decision to eliminate diet from concern is new.
I would as well. I have excellent blood lipids despite 60 to 65% of my caloric intake coming as fats. What I don’t eat are sugar and starch.
It’s not like that! Eggs have gotten a rather bad rap lately.