Pufa Better For Lean Mass Than SFA?

Jon

Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2017
Messages
560
Location
Colorado
sorry about the click bait title, but the study I’m sharing is claiming exactly that.

I’ve read through it (skimmed really) and my consensus is they witnessed the power of sfa’s ability to protect glucose oxidation and to some degree prevent lypolysis, hence the higher increase in fat gain in the sfa group. Pufa on the other hand resulted in less visceral fat and higher lean mass gains BUT I’m thinking this is because it changes the metabolism to encourage lipid oxidation? I was hoping some of you could look it over and share your thoughts :)

Overfeeding Polyunsaturated and Saturated Fat Causes Distinct Effects on Liver and Visceral Fat Accumulation in Humans
 

gaze

Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2019
Messages
2,270
first off, I would disregard this study because the source of saturated fats was muffins with palm oil, which still has lots of unsaturated fats, and secondly, I think the fatty liver is due to the sfa protecting from oxidative damage
 

SOMO

Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2018
Messages
1,094
Ok, I've seen this study before and nowhere in it does it mention MACROPHAGE INFILTRATION.

Simply gaining Fat/Adipose tissue mass is NOT ENOUGH to get sick/insulin resistant.

Macrophage infiltration (caused by high-fat/high-pufa) is the issue, and SFA is less likely to cause said macrophage infiltration of fat than PUFA.

Does SFA increased visceral/fat around the organs? Yes, because SFA is used as long-term high-energy storage for organs and if blood sugar falls, the organs need a backup reserve of energy.

I don't know how many people have ever eaten Veal heart/kidneys/thymus-sweetbreads/etc. here, but if even young calves have a considerable amount of fat around their organs then the fat is supposed to be there. Basically an animal is born with some amount of fat already encasing the organs.

Having fat around the organs ("Visceral Fat) is not sufficient enough to cause negative health issues it seems - I'm fairly certain it has to be accompanied by macrophage infiltration and inflammation.

01f01.jpg

The Kidney on the left has "healthy fat".
The Kidney on the right has "unhealthy fat" because of macrophage infiltration.

Coincidentally (or causally), the kidney with the macrophage infiltration also has FIBROSIS.
 
OP
Jon

Jon

Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2017
Messages
560
Location
Colorado
@Kammas i don’t think it’s a great idea to disregard it in total. I had the same thoughts you did on why they observed what they did. I do still think that gaining visceral fat isn’t good for most of us because well people generally aren’t worried about starving to death during winter these days lol. Whether or not the elevated blood sugar caused by the gain in fat from the palm oil is permanent (which obviously I know it’s not) I still don’t think it’s good to have chronically elevated blood sugar for the average person because people in 1st world civilizations have more of chance of keeping in a state of elevated blood sugar rather than going the other way. In essence I’m suggesting this study is a cautionary lesson to prevent developing elevated blood sugar via a high fat diet. It should also result in higher muscle mass considering.
 
Last edited:
OP
Jon

Jon

Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2017
Messages
560
Location
Colorado
Ok, I've seen this study before and nowhere in it does it mention MACROPHAGE INFILTRATION.

Simply gaining Fat/Adipose tissue mass is NOT ENOUGH to get sick/insulin resistant.

Macrophage infiltration (caused by high-fat/high-pufa) is the issue, and SFA is less likely to cause said macrophage infiltration of fat than PUFA.

Does SFA increased visceral/fat around the organs? Yes, because SFA is used as long-term high-energy storage for organs and if blood sugar falls, the organs need a backup reserve of energy.

I don't know how many people have ever eaten Veal heart/kidneys/thymus-sweetbreads/etc. here, but if even young calves have a considerable amount of fat around their organs then the fat is supposed to be there. Basically an animal is born with some amount of fat already encasing the organs.

Having fat around the organs ("Visceral Fat) is not sufficient enough to cause negative health issues it seems - I'm fairly certain it has to be accompanied by macrophage infiltration and inflammation.

01f01.jpg

The Kidney on the left has "healthy fat".
The Kidney on the right has "unhealthy fat" because of macrophage infiltration.

Coincidentally (or causally), the kidney with the macrophage infiltration also has FIBROSIS.
I appreciate the insight man! Very cool examples you gave, thank you :).

Btw, what do you think of the pufa causing less fat gain? You think it’s because pufa shifts metabolism to lipid oxidation?
 

gaze

Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2019
Messages
2,270
@Kammas i don’t think it’s a great idea to disregard it in total. I had the same thoughts you did on why they observed what they did. I do still think that gaining visceral fat isn’t good for most of us because well people generally aren’t worried about starving to death during winter these days lol. Whether or not the elevated blood sugar caused by the gain in fat from the palm oil is permanent (which obviously I know it’s not) I still don’t think it’s good to have chronically elevated blood sugar for the average person because people in 1st world civilizations have more of chance of keeping in a state of elevated blood sugar rather than going the other way. In essence I’m suggesting this study is a cautionary lesson to prevent developing elevated blood sugar via a high fat diet. It should also result in higher muscle mass considering.

I think it goes without saying high fat is bad regardless as they both lead to fat gain, but the study is trying to use the idea of fatty liver as the sole reason to promote Pufas over sfa, which is discouraging to see considering the poorly designed study along with the fact that they arnt accounting for things like pufa oxidation, sfa protective effects against pufa. I think just because sunflower oil produced less visceral fat then palm oil is skipping over the larger picture of how fats work in the body, specifically sfa role in the human body. But like you said, I do agree that fat should be minimized no matter what, but to say the little amount of fat eaten should be pufa because of this study is a dangerous
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom