Speaking as someone who two days ago hard-boiled 18 eggs, and now has only 1 egg left…
…I knew it! See? Why the scienticians don’t listen to me, I don’t know…
I’m waiting for the industry sponsored food pyramid that tells Americans they’re too fat because they don’t eat enough fattening food.
If you read what they are actually saying, it’s still that saturated fats are bad. It’s just cholesterol as such in isolation which is not bad.
So butter is still pretty much the Food of Maximum Evil. With bacon coming a close second. The eggs, if not cooked in butter or bacon grease, are much better than previously feared.
I’m not talking about federal guidelines, but the general idea that dietary cholesterol itself has minimal impact on blood cholesterol levels. I see posts on the SDMB from as early as 2001 where this seems to be fairly accepted knowledge. That’s what I’m talking about.
meh, I eat this all the time and have low cholesterol, so a lot has to do with genetics me thinks?
Well, I’m dead anyway.
Shit.
Perhaps you’re right, and mainstream scientific opinion, as reflected among certain message board participants, had shifted by 2001, and today’s news only demonstrates fringe groups like the US government’s Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee falling into line. 
More seriously, nutrition research is famously all over the map. There have been studies disputing dietary cholesterol for some time, but I think today’s news represents a shift in the consensus assessment of the direction in which the weight of the research leans.
I understand. I guess I’m just not surprised by this, as I’ve been seeing the research reflect this for at least a decade. I expect a similar thing will happen with salt reduction guidelines as well. We’ll see.
Hm, being diabetic I also avoid random carbs and sugars, and my lipid profiles are excellent also. Makes one wonder:dubious:
I’ve been saying this for years. It didn’t take very much investigation to find out this truth. Suck it, health nazis!
I’ve always assumed this, based entirely on the purely anecdotal evidence of my grandfathers. My maternal grandfather ate a lot of “healthy alternative” foods, was often in ill health, and passed away in his 70s. My paternal grandfather eats bacon, eggs, salty meats, and sweets daily (albeit in moderate portions). He’s been in great health for his whole life, played tennis into his 80s, and is pushing 100.
I don’t think there is any consensus at all that butter is “the food of maximum evil.”
The other white meat.
What’s your sugar intake like?
IMO Atkins was ridiculed not for what he promoted, but for what the popular media said he promoted.
Not so clear cut. Association of Dietary, Circulating, and Supplement Fatty Acids With Coronary Risk: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
I’m hypoglycemic and have the same experience.
The problem remains that recommendations like this are by necessity one size fits all and humanity consists of much variety.
The science has always been that some people, a minority, are quite sensitive to dietary cholesterol intact and respond amazingly well to significant restriction of it, and many are not. Even 15 years ago the American Heart Association was far from vilifying dietary cholesterol, stating it as follows:
Their main point was to emphasize diet plans that consists of lots of vegetables and fruits, fish, legumes, nuts, some lean meats and to limit foods that contain high amounts of saturated fats. Again the advice in 2000:
They also have always recognized that they were working off the best available information but that it was far from settled science:
Really there has been no major sea shift so much as a refocus of the messaging. This recent bit is if anything very retro, a focus on a single dietary component as “good” or “bad”; the change over the years has been a greater understanding that we eat and are impacted by complete nutrition patterns, not single parts. Better understanding that processed meats are particularly bad now though.
How the media messages this stuff is another story.