Coconut oil..........look again.

A

Argy

New member
ImStillMags wrote:

Baloney. There are quack "diet" experts who claim coconut
oil is healthful, but the scientific evidence is against
them. They peddle this line because that's how you
get notoriety in the diet field. You don't famous
by agreeing with mainstream medicine and peer-reviewed
literature. You get famous by saying the conventional
wisdom is wrong. Unfortunately, a lot of people are
getting suckered into believing these crackpot theories.

This study blames the MUCH higher rate of
cardiovascular mortality in Singapore as compared
to Hong Kong on consumption of saturated fats
including coconut oil.

Eur J Epidemiol. 2001;17(5):469-77.
Differences in all-cause, cardiovascular and
cancer mortality between Hong Kong and Singapore:
role of nutrition.
Zhang J, Kesteloot H.
Department of Epidemiology, School of Public
Health, Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium.

BACKGROUND: The majority of inhabitants in Hong Kong
and Singapore are ethnic Chinese, but all-cause and
cardiovascular mortality rates in these two regions
are markedly different. This study describes
differences in the magnitude and trends in mortality
and attempts to explain these differences.

METHODS: Data of mortality rates in 1963-1965 and
1993-1995 in the age class of 45-74 years, dietary
habits and other factors were compared between
Hong Kong and Singapore using Japan, Spain and the USA
as reference countries. Mortality and food consumption
data were obtained from WHO and FAO, respectively.

RESULTS: Large differences in all-cause and cardiovascular
mortality exist between Hong Kong and Singapore. The
difference in total cancer mortality was less consistent
and smaller. The most pronounced finding was that ischemic
heart disease mortality in 1993-1995 was 2.98 and 3.14 times
higher in Singapore than in Hong Kong in men and women,
respectively. Of the five countries considered, Singapore
has the highest all-cause mortality in both sexes in the
period of 1960-1995. The ratio of animal to vegetal fat
was higher in Singapore (2.24) than in Hong Kong (1.08).
Singapore had higher serum concentrations of total
cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol
than Hong Kong, but the opposite result was observed
for high-density lipoprotein cholesterol.

CONCLUSIONS: There are striking differences in all-cause
and cardiovascular mortality between Hong Kong and
Singapore. These differences can be most reasonably and
plausibly explained by their differences in dietary
habits, for example, a higher consumption of coconut and
palm oil, mainly containing saturated fat, in Singapore.

Coconut oil raises bad cholesterol more than
beef fat!

Am J Clin Nutr. 1985 Aug;42(2):190-7.
Plasma lipid and lipoprotein response of humans
to beef fat, coconut oil and safflower oil.
Reiser R, Probstfield JL, Silvers A, Scott LW,
Shorney ML, Wood RD, O'Brien BC, Gotto AM Jr,
Insull W Jr.

This study's purpose was to evaluate the fasting
human plasma lipid and lipoprotein responses to
dietary beef fat (BF) by comparison with coconut
oil (CO) and safflower oil (SO), fats customarily
classified as saturated and polyunsaturated.
Nineteen free-living normolipidemic men aged
25.6 +/- 3.5 yr consumed centrally-prepared
lunches and dinners of common foods having 35%
fat calories, 60% of which was the test fat.
The test fats were isocalorically substituted,
and each fed for five weeks in random sequences
with intervening five weeks of habitual diets.
Plasma total cholesterol (TC), high-density
lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), and low-density
lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) concentrations
among individuals follows the same relative rank
regardless of diet. Triglycerides (TG)
concentrations among individuals also maintain
their relative rank regardless of diet but in
a different order from that of the cholesterols.
Plasma TC, HDL-C, and LDL-C responses to BF were
significantly lower and TG higher than to CO.
As compared to SO, BF produced equivalent levels
of TG, HDL-C, and LDL-C and marginally higher TC.
Thus, the customary consideration of BF as
"saturated" and grouping it with CO appears
unwarranted.

This study in a rat model for myocardial
infarction (induced with a synthetic hormone)
found omega-3 fatty acids to be protective
against lipid peroxidation and cardiovascular
death, while coconut oil raised indicators of
damage to the heart muscle.

J Nutr Biochem. 1999 Jun;10(6):338-44.
Effect of saturated, omega-3 and omega-6
polyunsaturated fatty acids on myocardial
infarction.
Nageswari K, Banerjee R, Menon VP.
School of Biomedical Engineering, Indian
Institute of Technology, Bombay, India.

Dietary fatty acids have cholesterol lowering,
antiatherogenic, and antiarrhythmic properties
that decrease the risk of myocardial infarction (MI).
This study was designed to study the effects of
various oils rich in either polyunsaturated
(omega-3 or omega-6) fatty acids (PUFA) or
saturated fatty acids (SFA) on the severity of
experimentally induced MI. Male albino Sprague-Dawley
rats (100-150 g; n = 20) were fed diets enriched with
fish oil (omega-3 PUFA), peanut oil (omega-6 PUFA),
or coconut oil (SFA) for 60 days. Experimental MI was
induced with isoproterenol. Mortality rates; serum
enzymes aspartate amino transferase; alanine amino
transferase; creatine phosphokinase (CPK); lipid
profiles in serum, myocardium, and aorta; peroxide
levels in heart and aorta; activities of catalase and
superoxide dismutase; and levels of glutathione were
measured. The results demonstrated that mortality rate,
CPK levels, myocardial lipid peroxides, and glutathione
levels were decreased in the omega-3 PUFA treated group.
Maximum increase in parameters indicative of myocardial
damage was seen in the coconut oil group. These findings
suggest that dietary omega-3 PUFA offers maximum
protection in experimentally induced MI in comparison
to omega-6 PUFA and SFA enriched diets. SFA was found
to have the least protective effect.
 
Mark Thorson wrote:


Thanks. I'm wondering if there's any data on just how much palm
and coconut oil the Singaporeans are consuming? I need to evaluate
whether to cut out even the minor amounts of the stuff I'm
sometimes consuming.

I'd miss those donuts though.

I'm also interested in Doug's claim about "carbs plus saturated fat"
being the best negative metric. Sounds reasonable, in which case
the coconut-oil donuts are extra evil.

Steve
 
Steve Pope wrote:

It's why low carbers have no need to avoid saturated fat in grams or
percentage while low fatters need to make sure saturated fats are as low
as possible in both grams and percentage.


Of course so much food that's evil tastes good.
 
Steve Pope wrote:

No, it's a report of the research data. That low carbers have no need
to avoid saturated fat is a report of the data from plenty of studies.
That low fatters need to avoid saturated fat more than polyunsaturated
fat is a report of the data from plenty of studies. That the problem is
the sum of calories from carbs plus saturated fat is the analytical
logic from those different sets of studies.
 
Doug Freyburger wrote:


I read somewhere (and it makes sense) that the reason low-carb works
is because a person won't eat much fat unless it has carbs with it to
make it appealing. Regulate the carbs and you'll self-regulate the fat.

Imagine eating a stick of butter. Now imagine eating a plate of plain
cooked pasta. Now put them together...

-Bob
 
Doug Freyburger wrote:








I basically agree with your logic, but it is very tricky to come
up with general truths about health and diet even if they seem
to logically derive from study results. I'd say your conclusion could be
tested further, were someone to devise the right experiments.


Steve
 
zxcvbob wrote:

Usual caveat - Low fat works for some people. If you are one of the
people it works for, then do that and don't bother with low carb
discussions.

That does have a lot to do with it. Mix 50-50 fat and carb - butter and
flour. It's called a cookie and if I eat one it's harder for me to
decline the next one. Compare with all fat - just a stick of butter.
If I eat a pat of butter it makes me want to eat the next one less not
more.

Folks often scoff at the notion that eating fat on a low carb diet is
self limiting. Try it some time. Figure out the calories you have for
breakfast. Take an oil you like and figure out the volume it takes to
have that many calories. Then for a week try to have that much oil as
your breakfast daily for a week. Tht's right, as your breakfast. Toss
a shot glass or so of oil as your breakfast because that's the right
amount of calories. Let me know how many days you make. I tried it
back around 2001 or 2002. I made it about 3 days before I had to hold
my nose to force myself to swallow. By the 4th day I couldn't even do
that.

It wasn't that the oil was "disgusting" or whatever value judgment you
care to make. It was that eating fat in the absence of carbs is self
limiting in an extremely real way. As in the body starts generating a
gag reflex to keep fom having too much of it.

That's part of why low carbing works well for a lot of people. The
cravings for carbs go away after a certain point. The cravings for fat
never start. The switch from carb calories to fat calories pushes the
body to not overeat. If, and this is a big if, you go very high fat.
Try it with a giant steak and what you get is you aren't hungry for a
long time afterwards but you may well eat the entire giant steak. Try
it with an untrimmed prime rib cut where you eat the fat first and you
will probably have trouble eating the flesh part.
 
Miche wrote:


I agree palm oil farming is causing massive deforesttion, due
to recent trends towards ultra-large-scale palm farming for biofuel.

What is less clear is whether consuming a given amount of palm
oil represents more deforestation than consuming the same amout
of some other oil. Olive trees replace what once was Mediterranean
forest, which has largely disappeared. Corn farmers in the U.S.
are occuping former hardwood woodlands. etc.


S.
 
In article ,
[email protected] (Steve Pope) wrote:


I go for none, actually. On the grounds that once the habitats are
gone, the orangutans are gone.


Which is their problem to deal with. I have to pick my battles, not
having limitless time, energy or money; I've picked this one.

Miche

--
Electricians do it in three phases
 
Miche wrote:



Sure. For me, it's important to understand that all consumption
uses resources and negatively impacts the environement. So, I prefer
to personally reduce my overall consumption, not just consumption
of some items determined to be bad; although I look at the latter issue
as well.

On a global basis I believe that plant-based foods use less
resources and have less environmental impact than animal-based
foods of the same caloric content. So I would be interested to
know, for example, whether using coconut oil or olive oil has
more or less impact than using the equivalent amount of butter
or lard. But regardless of which is being used, less is better.


Steve
 
In article ,
[email protected] (Steve Pope) wrote:


Well yeah. I'm not disputing that.


In some parts of the world free-range animal husbandry is a more
efficient use of the land than growing crops, vegetables or fruit.
Parts of New Zealand are included in that.

Miche

--
Electricians do it in three phases
 
On Mar 4, 10:30?am, Doug Freyburger wrote:

Good post, Doug, but even the lean part of the steak is self-limiting
because your body gets full of protein, and even steak seems
undesirable. Low carbing is astoundingly effective if you really do
restrict carbs.

--Bryan
 
In article ,
Omelet wrote:



In some places, including within sight of my house (there's your site!),
there's not enough water to grow anything other than grass/hay. That's
a good source of food for ruminants, but not humans. Out my front door
a few miles is Sonoma Mountain. There's not much water up there, not
enough for irrigation but enough for the cows to drink. The best
property up there can support one cow per 5 acres. Our average rainfall
in July is .01 inch!

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA
[email protected]
 
Bryan wrote:


I agree. Knowing that there were once not long ago tens of millions of
mountain gorillas, and now under 5000, is really tragic. They are
sentient beings.


Steve
 
In article ,
[email protected] says...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_farming_by_country

I'm a dedicated carnivore but as a general rule

Only if the acre is in a location, elevation and latitude usable for
growing crops that survive in that climate.

Where the land is too steep, rocky, dry, wet, acid, cold, thin-soiled,
inaccessible to machinery, to cultivate crops digestible by humans, it
may still support freerange grazing by species with a different
digestive system, such as herbivores and birds. New Zealand, and parts
of Europe, produce some of the highest quality meat and dairy in the
world, in hill/mountain areas which are only suitable for managed free
range grazing.

Janet.
 
Back
Top