Is Peat Wrong After All? The Lyon Heart Study

[X3CyO]

The idea is that if it shifts the bodies fatty acid profile away from pufa, then its good.

Pufa in many natural plant sources contain vitamin e in adequate amounts to saturate this pufa in the body in semi-adequate amounts, and if someone were to eat more specifically veg, then the ratio of e to pufa increases even more.

Carbohydrate intake also saturates the system if overeaten and or as ones main source of calories.

In this post Mufa apparently shifts the body composition away from pufa as well. Different Effect Of MUFA Vs SFA On Tissues PUFA Content



Primarily I like to believe based on observations made about what foods are eaten in abundance in blue zones without the addition of processed food in oil or sugar form leads to this saturated fatty acid profile "naturally".

Tons of fruit, starch, veg, small amounts of meat, handful of nuts every once in a while. Low fat.

Peat just skims the best off the top because everything below fruit and milk has more and more dynamic metabolic consequences.

 

[DaveFoster]

The title of the article you have mentioned is "unsaturated vegetables oils: toxic".
In the Lyon heart study, they use canola oil to save lives. May be in this case "toxic" seems to much.

Please, read the the title of an article you mention in the future.

It's not; you haven't read the article. Why would you post a question if you aren't going to bother reading the responses?

If you make many dietary adjustments to a group, for example swapping butter with canola and olive oil, it's erroneous to conclude that canola oil lowered the incidence of heart disease.

If you simply left out the canola and simply used the olive oil, then you would have a similar (possibly more significant) improvement.

There's also an argument (made by Chris Kresser I believe, among others) that, while PUFA should be kept low, in a context of a high PUFA diet, the ratio of n-3 to n-6 fatty acids become important.

 

[Crazycoco]

Thank you very much X3 Cyo, this is the kind of insight that i wanted by writing my post.
I can agree with you. But dont you find the omega3/ omega 6 ratio is an important one, as the french think?
My general idea is like ray peat said: keep pufa very low but i would argue that omega 3/6 ratio is still important and probably protective. What do you think?

 

[Crazycoco]

Dave foster,

"If you make many dietary adjustments to a group, for example swapping butter with canola and olive oil, it's erroneous to conclude that canola oil lowered the incidence of heart disease."

Why erroneous? In one group, more butter in the other less butter and more canola oil. Results: in the canola oil, far less heart diseases and cancer. Pure fact. Now, as a person mention above, in the canola oil group, the overall pufa was less important. So May be it was an important factor.
The only thing here is that the Word "toxic" is too much regarding the saved lives.
So again, dont you think that the best thing to do is:

-low pufa as a rule
-but good omega 3/6 ratio as an other rule.
??
(When ray peat mention diabetes of a fishman who eat a pound of salmon a day against Omega 3, ok but damn it was ONE POUND EVERY DAY. So too much of it)

Thank you:)

 

[Xisca]

Oils are more than oils... Olive oil has oleuropein, the same as in olive leaves that are sold as a supplement, which I investigated thanks to @Daniel11

Diets in the world have alsways been GOOD at finding a balance within the unbalance due to nature's providing this but not that, and "es lo que hay"! Meaning that you have no choice but finding a creative solution within your local boundaries.
1st do not die of hunger!
2nd, eat what there is, so that you do more than surviving, and more than hibernating.
3rd, find in your place how to eat problematic food by the right processing, and the right other food that compensate the original problem.
4th comes a world where we can:
- eat part of a masai diet, and part of an inuit diet!
- extract and separate food elements, including oil...
Argh, 3rd point becomes complex!

When I saw some asiatic claiming about the necessity to eat some sesame like tahini with their white rice, and chew all that well, and that those people in a poor hospital were recovering much better than in the hospital for the rich!!!! This is about balancing, about less sugar pike, and sesame is more than sesame oil, and more than pufas. And better than rice alone.

When the masai drink blood, this is obviously to not burn the cherry tree in winter and complain of no cherries in the spring! Too much iron, well dairy next. Amd keep the animal alive as long as it helps you live.
And when a doctor says to eat a piece of cheese after red meat, this is the idea of a French doctor isn't it? Local solution in a place where you can breed cows for meat and dairies.

But when instead of your fields for cultivating, and your forests for hunting, and your river or sea for fishing, you have a supermarket with tropical fruits "fields", and freezing ice north pole conditions a few steps away... sure you loose some creativity to overcome local drawbacks! The less choices, the more you need creativity. More choices seem to trigger less creativity, but indeed even more is needed, and much more knowledge. The scientific knowledge has to help the intuitive one.

Also, when you eat all the time the same local food, you know what you feel when you introduce one new food, so you are closer to your body sensations, or better said, you can translate your body sensations much better.

Sooooooooo, yes this is interresting to see where are the points in different diets. But @Crazycoco you just do not know the difference between french and others! It is normal and not rude to be provocative in France! Much less than anywhere else!

Please others who are not European, be ethnologists and laugh at the French trick that is no way rude in this country : you are supposed to stimulate others by a word like "wrong", so that they are triggered in their creativity to answer you! And the person who uses the word "wrong" is just trying to make end's ends meet, look for where the opposites have something in common or can enrich each other! This coco nut told you many times that he was trying to see what was good and in common in 2 different diets, and where the differences come from. Why some opposite in the diet reach good or even same results?

cococrazy, how would you rephrase your question as a wise ehtnologist who drops his native trick? :)
I have wished for a long time that this forum's members would all put their country visible to others... We are here like the supermarkets: very international and a mix trying to match and create something new.

 

[ecstatichamster]

Regarding the quote "Did you notice the name of this forum? " you mention above, yes i read it, "FORUM" not "CULT".
So Argumention not deifying.

It's about a specific approach to health and a specific way of looking at health interpreted with research from Dr. Peat. That's our paradigm here.

 

[Xisca]

Sometimes I think I write for nothing....

 

[Crazycoco]

So Thank you xisca for the kind words!

"Please others who are not European, be ethnologists and laugh at the French trick that is no way rude inthis country : you are supposed tostimulate others by a word like"wrong", so that they are triggeredin their creativity to answer you!And the person who uses the word"wrong" is just trying to make end'sends meet, look for where the opposites have something incommon or can enrich each other!"

Yes exactly that! I really dont think i'm necessarly right it was just to provoke some debates to seek the truth or the less wrong.
We love debates in France and to have one you have to challenge common ideas. For example when i was a lowcarber my family always showed me sushi bars and said "boo look at those japaneses and that rice. They Will going to be sooo fat!" (Scoffing at me) and there was nothing wrong with that! Then my father said "May be he needs some carbs to Understand the joke" and that was fun and provoke a debate. After that a friend said to me (because i said gluten was very bad): "why dont you call Obama to sell him a terrible weapon to fight isis? Gluten. Imagine all that bread throwing by plane on their faces" ... And that was fun made me seeking more arguments and finally think "well, it s possible to lose Wright on low carb, not necessarly the best, and certainly not the only one" and discoverd ray peat work.

So the same thing here: frankly it' s hard to argue against a bit of Omega 3 in a diet. Not much, just a little, not necessarly from oils.

Regarding the fact that calcium block the toxicity of iron of the red meat. Yes the doctor is french, a Leading expert in this field. I has conduct Leading studies in rats and observe the following:

- high red meat in rats: colon cancer at the end

-high red meat plus calcium intake: no colon cancer at all.

-so the "after red meat, have a bit of cheese"

Thank you again!

 

[Crazycoco]

" I has conduct Leading studies in rats"

Sorry, HE has conduct these study not me of course

 

[tankasnowgod]

The title of the article you have mentioned is "unsaturated vegetables oils: toxic".
In the Lyon heart study, they use canola oil to save lives. May be in this case "toxic" seems to much.

Please, read the the title of an article you mention in the future.

Again, they did NOT use Canola oil to save lives. While it was indeed used (or at least recommended) in the experimental group, remember, according to your own sources, PUFA intake was lower in the experimental group. It was the overall diet that saved lives, and you cannot CORRECTLY attribute any one part of the intervention to lower mortality based only on this experiment. And since this was a free living study that used dietary recall surveys, we don't know how much canola oil was consumed by the experimental group.

Beyond that, Canola is more unsaturated than traditional fats, but less unsaturated than most of the other common vegetable oils (like cottonseed, soybean, and corn).

To use your own words against you- Please, read the study you mention in the future.

 

[tankasnowgod]

Why erroneous? In one group, more butter in the other less butter and more canola oil. Results: in the canola oil, far less heart diseases and cancer. Pure fact.

Nope, that is cherry picking. The Lyon study also recommended increased increased fish, poultry instead of meat, more root and green vegetables, fruit at least once a day. Along with the fact it was a free living study that used dietary recall. THIS is what makes your statement erroneous.

 

[Crazycoco]

"The Lyon study also recommended increased increased fish, poultry instead of meat, more root and green vegetables, fruit at least once a day". Yes plus canola oil and far less butter.
even if we can't isolate a single factor , I can agree with you on that, saying that canola oil in regular amont is toxic seems to be highly debatable her IMO.
If it was the case, the study would not show a huge decreasing Risk after canola oil use.
"Toxic" is a tough term in general, particular in medicine. If you give "toxic" thing to a patient with heart problem he will die. Here they survive very well, with this "toxic" thing in spite of butter.
So no, i can as' the question
"Is peat gone too far?".

 

[sladerunner69]

Hi,

Brief story. I was overweight. Read Gary taubes and went to à very low carb diet (under 40 grams of carbs per day). Lost a lot, no specific problems to mention but was still overweight. Read Ray peat. Ice cream eggs gelatin coffe and coconut oil on the menu: lost more weight! Coconut oil has a big impact on me. I litteraly can't gain weight with coconut oil in my diet. But health is not all about weight loss. And here i Would like to have your opinion about the relevance of a mediterranean diet. I'm french. In france we have a top leading expert in nutrition: Michel de lorgeril. In has conducted a study, RCT, the Lyon heart (1994) and it is because of this study That you are all aware about the mediterranean diet. It's a great study with massive results. Just by changing diet habits, people reduce heart failures, heart attacks by 70%! No drugs has ever done That! Here is the thing: no omega 6 oils but they replaced butter with canola oil and olive oil. Reduced saturated fats a lot. So this experimental study, i think, falsify Ray peat views. Keep in mind That the author of the study think That the results Would have been better if the second group drank wine! (he thinks that alcohol is heart protective and That the cancer-wine studies are entierly bull****, he thinks that coffee is protective too. About dairy he says That cheese is very fine but not better or cream). And everyone knows That Jeanne calment (the ancient oldest woman -french-) drunk a lot of olive oil and wine...
We cannot test a mediteranean diet versus ice cream diet but frankly guys...

What do you think?

Studies like that really are just not reliable. The method for collecting data is to simply ask the participants to maintain a log of the foods they ate. Everyone has a financial incentive to claim they ate according to the guidelines defined by the study, but there's really nothing assuring us that any of them actually do.

Another common study is the purely statistical inference method, for example to find the countries and populations with the lowest occurrence of a certain illness and to attribute this "good health" to whatever the average diet of the country probably is.

 

[Crazycoco]

Hi salderunner,

I can guarantee you that this study is a top ranking study. Every epidemiologist in nutrition is aware of it. The only reason why american have heard of mediteranan diet in recent years is because of this study. the european journal of clinical nutrition published a paper to find biais because of the astonishing results: they found no biais. It's not "a" study, in epidemiology of nutrition it' s "THE" study.
The hundreds of patient of the study had no "financial incentive" because they already had an heart attack and they follow the recommandation a lot because they were told it can save their lives.
When i read the lorgeril work he mention an anecdotal but intersting story. Do you know why it's very difficult to conduct this kind of study again (put patients with previous heart attacks on two different diets, the mediteranean diet and an other one)?

It's because they dont find patients with previous heart attacks who want to be tested and not be include in the mediterranean group!

Again if someone could contact ray peat about this study it Will be Great!

 

[Crazycoco]

Again i'm clearly not saying that mediteranean way is the only way to be Healthy. Clearly not and the author of the study thought the same (at first, they wanted to test the okinawan diet- because of the longevity and favorable Omega 3 ratio- but they did not because they thought that it was more simple to a french to follow a mediterranean diet that an asian one).
Again to me, the best thing seems to me:

-pufa low
-good ratio Oméga 3/6

 

[schultz]

you say no omega 6 but isnt canola oil full of omega 6

I think it's around 30% PUFA, so about the same as modern day lard. Soybean averages at about 58%, sunflower oil @ 66% and safflower @ 75%.

Edit: It's actually 28% PUFA.

 

[Xisca]

I think you have not found that you can quote messages or part of messages, and also several messages.

Research can be good, from Peat and others, but a meditarrenean diet makes sense when you live where you find the local food. And less change in the daily food means less stress. They can try the okinawa diet in Japan!

Note that if you have no supermarket and no planes, you'd better investigate how to manage oat if you live in Scotland! It is just impossible that orange juice and milk be universal for everybody.

Maybe this diet is fine despite the canola oil. Curious that they tried it, as it is not in the meditarranean diet. I think PUFA means only part of the story, as each oil has many tastes = many characteristics. Now I would chose the strongest olive oil I can instead of the mildest! More oleuropein!

Bear in mind Peat is American, and they have eaten PUFA for a much longer time, and also have enriched food in iron for a longer time, so all this is more a burden than for us in Europe. Not all people will need 4 years to get rid of all their pufas for example. I absolutely do not mind eating strawberries and other berries despite the fact RP says the seeds are high in pufa! I swallow them anyway I do not think there is that much, and no oil is pure pufa, and no fat is free of pufa 100% I think. Fats are a mix.

So what if they put butter or coco oil in the otherwise same diet?
What if they allow only olive and no canola?
These are good questions.... why the diet is ok with no SatFat?

 

[Crazycoco]

Thank you xisca :)

Yes, may be this diet is fine despite the canola oil... and may be not. If so, the canola oil "toxicty" seems to be quite weak here... but why dont take seriously the begining hypothesis of the authors, that a good ratio Omega 3/6 is a key factor in health?
Is that more irrelevant that to worry about pufa content in berries (i dont say you are?
I remember a famous quote. What is the specificity of a great idea in science? You can explain a lot with little. Regarding the Omega3/6 in reasonable amount (aka not that much) you can explain a lot: why people as differents as japanese and the Méditeranean whose eat in opposite way are healthy (low pufa, good ratio).

And Yes a rct study olive oil vs coconut oil vs canola oil would be great.

Thank you Again for you post!

 

[Crazycoco]

Regarding the saturated fat question the author thinks (i' m not convinced with that) that wine protects against too much saturated fats and that can explain the "french paradox". He insists that a mediteranan diet is clearly not anti-dairy. But he thinks that the best way to consume dairy is cheese.

 

[Peat Tong]

they need a study comparing all the fats!
high alpha-linolenic acid (canola) - high oleic acid (hi-oleic sunflower or other) - high oleic acid plus phenols (olive oil) - and high dairy fat, high coconut, high palm kernel, high omega 6...