Recent FDA action on trans fats, moving toward a ban and signaling the beginning of the end of the trans fat era, is very welcome and, if anything, overdue. Trans fats are not just harmful in their own right but vividly illustrate much of what bedevils modern nutrition, or as Michael Pollan has called it, "nutritionism." Before getting back to getting rid of trans fat and what lies ahead, let's look back to see how we got into this mess in the first place.
Trans fat was first introduced into the food supply in an apparently innocent attempt to reduce the adverse effects and mimic the desirable commercial properties – stability and high melting point – of saturated fats. The trans fat era was ushered in by food packages that boldly proclaimed "no tropical oils!" The so-called tropical oils, coconut and palm, had in turn been introduced in the late 1980s to replace highly saturated animal fats. Palm kernel oil and coconut oil are among the very few highly saturated plant oils.
More
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
3 comments:
The author of the article should do a little research on the subject. The scare about trans fats was a result of a study done by only two people.
During the 1990s, two Harvard researchers, Walter Willett and Alberto Ascherio, began publishing a series of epidemiologic studies claiming to link consumption of trans fats with increased risk of heart disease. In 2002, the National Institute of Medicine issued a report warning that there was no safe level of trans fat consumption.
There is no credible scientific evidence whatsoever showing that trans fats cause or increase the risk of heart disease.
The vast majority of the studies of trans fats involving human populations (i.e., epidemiology) have been conducted by Willett and/or Ascherio. Despite their results purporting to link trans fat consumption with increased risk of heart disease, these studies are not credible because:
◾Statistical noise. Their results all fall within the realm of statistical noise, as determined by the traditional standards of science and statistics.
◾Garbage in, garbage out. None of the consumption and/or medical data in any of the studies is sufficiently reliable. No one knows how much trans fat any study subject consumed or over what period of time. No one knows the cause or nature of any of the heart disease among the studies’ subjects. Without these key data, it is impossible to attribute heart disease to trans fat consumption with any degree of confidence.
You are just too stupid to know what to eat--so listen to the government that loves you, wants to take care of you cradle to grave, and drink your Kool-Aid.
"There is no credible scientific evidence whatsoever showing that trans fats cause or increase the risk of heart disease.
The vast majority of the studies of trans fats involving human populations (i.e., epidemiology) have been conducted by Willett and/or Ascherio"
Funny. 20 seconds on google scholar shows your claim here is incorrect. But I will say that people are all full of crap when it comes to diets. "Eat right and excercise". It's not rocket science. Then again, I guess if I were Michelle Obama making this statement, this would be the advice of an evil socialist dictator according to this crowd.
Post a Comment