PUFAs Better Than Saturated Fats?

[RWilly]

@RWilly , not sure I understand. How do PUFAs affect the microbiome? And how is that different than saturated fats?

I look at Ray Peat's work from more of a sterile gut perspective. Microbes change everything.

Impact of Omega-3 Fatty Acids on the Gut Microbiota

A few excerpts:

"diet is one of the strongest selective pressures for microbial communities within the gastrointestinal tract. Table 2 summarizes the studies that have investigated the role of PUFAs on microbiota. Several studies have demonstrated that feeding a high-fat diet (i.e., 45–60% kcal from fat) influences the types and amounts of gut microbes and adversely affects intestinal health. In particular, a high-fat diet is implicated in dysbiosis, including a decrease in Bacteroidetes and an increase in both Firmicutes and Proteobacteria in the murine model [38,39], a reduction of microbiota richness in terms of the number of species per sample [40,41], as well as an increase in LPS-producing bacteria such as Enterobactericeae and/or a decrease in LPS-suppressing bacteria (those which can lower the numbers of LPS-producing bacteria, such as Bifidobacterium). Moreover, a high-fat diet results in epithelial alterations, such as intestinal barrier dysfunction [42]; a higher intestinal permeability [43,44]; and an increased LPS translocation that can diffuse from the gut to the bloodstream, either by direct diffusion mediated by para-cellular permeability or through absorption by enterocytes during chylomicron secretion [45]. Current evidence suggests that dietary fat augments the circulating LPS concentrations. The resultant postprandial endotoxemia leads to low-grade systemic inflammation, which has been implicated in the development of several metabolic diseases, insulin resistance, adipocyte hyperplasia and reduction of pancreatic β-cell function [46], and impaired glucose metabolism [47].

"Studies have shown that different types of dietary fat, including saturated fatty acids (SFAs), monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFAs), and PUFAs, and their abundance in the diet, could change gut microbiota composition"

"Studies on mice-transplanted faeces showed that the omega-3 PUFAs can modify the microbiota through the production and secretion of intestinal alkaline phosphatase (IAP), leading to a reduction in the number of LPS-producing bacteria, thus reducing metabolic endotoxemia"

"Data from animal models indicates that fish oil in particular has effects on shaping the micro biome."

 

[TNT]

Thanx, @RWilly . So it sounds like Omega-3s actually have a positive impact on the gut microbiome? So do you disagree with RP saying that PUFAs are bad?

 

[RWilly]

Thanx, @RWilly . So it sounds like Omega-3s actually have a positive impact on the gut microbiome? So do you disagree with RP saying that PUFAs are bad?

I think PUFA's are bad without protectors, such as vitamin E. I personally think that nuts are okay, as our hunter gatherer ancestors were very healthy according to teeth and skeletal remains. They ate plenty of nuts. And, how else would they have gotten vitamin E in before synthetic vitamin E was available? Vitamin E is there to protect the PUFA.

Also, our beneficial microbes can help us with PUFA issues:
Polyunsaturated fatty acid saturation by gut lactic acid bacteria affecting host lipid composition

 

[Rafael Lao Wai]

@Rafael Lao Wai , between your summarizing "the more central characteristics of the "Peat diet": low PUFA, low intake of irritating fibers, more sugar than starch, no wheat, short exercises instead or long ones etc." and your explanation of glucose oxidation, I'm really impressed with your understanding of RP and ability to convey his messages in easy-to-understand ways. May I ask where are you getting your info? I've read a bunch of his blogs, watched several videos, and hung out in Peat groups, but I still feel relatively clueless, so if there's one place you think I could get a pretty solid grip on Peat principles, I'd love to know.

Sorry for taking so long to answer, I was a little busy.

I've initially accumulated some knowledge from mostly Ray's articles, but the forum helped me put this knowledge into a system, since there were quite a few things that I didn't get when I first read Ray's articles. Haidut's explanations regarding things such as NAD, electron transport chain, etc. had a very big importance, since I didn't really understand how ATP was generated until 6 or 7 months ago. I see you joined the forum in 2018. I joined it in 2017, and I remember that even in 2018, one year after I signed into this forum, I still felt the same way as you. It took me almost 2 years to be able to grasp Peat's main ideas in a way that I can explain it decently, since they are so different from everything that I had ever heard from mainstream midia and sites, so I wouldn't worry if you're only starting to get a deeper understanding of physiology.

Something that paid off when I was trying to read Peat's articles was studying things such as the steps of glycolysis, of the Kreb's cycle and of the Electron Transport Chain. Many times, when you're watching an interview of haidut or Ray, they may say something like "if the pyruvate generated from glycolysis isn't dehydrogenated, then it will be wasted as lactic acid". If you have some basic knowledge about cell respiration, you'll notice that pyruvate is the final step of glycolysis, and it's the pyruvate dehydrogenase enzyme that will transform this pyruvate into acetyl-CoA. If the pyruvate isn't acted upon by the PDH enzyme, then the electrons will be directed towards the pyruvate instead of the electron transport chain, transforming pyruvate into lactic acid.

I remember, in the past, being totally lost when Ray or haidut started talking about these things, but knowing how the biologic pathway works, I could understand better how food gives us energy.

Also, Danny Roddy's videos really helped as well. Re-watching haidut's interview's, as well as re-reading Peat's articles, and trying to summarize each one( which can be quite a mental effort, if one is not used to doing that, but it does pay off; it makes it easier to memorize some key things) are great ways to build a good base about physiology. This is easier said than done if you don't like biology very much. One of the only subjects that I have a lot of interest in is biology( the other ones are language and nutrition), so, for me, reading Ray's work is something I enjoy doing, although I don't understand everything he says.

 

[schultz]

And, how else would they have gotten vitamin E in before synthetic vitamin E was available?

Is vitamin E even needed if PUFA's are not consumed? In any event, vitamin E is present in small amounts in fruits and vegetables.

 

[Rafael Lao Wai]

Is vitamin E even needed if PUFA's are not consumed? In any event, vitamin E is present in small amounts in fruits and vegetables.

Ruminant fat also has a significant amount of vitamin E. It has more vitamin E per unit of PUFA than walnuts, and it has way more saturated fat.

 

[Rafael Lao Wai]

I think PUFA's are bad without protectors, such as vitamin E. I personally think that nuts are okay, as our hunter gatherer ancestors were very healthy according to teeth and skeletal remains. They ate plenty of nuts. And, how else would they have gotten vitamin E in before synthetic vitamin E was available? Vitamin E is there to protect the PUFA.

Also, our beneficial microbes can help us with PUFA issues:
Polyunsaturated fatty acid saturation by gut lactic acid bacteria affecting host lipid composition

Where did you read that hunter- gatherers ate a lot of nuts?

According to Shawn Baker, the tests carried out on bones of early humans indicate that our diet was heavily carnivorous( I think it had something to do with nitrogen content of bones), and agriculture had a bad impact on brain size, as well as bone size. Agriculture likely was a proxy for grain consumption. If ancient people were still learning that the hull of grains is full of anti-nutrients, then it would make sense that they were suffering the side- effects of those toxins. Nuts and seeds are very similar to grains, regarding hard fibers, phytic acid( which steals minerals from your digestive system), digestion inhibitors( since the seeds are the next generation of the plant that created them), PUFA( liekly because the temperature of seeds and nuts is lower than the temperature of mammals), as well as overall bad protein quality.

I don't see why ancient people would go out of their way just to look for hard seeds full of toxins and lacking important nutrients when they could spend their time hunting and eating smooth, juicy meats and internal organs of fat animals or trying to find honey. Maybe I'm missing something?

Also, it's interesting that bacteria can turn PUFA into SFA. I think that's why cows can even eat a lot of corn and still have a very saturated fat, with little PUFA: 3 out their 4 stomachs are full of bacteria, and they make this conversion for the cow. Chickens and pigs will get a quite PUFA-filled fat if they're fed corn and soy.

 

[Rafael Lao Wai]

I think this is because of PUFA's effect on the micro biome. Endotoxins get absorbed into the bloodstream via chylomicrons during saturated fat absorption when there is a lot of gram negative bacteria in the gut. I have the feeling that the anti-inflammatory effects of PUFA are related to it's volatility in the gut against pathogenic microbes.

I think Amazoniac mentioned this somehwere. He was quoting Koch:

"The Eskimos rarely develop cancer. The largest part of their diet is fat and this contains full quantity of unsaturated fatty acid. The lesson to be taken from these facts is that the fats sold for the kitchen and table today, that do not become rancid, are of no help to the health of the body. The preparation of a fat so it will not become rancid is to saturate the unsaturated groups with hydrogen. Generally a nickel catalyst is used. But that makes no difference, perhaps. The destruction of the double bonds in the fatty acid greatly lowers its chance to undergo autoxidation and thus to induce the oxidation of toxins or aid its own oxidation for the production of energy. Everyone should pay particular attention to this, for when the fat is reduced so as to not be able to form peroxides and no longer tastes rancid in consequence, it is difficult to burn in the body and will pile on in undesired places. But worst of all, it is bad for the complexion. Since the auto-oxidations that natural un-saturated fatty acids are intended to produce in germ toxins are no longer possible in Spry and Crisco, so the germs that injure the skin have no such health factor to contend with and can mar the complexion with a much freer hand. Adding oxygen to become the peroxide makes the fat rancid. Therefore, one must buy fats that are not rancid yet, but can come so on exposure to air. It is the process of becoming rancid that is the change that is helpful; not the rancid fat. Thus in the body, the taking up of oxygen to become a peroxide induces other unsaturated atomic groups that are unable to do so themselves to take up oxygen and to become burned also. So it is not only the fat you buy that we are considering, but fats in other foods as well as germ and metabolic toxins that un-saturated fats help to get rid of and convert into energy."

It's from this thread:MS Tied To Glucose Deficiency Due To Endotoxin And Fat, Extra Glucose May Treat It

 

[CLASH]

I look at Ray Peat's work from more of a sterile gut perspective. Microbes change everything.

Impact of Omega-3 Fatty Acids on the Gut Microbiota

A few excerpts:

"diet is one of the strongest selective pressures for microbial communities within the gastrointestinal tract. Table 2 summarizes the studies that have investigated the role of PUFAs on microbiota. Several studies have demonstrated that feeding a high-fat diet (i.e., 45–60% kcal from fat) influences the types and amounts of gut microbes and adversely affects intestinal health. In particular, a high-fat diet is implicated in dysbiosis, including a decrease in Bacteroidetes and an increase in both Firmicutes and Proteobacteria in the murine model [38,39], a reduction of microbiota richness in terms of the number of species per sample [40,41], as well as an increase in LPS-producing bacteria such as Enterobactericeae and/or a decrease in LPS-suppressing bacteria (those which can lower the numbers of LPS-producing bacteria, such as Bifidobacterium). Moreover, a high-fat diet results in epithelial alterations, such as intestinal barrier dysfunction [42]; a higher intestinal permeability [43,44]; and an increased LPS translocation that can diffuse from the gut to the bloodstream, either by direct diffusion mediated by para-cellular permeability or through absorption by enterocytes during chylomicron secretion [45]. Current evidence suggests that dietary fat augments the circulating LPS concentrations. The resultant postprandial endotoxemia leads to low-grade systemic inflammation, which has been implicated in the development of several metabolic diseases, insulin resistance, adipocyte hyperplasia and reduction of pancreatic β-cell function [46], and impaired glucose metabolism [47].

"Studies have shown that different types of dietary fat, including saturated fatty acids (SFAs), monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFAs), and PUFAs, and their abundance in the diet, could change gut microbiota composition"

"Studies on mice-transplanted faeces showed that the omega-3 PUFAs can modify the microbiota through the production and secretion of intestinal alkaline phosphatase (IAP), leading to a reduction in the number of LPS-producing bacteria, thus reducing metabolic endotoxemia"

"Data from animal models indicates that fish oil in particular has effects on shaping the micro biome."

If I'm not mistaken this is in mice/ rats, which have a different digestive set up than us. They rely on fermentation in the cecum for thier production of fats and in general would have a lower fat diet in the wild, relatively devoid of saturated fats. Thus, when feeding them fats they develop dysbiosis as the fats interfere with the fermentative processes that these animals rely on. In contrast we have a small intestine adapted to digesting and in particular absorbing not only fats but animal proteins and simple sugars from fruits. Fats in humans, technically wouldnt even make it in large amounts to the site of fermentation (the colon), as they are very efficiently absorbed in the small intestine. Thus, I think the argument of an "altered microbiome" is a moot point when crossing over to humans, especially in the context of eating a diet that not only contains meat, seafood and saturated fats but also fruits, vegetables and maybe some tubers or dairy depending on tolerance. Even more so, the saturated fats stimulate bile release in the small intestine which serves to keep the small intestine clean. As far as I understand when peat refers to a "clean intestine" it is in reference to the small intestine, which is relatively close to steril in comparison to the colon. Saturated fatty acids, bile acids and alkaline phosphatase, the latter two of which are stimulated by saturated fats, all function in the degredation, removal and detoxification of not only bacteria, but endotoxin. When comparing the digestive anatomy and physiology of humans and rats/ mice, with the context of "microbiome" these studies look silly. Also, as an aside, I have had quite a few stool tests analyzed by PCR. My diet is relatively high in saturated fat and sugar. My bacteroidetes population is very high (above the reference range) and my firmicutes and proteobacteria populations are very low, in fact my firmicutes population is supposedly in the red (below reference range). This flies in the face of the statements above quoted in the post. I think the microbiome research is the fill in for the "human genome mapping" experiment since it mostly failed.

As for the bolded part, that fact that saturated fats induce barrier dysfunction, is not seen in humans. There is quite a bit of research to the contrary and very little that actually supports that notion, especially when the studies are actually read in thier entirety. The saturated fats do increase plasma LPS but they do not significantly nor reliably increase inflammation. In fact the saturated fats actually bind to and detoxify LPS, inhibiting it from causing inflammation. This is preciesly why people develop elevated lipid panels; they are under heavy endotoxin burden and increase thier blood lipid production as a protective mechanism. LPS promotes liver cholesterol and lipoprotein production directly through TNF-alpha, as a protective function (its why statins are such sh*t drugs, on par with lobotomies lol). Overall saturated fats are protective of endotoxin, one of the best protectors. PUFA's are not protective in any significant way besides omega-3's interfering with endotoxin absorption and function in the gut. However, despite inhibiting the absorption of endotoxin, omega-3's are directly hepatotoxic, inhibiting the livers ability to produce cholesterol and lipoproteins during infection or toxic burden by damaging the cells that produce the cholesterol directly. They also deplete antioxidant compounds like vit E and Vit C, they interfere with steroidogenesis and they directly damage the lumen of the vasculature. Omega-6's are even worse. There isnt a good case for the consumption of PUFA that I have seen. As for saturated fats they are precursors to steroid hormones, serve a structural component within the bodies tissues, function as a relatively neutral fuel source, especially considering that fatty acid oxidation is always occuring, and have numerous benefits on the intestine as described. The omega 3 studies are being produced to cover up the failed "PUFA for heart disease" trope. "PUFA's are still good everyone, they just have to be in the correct balance with omega 3's". I think it has to be said tho that Omega 3's can help to some extent with an excess of omega 6's by interference with the inflammatory mediator enzymes but in context is switching to methadone really that much of an improvement from using heroin? I'd avoid both, except for the minor amount of omega 3 you get from grass fed beef, and seafood sources like oysters/ shrimp/ mussels/ scallops. Supplementing them or seeking them out in large supply in food sources seems foolish to me at best...

 

[Cirion]

I have 6 months of data now and have plotted up my PUFA intake vs. weight gain for your viewing pleasure. The axis are 14 day rolling avg PUFA intakes vs. 14 day rolling avg. weight gain. Red dotted lines add for ease of interpreting the trend that is clearly and unmistakenly upwards. Eating PUFAs is the best way to get fat and unhealthy. End of story.

/thread

 

[RWilly]

Where did you read that hunter- gatherers ate a lot of nuts?

According to Shawn Baker, the tests carried out on bones of early humans indicate that our diet was heavily carnivorous( I think it had something to do with nitrogen content of bones), and agriculture had a bad impact on brain size, as well as bone size. Agriculture likely was a proxy for grain consumption. If ancient people were still learning that the hull of grains is full of anti-nutrients, then it would make sense that they were suffering the side- effects of those toxins. Nuts and seeds are very similar to grains, regarding hard fibers, phytic acid( which steals minerals from your digestive system), digestion inhibitors( since the seeds are the next generation of the plant that created them), PUFA( liekly because the temperature of seeds and nuts is lower than the temperature of mammals), as well as overall bad protein quality.

I don't see why ancient people would go out of their way just to look for hard seeds full of toxins and lacking important nutrients when they could spend their time hunting and eating smooth, juicy meats and internal organs of fat animals or trying to find honey. Maybe I'm missing something?

Sort of depends where the hunter gatherers lived:
Ancient hunter-gatherers didn’t all eat paleo

"There's been quite a lot of controversy surrounding ancient diet research, but one thing is definitely clear: hunter-gatherers eat whatever it is most efficient to hunt and gather. If you live on cold tundra where few to no plants grow, you will eat a lot of fish and other meats, depending on what you can catch. If you live in a tropical forest, you will eat more fruits and vegetables that grow abundantly, alongside perhaps some grains or nuts and also, yes, meat. If you live on a grassland, you will eat meat whenever you can catch it, but when animals are scare you will chow down on whatever plant-based foods are available."

"As for grains, which have largely gone unmentioned so far, by looking at fossilized dental plaque anthropologists have begun to realize that paleolithic people ate plenty of grains, legumes, and tubers. Neanderthals ate barley. They ground up seeds with rock tools. And though many of our ancestors didn't drink milk, as a population we actually evolved the ability to digest lactose by acquiring a genetic mutation that spread through a significant chunk of humanity precisely because it was helpful."

In fact the saturated fats actually bind to and detoxify LPS, inhibiting it from causing inflammation.

I would love to see a study on this, as I would love to increase my saturated fat intake if that is so. Keep in mind, those with a lot of gram negative bacteria in their guts will have more of an inflammatory response to LPS than a healthy person.

I have 6 months of data now and have plotted up my PUFA intake vs. weight gain for your viewing pleasure. The axis are 14 day rolling avg PUFA intakes vs. 14 day rolling avg. weight gain. Red dotted lines add for ease of interpreting the trend that is clearly and unmistakenly upwards. Eating PUFAs is the best way to get fat and unhealthy. End of story.

Curious what kind of PUFA foods those were. I think it depends if it's a whole food.

 

[rob]

On diabetes, recent evidence (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1550413119303778) seems to implicate all long-chain fatty acids (so SFAs, MUFAs and PUFAs) in driving T2D-related inflammation due to compromised beta oxidation. Based on this, medium-chain fats would be the go-to choice for T2D.

That aside, two things I completely get on board with is how problematic PUFAs are and, in the context of FFAs, the need to manage stress. At a basic level, studies have consistently shown PUFAs increase oxidative stress and, as others say, deplete antioxidant stores. Indeed, many chronic diseases are characterised by increased lipid peroxidation, so PUFA-rich foods are just fuel on the fire in my book.

Some argue that vit E supps. can work to counter higher PUFA intake but a diet requiring such supp. offsetting is very suspect to me. Furthermore, vit E supps. (plus thiol antioxidants) have been shown to block basal autophagy through excessive ROS suppression (Antioxidants can inhibit basal autophagy and enhance neurodegeneration in models of polyglutamine disease) so it seems a problematic strategy, especially long term.

 

[schultz]

Sort of depends where the hunter gatherers lived:

Yes it does. I'm not sure people understand this lol. They have this idea in their head of what they want the 'paleo' diet to look like and then sort of construct a scenario in their head of how people lived, while inevitably adding their own life experiences. I have heard this sort of argument... "Fruit is seasonal so that means hunter gatherer's didn't have access to fruit all year." That depends on where you live, since fruit can pretty much be year round in places near the equator with multiple growing seasons. It also doesn't take into account that some groups of people were probably nomadic. It's not that farfetched to assume that people would have traveled to where the food was, following grazing herds or whatever. People don't often think of it being warm all year, especially people like me who live in Canada. Some peoples life experience is that there is always a winter, there is limited growing season, but when you're a nomadic hunter gatherer living in a world without borders you don't have to stay for winter (why would you?). Being nomadic would also allow you to experience increased amounts of light all year. It's really an ideal way to live. And all that walking was probably pretty healthy. Not to mention all the different landscapes would keep live interesting.

 

[Rafael Lao Wai]

Sort of depends where the hunter gatherers lived:
Ancient hunter-gatherers didn’t all eat paleo

"There's been quite a lot of controversy surrounding ancient diet research, but one thing is definitely clear: hunter-gatherers eat whatever it is most efficient to hunt and gather. If you live on cold tundra where few to no plants grow, you will eat a lot of fish and other meats, depending on what you can catch. If you live in a tropical forest, you will eat more fruits and vegetables that grow abundantly, alongside perhaps some grains or nuts and also, yes, meat. If you live on a grassland, you will eat meat whenever you can catch it, but when animals are scare you will chow down on whatever plant-based foods are available."

"As for grains, which have largely gone unmentioned so far, by looking at fossilized dental plaque anthropologists have begun to realize that paleolithic people ate plenty of grains, legumes, and tubers. Neanderthals ate barley. They ground up seeds with rock tools. And though many of our ancestors didn't drink milk, as a population we actually evolved the ability to digest lactose by acquiring a genetic mutation that spread through a significant chunk of humanity precisely because it was helpful."



I would love to see a study on this, as I would love to increase my saturated fat intake if that is so. Keep in mind, those with a lot of gram negative bacteria in their guts will have more of an inflammatory response to LPS than a healthy person.




Curious what kind of PUFA foods those were. I think it depends if it's a whole food.

Thanks for the link, but I find that site to be suspicious for a few reasons: they promote vaccines, they spread the idea that eating meat contributes significantly to climate change( which, itself, may not even be real) and they promote legumes and grain consumption. The anti-meat propaganda in that site is very mild, but the links in it lead to very wrong arguments, such as "humans didn't adapt to eating meat" or " humans would've hunted lean animals, since there were no fat ones". The digestive system of human beings is similar to the gut of pigs and dogs, so we're at least omnivores, and at max, carnivores. Our stomach acid is actually even more acidic than some scavenger animals, so we ARE adapted to eating meat.

I see no mention of bone desity or bone nitrogen content, and they even admit that they really don't really know what ancient people ate, so just because they found some grain residues in their teeth, it doesn't necessarily mean they ate them in significant amounts everyday. Also, if there was grain residue in their teeth, maybe that points to teeth erosion caused by grain consumption.

But I agree with your point that the diet of hunter- gatherers does depend heavily on what kind of environment they were in. As @schultz said, people near the equator will be able to enjoy fruit and sun everyday, so their sugar consumption will be higher than people living in Mongolia.

 

[RWilly]

On diabetes, recent evidence (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1550413119303778) seems to implicate all long-chain fatty acids (so SFAs, MUFAs and PUFAs) in driving T2D-related inflammation due to compromised beta oxidation. Based on this, medium-chain fats would be the go-to choice for T2D.

Personally, I think a high fat diet, whether SFA, MUFA or PUFA is not that great.

I'm however still debating butter, because of it contains other nutrients such as Vitamin A to fight pathogens, and because of the SCFA butyrate, that is shown to have health benefits.

I'm also debating dark chocolate, because of the polyphenols.

And, olive oil might still be okay too because of its high polyphenol content.

Yes it does. I'm not sure people understand this lol. They have this idea in their head of what they want the 'paleo' diet to look like and then sort of construct a scenario in their head of how people lived, while inevitably adding their own life experiences. I have heard this sort of argument... "Fruit is seasonal so that means hunter gatherer's didn't have access to fruit all year." That depends on where you live, since fruit can pretty much be year round in places near the equator with multiple growing seasons. It also doesn't take into account that some groups of people were probably nomadic. It's not that farfetched to assume that people would have traveled to where the food was, following grazing herds or whatever. People don't often think of it being warm all year, especially people like me who live in Canada. Some peoples life experience is that there is always a winter, there is limited growing season, but when you're a nomadic hunter gatherer living in a world without borders you don't have to stay for winter (why would you?). Being nomadic would also allow you to experience increased amounts of light all year. It's really an ideal way to live. And all that walking was probably pretty healthy. Not to mention all the different landscapes would keep live interesting.

Good points.

 

[CLASH]

@RWilly
The protective effect of serum lipoproteins against bacterial lipopolysaccharide. - PubMed - NCBI

Dietary saturated fatty acids reverse inflammatory and fibrotic changes in rat liver despite continued ethanol administration. - PubMed - NCBI

JLR : Journal of Lipid Research

I'll add a few more later that are more direct.

 

[RWilly]

@RWilly
The protective effect of serum lipoproteins against bacterial lipopolysaccharide. - PubMed - NCBI

Dietary saturated fatty acids reverse inflammatory and fibrotic changes in rat liver despite continued ethanol administration. - PubMed - NCBI

JLR : Journal of Lipid Research

I'll add a few more later that are more direct.

lol- hitting me with rat studies. (Have to give you a hard time since you called me out on my rat studies ... lol)

But.... that brings up a point about vitamin C. There are other studies that show that a McDonald's high fat diet and the endotoxemia that comes with it, can be ameliorated with OJ ... which I think may be due to vitamin C. All mammals, besides humans, primates and guinea pigs, make their own vitamin C. Endotoxemia increases the need for C. In fact, it's believed that sepsis may in fact be scurvy due to the endotoxin load.

 

[TNT]

If Vitamin E can offset the damage from PUFAs, then wouldn't nuts and seeds be OK, since they contain high amounts of Vitamin E to offset the PUFAs in them?

 

[RWilly]

If Vitamin E can offset the damage from PUFAs, then wouldn't nuts and seeds be OK, since they contain high amounts of Vitamin E to offset the PUFAs in them?

Personally, I think nuts and seeds are okay in moderation. There are many health studies out there that show that nuts and seeds reduce the risk of cardiovascular mortality and type 2 diabetes.

 

[Cirion]

Curious what kind of PUFA foods those were. I think it depends if it's a whole food.

Mostly reasonable choices like cheese, eggs, beef, coconut oil, etc. Occasionally from a cheat meal of pizza or something (that's where those high #'s greater than 10g come from).

On diabetes, recent evidence (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1550413119303778) seems to implicate all long-chain fatty acids (so SFAs, MUFAs and PUFAs) in driving T2D-related inflammation due to compromised beta oxidation. Based on this, medium-chain fats would be the go-to choice for T2D.

This seems true in my experience. All fats make my symptoms worse, even SFA. CLASH would love to disagree with me, but I have almost 7 months of personally collected data of fats VS. metabolic rate that disagree. It's gonna be hard to make me change my mind with 7 months of data on my back. This is not even anti-Peat, since the man himself said ALL fats (even SFA) tend to shift the metabolism away from glucose metabolism.