Author Topic: Coconut oil misinformation needs to be tackled at a deeper level  (Read 2088 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline God Bomb

  • Keeps Priorities Straight
  • ***
  • Posts: 453
I don't think supporters of cocnut oil dispute or are unaware of the saturated fat content.  They have their own sources telling them that MCT oils are metabolised differently to other sat fats.  OR they believe the saturated fats are correlated to heart disease and not the cause.
Fell deeds awake. Now for wrath, now for ruin, and the red dawn.

Offline daniel1948

  • Hasn't
  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 6858
  • Cat Lovers Against the Bomb
Re: Coconut oil misinformation needs to be tackled at a deeper level
« Reply #1 on: June 25, 2017, 10:08:39 AM »
I think they deny the correlation entirely, and claim that saturated fats reduce your chances of heart disease. I think some of them also claim that high serum cholesterol protects you from heart disease rather than causing it. I'm sure some will chime in here. I do have more confidence in the AHA than in people who post on chat boards or the isolated papers they cite, taken out of the context of the full range of all published papers.
Daniel
----------------
"Anyone who has ever looked into the glazed eyes of a soldier dying on the battlefield will think long and hard before starting a war."
-- Otto von Bismarck

Offline CarbShark

  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 8414
Coconut oil misinformation needs to be tackled at a deeper level
« Reply #2 on: June 25, 2017, 12:37:11 PM »
I can tell you what this supporter of coconut oil thinks.

I don't think supporters of cocnut oil dispute or are unaware of the saturated fat content. 

Exactly. Fully aware of and do not dispute or deny the saturated fat content.
Quote
They have their own sources telling them that MCT oils are metabolised differently to other sat fats. 

I'm not sure what you mean by our "own sources" but it is a fact that a percentage of oils in coconut oil are Medium Chain Triglycerides, and it is also a fact that they are metabolized differently than other fats (saturated and unsaturated).

The body does not store MCTs. Triglycerides from other fatty acids, yes, but not MCTs. So the liver converts MCTs directly to ketone bodies, which the body burns for fuel readily. Several organs (including the brain and the heart) do quite well burning ketone bodies. The heart pumps more blood for the same amount of calories, for example.

The brain will always need some glucose to burn, but parts of the brain can also burn ketones at the same time. This is probably why ketogenic diets have been found effective for epilepsy and other brain related disorders. There is on going and promising research on coconut oil, MCTs, ketones and ketogenic diets used as therapies for alzheimers, parkinsons, autism and cancer.

Quote
OR they believe the saturated fats are correlated to heart disease and not the cause.

Actually the belief is that saturated fats are not correlated to CVD, and not the cause. (With sugar, not so much.)

I think they deny the correlation entirely, and claim that saturated fats reduce your chances of heart disease.

Yes about disputing the correlation to CVD. It's a Maybe on SFs reducing risk.

One would reduce risk by eliminating sugar and flours and other fast carbs from the diet, and replacing those calories with fats (including saturated fats).

Whether saturated fats themselves actually lower the risks for CVD  is not been studied enough to say conclusively.

But you are right, some of my fellow travelers think it does help reduce CVDS.

Quote
I think some of them also claim that high serum cholesterol protects you from heart disease rather than causing it.


That's an enormous oversimplification (Of both sides of the issue, actually.)

Total serum cholesterol levels are irrelevant to risks for CVD.

High HDL and low TG seem to be protective.

LDL partial size is very relevant.

Small dense LDL particles are inflammatory and linked to CVD.

Large buoyant LDL particles are not, and may be as protective of CVD as HDL.

The small dense LDL particles are usually associated with low HDL and high TG, which come from a high carb (sugars, starches, grains) low fat diet.

Large buoyant LDL particles are usually associated with HDL and low TG (which comes from a high fat, low sugar, low carb diet).

Quote
I'm sure some will chime in here. I do have more confidence in the AHA than in people who post on chat boards or the isolated papers they cite, taken out of the context of the full range of all published papers.

Sometimes it troubles me how much skeptics rely on authority without looking any deeper.

The AHA is guilty of the exact thing you're accusing those who disagree with them of.

Out of the 30 studies of the effects of Saturated fat, they rejected all but four, which were all started in the '60s and the last one completed and published in 1973.

Here's a few relevant links from my posts in the discussion of the topic in another thread:


Here's a link  to an article by Gary Taubes on the topic, but don't take his word for it. Do some research.
http://www.cardiobrief.org/2017/06/16/guest-post-vegetable-oils-francis-bacon-bing-crosby-and-the-american-heart-association/

Skepticism should be more than parroting authorities in science.

In addition to the Taubes article, linked previously, and the aticles linked below, here's a couple good brief summaries of the critiques of the AMA paper, not offered as evidence or authority, but they simply phrased it better than I could:

Malcolm Kendrick:
Quote
"To be more scientific, Gary Taubes takedown is pretty good. My own take on this is that it relies entirety on four studies, the most recent of which completed in 1972 (Finnish mental hosptial study), which was not randomized, controlled, or blinded. They have simply ignored contradictory studies."

Paul Meyer:
Quote
"The AHA had a committee do a meta-analysis, a study of studies, to justify the anti-sat fat position. Taubes pointed out they excluded something like 26 out 30 studies and the ones they picked had serious issues (in a couple, these were experiments without a control group, a serious no-no). BTW, they had to go back to the 60's to find studies to their liking. Also, the AHA was apparently not interested in looking at overall mortality, did the interventions actually save anyone's life which is especially important if you are asking them to alter a long standing part of traditional diets (i.e. telling them to exclude sat fats)."

For fat’s sake, don’t follow those guidelines! - Alliance for Natural Health International
http://anhinternational.org/2017/06/21/fats-sake-dont-follow-guidelines/

Diet war veterans last stand. Recent saturated fat attack a blast from the past | HealthInsightUK
http://healthinsightuk.org/2017/06/23/diet-war-veterans-last-stand-recent-saturated-fat-attack-a-blast-from-the-past/

American Heart Association: Let's create dietary policy based on the flimsiest of science | Dr. William Davis
http://www.wheatbellyblog.com/2017/06/american-heart-association-saturated-fat/

Another good critique of the AMA article, including the section on coconut oil, this one from Larry Husten at CardioBrief.

My Beef With The AHA’s Saturated Fat Recommendations
http://www.cardiobrief.org/2017/06/21/my-beef-with-the-ahas-saturated-fat-recommendations/

Quote
The only evidence against coconut oil cited by the authors is that it raises LDL levels. Let’s put aside for the moment the question of whether this by itself warrants this type of action. The problem is that once again the authors cherry pick their evidence. They choose to focus on the surrogate endpoint that supports their view but dismiss another surrogate endpoint that works against their view. They bury the fact that in addition to raising LDL coconut oil also raises HDL, the so-called “good” cholesterol. They dismiss HDL because, as they correctly note, several trials have failed to demonstrate that raising HDL is beneficial. But coconut oil has never been tested for clinical endpoints, and although HDL no longer appears to play a causal role in cardiovascular disease it still appears to play an important prognostic role. It is still entirely plausible that the HDL-raising properties of coconut oil may be beneficial, outweighing the likely negative effects of the LDL increase. Their conclusion is thus entirely unwarranted: “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.” This may be a reasonable scientific hypothesis. It is not, by any means, a scientific fact.
« Last Edit: June 25, 2017, 02:56:32 PM by estockly »
and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just a guy who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

Offline lonely moa

  • A rather tough old bird.
  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4586
Re: Coconut oil misinformation needs to be tackled at a deeper level
« Reply #3 on: June 26, 2017, 03:37:22 PM »
And speaking of authority:

Quote
A meta-analysis of prospective epidemiologic studies showed that there is no significant evidence for concluding that dietary saturated fat is associated with an increased risk of CHD or CVD. More data are needed to elucidate whether CVD risks are likely to be influenced by the specific nutrients used to replace saturated fat.


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20071648

The lead author, Krauss, is the guy who figured out LDL, HDL and their subfractions.  This is not news.
"Pull the goalie", Malcolm Gladwell.

Offline God Bomb

  • Keeps Priorities Straight
  • ***
  • Posts: 453
Re: Coconut oil misinformation needs to be tackled at a deeper level
« Reply #4 on: February 12, 2018, 02:50:17 AM »
carbshark, thanks for reply.

Sorry to bump old thread but this is another example of people arguing across each other.  Steve thinks he's pointing out why coconut oil is actually worse than any other oil because of the saturated fat content, but the people advocating for it already know this.  A case of not understanding what you're fighting.
I'm not taking sides here BTW. 
Fell deeds awake. Now for wrath, now for ruin, and the red dawn.

Offline John Albert

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4328
Re: Coconut oil misinformation needs to be tackled at a deeper level
« Reply #5 on: February 12, 2018, 09:32:51 AM »
CarbShark has also apparently received most of his "knowledge" about nutrition from low carb diet advocates. He's not a doctor or a dietician and his opinions mostly run contrary to that of the medical establishment. So it may be wise to take his opinions with a grain of salt.

Offline God Bomb

  • Keeps Priorities Straight
  • ***
  • Posts: 453
Re: Coconut oil misinformation needs to be tackled at a deeper level
« Reply #6 on: February 12, 2018, 08:35:23 PM »
CarbShark has also apparently received most of his "knowledge" about nutrition from low carb diet advocates. He's not a doctor or a dietician and his opinions mostly run contrary to that of the medical establishment. So it may be wise to take his opinions with a grain of salt.

Is anyone in this thread a doctor or dietician?
Fell deeds awake. Now for wrath, now for ruin, and the red dawn.

Offline John Albert

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4328
Re: Coconut oil misinformation needs to be tackled at a deeper level
« Reply #7 on: February 12, 2018, 08:54:18 PM »
CarbShark has also apparently received most of his "knowledge" about nutrition from low carb diet advocates. He's not a doctor or a dietician and his opinions mostly run contrary to that of the medical establishment. So it may be wise to take his opinions with a grain of salt.

Is anyone in this thread a doctor or dietician?

Not to my knowledge. But if you look at CarbShark's post, he's touted himself as a "supporter of coconut oil" and proceeded to make a series of technical statements on his own authority as if he's an expert on the subject, despite having no credentials whatsoever. 

On the contrary, most major health organizations around the world still conclude that coconut oil is shown to raise levels of LDL cholesterol, which is known to be a leading cause of cardiovascular disease. This is well-established science with many decades of clinical evidence behind it. A few sparse studies and dissenting opinions from fad diet evangelists don't overturn that.
« Last Edit: February 12, 2018, 08:57:30 PM by John Albert »

Offline God Bomb

  • Keeps Priorities Straight
  • ***
  • Posts: 453
Re: Coconut oil misinformation needs to be tackled at a deeper level
« Reply #8 on: February 12, 2018, 09:01:20 PM »
Yeah, I was just interested to see if an informed person could look at both sides and explain how there is such a monumental difference of opinion when all the evidence is on the table for everyone to see. 
Fell deeds awake. Now for wrath, now for ruin, and the red dawn.

Offline John Albert

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4328
Re: Coconut oil misinformation needs to be tackled at a deeper level
« Reply #9 on: February 12, 2018, 09:49:39 PM »
I'd love to get Mark Crislip in here to take a hard, critical look at these studies.

Offline lonely moa

  • A rather tough old bird.
  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4586
Re: Coconut oil misinformation needs to be tackled at a deeper level
« Reply #10 on: February 12, 2018, 10:59:16 PM »
I'd love to get Mark Crislip in here to take a hard, critical look at these studies.

Cochrane already has.
"Pull the goalie", Malcolm Gladwell.

Offline CarbShark

  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 8414
Re: Coconut oil misinformation needs to be tackled at a deeper level
« Reply #11 on: February 13, 2018, 10:29:10 AM »
CarbShark has also apparently received most of his "knowledge" about nutrition from low carb diet advocates. He's not a doctor or a dietician and his opinions mostly run contrary to that of the medical establishment. So it may be wise to take his opinions with a grain of salt.

Is anyone in this thread a doctor or dietician?

Not to my knowledge. But if you look at CarbShark's post, he's touted himself as a "supporter of coconut oil" and proceeded to make a series of technical statements on his own authority as if he's an expert on the subject, despite having no credentials whatsoever. 

In the context of this discussion, the OP used the term "supporter of coconut oil" and wondered what those people think.

And I began my post explaining "this is what I think."

I know you're not interested in what I think, but I believe the OP is
Quote

On the contrary, most major health organizations around the world still conclude that coconut oil is shown to raise levels of LDL cholesterol, which is known to be a leading cause of cardiovascular disease. This is well-established science with many decades of clinical evidence behind it. A few sparse studies and dissenting opinions from fad diet evangelists don't overturn that.

Here is a good, well researched and footnoted critique of that article.


Saturated Fats and CVD: AHA Convicts, We Say Acquit
and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just a guy who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

Offline CarbShark

  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 8414
Re: Coconut oil misinformation needs to be tackled at a deeper level
« Reply #12 on: February 13, 2018, 11:35:13 AM »
and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just a guy who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

Offline John Albert

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4328
Re: Coconut oil misinformation needs to be tackled at a deeper level
« Reply #13 on: February 13, 2018, 03:28:40 PM »
I'd love to get Mark Crislip in here to take a hard, critical look at these studies.

Cochrane already has.

Alright, but I'd like to hear Crislip's response as well. 

Offline CarbShark

  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 8414
Re: Coconut oil misinformation needs to be tackled at a deeper level
« Reply #14 on: February 13, 2018, 04:28:20 PM »
I'd love to get Mark Crislip in here to take a hard, critical look at these studies.

Cochrane already has.

Alright, but I'd like to hear Crislip's response as well.

Well, ask him?
and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just a guy who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

 

personate-rain