Saturated Fat TERRIBLE For Liver Health & Diabetes. Compared To PUFA

Nuancé

Member
Joined
May 11, 2020
Messages
50
Hello,
Finally, where are the well done studies who incriminates PUFA or vegetable oil ?
I'm not saying that vegetable oil are great, even though I think that whole PUFA foods (fatty fish, nuts especially) are great for health if they are fresh and not rancid.

But when you look at the evidence... SFA vs PUFA, the "team SFA" is always worst.
Fatty liver, insulin sensitivity, visceral fat, it's terrible, in every study we have the same conclusions.
Even the so vile SUNFLOWER OIL seems quite good.

Effects of n-6 PUFAs compared with SFAs on liver fat, lipoproteins, and inflammation in abdominal obesity: a randomized controlled trial

"Results: A total of 61 subjects completed the study. Body weight modestly increased but was not different between groups. Liver fat was lower during the PUFA diet than during the SFA diet [between-group difference in relative change from baseline; 16% (MRI; P < 0.001), 34% (MRS; P = 0.02)]. PCSK9 (P = 0.001), TNF receptor-2 (P < 0.01), and IL-1 receptor antagonist (P = 0.02) concentrations were lower during the PUFA diet, whereas insulin (P = 0.06) tended to be higher during the SFA diet. In compliant subjects (defined as change in serum linoleic acid), insulin, total/HDL-cholesterol ratio, LDL cholesterol, and triglycerides were lower during the PUFA diet than during the SFA diet (P < 0.05)"

Saturated Fat Is More Metabolically Harmful for the Human Liver Than Unsaturated Fat or Simple Sugars

"Macronutrient composition of excess energy influences pathways of IHTG: CARB increases DNL, while SAT increases and UNSAT decreases lipolysis. SAT induced the greatest increase in IHTG, insulin resistance, and harmful ceramides. Decreased intakes of SAT could be beneficial in reducing IHTG and the associated risk of diabetes."

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

"Both groups gained similar weight. SFAs, however, markedly increased liver fat compared with PUFAs and caused a twofold larger increase in VAT than PUFAs. Conversely, PUFAs caused a nearly threefold larger increase in lean tissue than SFAs. Increase in liver fat directly correlated with changes in plasma SFAs and inversely with PUFAs. Genes involved in regulating energy dissipation, insulin resistance, body composition, and fat-cell differentiation in SAT were differentially regulated between diets, and associated with increased PUFAs in SAT. In conclusion, overeating SFAs promotes hepatic and visceral fat storage, whereas excess energy from PUFAs may instead promote lean tissue in healthy humans."

I'm not here for starting a war haha, but only for debate. We have to think for ourselves and not being fanatic.
1f642.png


I also remember a study on muffins... one group fed with palm oil enriched muffins, an other with sunflower oil enriched muffins and same results.
Great methodology everytime, intervention controlled trial.
 

tankasnowgod

Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2014
Messages
8,131
Hello,
Finally, where are the well done studies who incriminates PUFA or vegetable oil ?

Funny how you talk about "Well Done Studies," and then cite the following three that you did. The first and last are free living studies, so hardly "well done" in that sense, as they aren't able to control for diet at all. The second is ridiculous, as it uses 100 grams of Blue Cheese a day. Insane. Massive confounder, as using a moldy cheese is almost certainly filled with excess endotoxin, and other problematic substances.

As for the Well Conducted studies you ask for, Haidut has posted several times about the Nanji studies where researchers induced fatty liver (and I believe even NASH and cirrhosis) with diets of Poly Unsaturated Fat and Alcohol, and reversed these conditions simply by switching to Saturated Fat, even when the animals were still being fed alcohol.

A suggestion, as a newbie (if you aren't a troll), you should spend more time searching the forum first, rather than writing a post about studies that have already been discussed previously.
 
Last edited:

boris

Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2019
Messages
2,345
I don't know about the first study (I would say that the saturated fat protects the liver), but the others:

[...] This study is about overfeeding. As such, not really sure what its point is. Clearly if there is an overfeeding you'd expect suboptimal results. (2) It is not a study where you had group of people eating entirely one or other type of fat. It simply added the various types of fat on top of a diet that was already high in PUFA. The same trick done in virtually every other "Look! SFA is bad" study.
A legit study would have fed the typical amount of calories these people consumed in order to maintain stable weight and then ensure that each group eats ONLY a specific type of fat (MUFA, PUFA, SFA), not a mix of all of them where one of the types is slightly more abundant.

And about this:

Finally, where are the well done studies who incriminates PUFA or vegetable oil ?

Probably hundreds of them here: Search Results | Scientific Studies: PUFA | Ray Peat Forum

More:
Unsaturated Fats and Heart Damage – Functional Performance Systems (FPS)
Arachidonic Acid’s Role in Stress and Shock – Functional Performance Systems (FPS)
Unsaturated Fats and Longevity – Functional Performance Systems (FPS)
PUFA, Development, and Allergy Incidence – Functional Performance Systems (FPS)
 
Last edited:
OP
N

Nuancé

Member
Joined
May 11, 2020
Messages
50
Funny how you talk about "Well Done Studies," and then cite the following three that you did. The first and last are free living studies, so hardly "well done" in that sense, as they aren't able to control for diet at all. The second is ridiculous, as it uses 100 grams of Blue Cheese a day. Insane. Massive confounder, as using a moldy cheese is almost certainly filled with excess endotoxin, and other problematic substances.

As for the Well Conducted studies you ask for, Haidut has posted several times about the Nanji studies where researchers induced fatty liver (and I believe even NASH and cirrhosis) with diets of Poly Unsaturated Fat and Alcohol, and reversed these conditions simply by switching to Saturated Fat, even when the animals were still being fed alcohol.

A suggestion, as a newbie (if you aren't a troll), you should spend more time searching the forum first, rather than writing a post about studies that have already been discussed previously.

Keep calm and don't be so arrogant when you're talking about animal studies ("even when the animals were")... we're not monkeys, worms, platypus or bloody rodents haha but HUMANS who eat foods. I agree that moldy cheese can be a confounder, but other studies don't use it and share the same results.
These studies were globally well designed, that's juste bad faith.

An other one who quotes SFA for insulin resistance and ceramide.

Efficacy of nutritional interventions to lower circulating ceramides in young adults: FRUVEDomic pilot study
 

Jessie

Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2020
Messages
1,018
Well, I don't really have any vested interest in defending saturated fat, I think a high fat diet of ANY kind is bad.

I do think the stuff on liver health is bogus though. There's been well done research on liver cirrhosis in alcoholics and those who ate butter didn't develop the disease, and those who had the disease actually saw improvements.

I also think there's established research in dietary PUFA's role in the cancer metabolism. Broda Barnes even noted this way back in the early 20th century. His book "Solved the Riddle of Heart Attacks" the whole last chapter is dedicated to polyunsaturated fat, worth a look at.

If you focus on getting sugar as you primary energy source you wont have to worry about any of this.
 

tankasnowgod

Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2014
Messages
8,131
These studies were globally well designed, that's juste bad faith.

I don't even know what that means. "Globally" well designed? "Bad Faith?

In a free living study, you CAN'T control what the participants do. That's not bad faith, that's a fact.

Anyway, you don't really seem interested in Peat's ideas, or the benefits of Saturated Fats vs Unsaturated, you simply seem interested in repeating the mainstream line of thinking. I'm really not interested in debating you, especially since you yourself are a fanatic of the mainstream line of thinking (with only 14 posts on this forum, to boot).
 
OP
N

Nuancé

Member
Joined
May 11, 2020
Messages
50

I've read a couples of them. Some are interesting yes... but Haidut tends to quote unrealistics studies on animals, cells mainly. Or associations studies concerning vegetable oil, that I don't appreciate by the way.
Until now I've never seen studies talking about whole fish, whole nuts and their so-called dangers. When I check studies on these subjects on Pubmed, they always seems to be protective for heart health, brain health etc in well designed studies, as are the majority of whole foods normally consumed.
 
OP
N

Nuancé

Member
Joined
May 11, 2020
Messages
50
I don't even know what that means. "Globally" well designed? "Bad Faith?

In a free living study, you CAN'T control what the participants do. That's not bad faith, that's a fact.

Anyway, you don't really seem interested in Peat's ideas, or the benefits of Saturated Fats vs Unsaturated, you simply seem interested in repeating the mainstream line of thinking. I'm really not interested in debating you, especially since you yourself are a fanatic of the mainstream line of thinking (with only 14 posts on this forum, to boot).

Curiously you don't talk anymore of your animal studies. :)

No I'm not a fanatic, that's all. I appreciate some Peat ideas, about Ca/P ratio, glycine, fruits etc and I doubt about other things. It's not black or white between PUFA and SFA, nutrition is always a matter of nuances.
I prefer human studies that aren't totally perfect (it's nearly impossible to control everything but you don't necessarily have to when there is an huge trend without strong controverse) than pigs or mice sorry.
 

Jessie

Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2020
Messages
1,018
I prefer human studies that aren't totally perfect (it's nearly impossible to control everything but you don't necessarily have to when there is an huge trend without strong controverse) than pigs or mice sorry.

I mean, there's been a few meta-analysis (with humans) that show a inverse relationship with saturated fat and disease. I remember seeing those way back in my keto days, lol.

Go to Marks Daily Apple, if its still around. He cites all kinds of references in his articles about SFAs.
 
OP
N

Nuancé

Member
Joined
May 11, 2020
Messages
50
I mean, there's been a few meta-analysis (with humans) that show a inverse relationship with saturated fat and disease. I remember seeing those way back in my keto days, lol.

Go to Marks Daily Apple, if its still around. He cites all kinds of references in his articles about SFAs.

And you're totally right ! There is an huge controversy on saturated fats when talking about associations studies. But in intervention studies it's often bad when we talk about saturated fat from isolated fat (butter, cream, beef tallow...).
Except coconut oil I admit, coconut oil is particularly rich in MCT so..
 

yashi

Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2020
Messages
91
I wouldn't mind a few devil's advocate threads with studies. The problem with them is, they are often low effort. Just posting a few links to studies and then pasting the text of some result makes it now a chore for anyone that should now argue for or against it. Atleast these threads should have a small, self-written summary about the important points like

- human or animal study
- quick runup of what the groups actually ate or did and in what forms (and other study design stuff, summarized)
- timeframes used for study length, test times, etc.
- results
- possible weaknesses or blind spots

But just pasting some links to studies and a few pastes is basically "you go do the work for me, dive into these studies, find the relevant parts, pick them apart and then research other studies and show me". Basically, all I'd expect is to atleast try to proof you did some analysis of studies you want to discuss first and show they are worth discussing.
 
J

jb116

Guest
Funny how you talk about "Well Done Studies," and then cite the following three that you did. The first and last are free living studies, so hardly "well done" in that sense, as they aren't able to control for diet at all. The second is ridiculous, as it uses 100 grams of Blue Cheese a day. Insane. Massive confounder, as using a moldy cheese is almost certainly filled with excess endotoxin, and other problematic substances.

As for the Well Conducted studies you ask for, Haidut has posted several times about the Nanji studies where researchers induced fatty liver (and I believe even NASH and cirrhosis) with diets of Poly Unsaturated Fat and Alcohol, and reversed these conditions simply by switching to Saturated Fat, even when the animals were still being fed alcohol.

A suggestion, as a newbie (if you aren't a troll), you should spend more time searching the forum first, rather than writing a post about studies that have already been discussed previously.
 

Jessie

Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2020
Messages
1,018
And you're totally right ! There is an huge controversy on saturated fats when talking about associations studies. But in intervention studies it's often bad when we talk about saturated fat from isolated fat (butter, cream, beef tallow...).
Except coconut oil I admit, coconut oil is particularly rich in MCT so..
I think translocation of endotoxin is probably a big reason for this. It will elicit a immune response and cause your LDL to spike. The real problem is the lipopolysaccharides, but fat acts as a carrier for these inflammatory substances. MCTs are a TLR4 antagonist, so they will actually prevent this. You need good intestinal health to withstand high fat diets, and most people don't have a good microbiome in the western world today.
 

yerrag

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
10,883
Location
Manila
I wouldn't mind a few devil's advocate threads with studies. The problem with them is, they are often low effort. Just posting a few links to studies and then pasting the text of some result makes it now a chore for anyone that should now argue for or against it. Atleast these threads should have a small, self-written summary about the important points like

- human or animal study
- quick runup of what the groups actually ate or did and in what forms (and other study design stuff, summarized)
- timeframes used for study length, test times, etc.
- results
- possible weaknesses or blind spots

But just pasting some links to studies and a few pastes is basically "you go do the work for me, dive into these studies, find the relevant parts, pick them apart and then research other studies and show me". Basically, all I'd expect is to atleast try to proof you did some analysis of studies you want to discuss first and show they are worth discussing.
Well said.

But that is a good way for me to have someone do the reading and analysis for me. Thanks for showing me this m.o. lol
 

Gone Peating

Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2018
Messages
1,006
Even mainstream science acknowledges omega 6 is a disaster for one’s health. But they don’t put two and two together in recognizing vegetable oil is why we are so overloaded with omega 6
 

Tarmander

Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2015
Messages
3,763
oh hey look its this thread again

Honestly, it is probably personal experience. If the research goes back and forth like this for years on end, that usually means you should decide for yourself how you feel on different fats. No one feels good on soy oil or canola oil. Maybe Fish vs Sat fat is really the debate.

Personally my blood sugars do great on Sat fat...as long as I don't eat any carbs along with it...which means blood sugars do terrible on Sat Fat unless you go Keto. Fish is great for blood sugars
 

yerrag

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
10,883
Location
Manila
ersonally my blood sugars do great on Sat fat...as long as I don't eat any carbs along with it...which means blood sugars do terrible on Sat Fat unless you go Keto. Fish is great for blood sugars
So odd. I can say the opposite, and I'm not trolling. I do well on carb without sat fats, as well as with. But when I just eat sat fats with no carb, that is a downer for me. And I have to have protein in meals. I sink without protein.
 

Tarmander

Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2015
Messages
3,763
So odd. I can say the opposite, and I'm not trolling. I do well on carb without sat fats, as well as with. But when I just eat sat fats with no carb, that is a downer for me. And I have to have protein in meals. I sink without protein.
I am talking mainly about blood sugar levels and their stability. Sat fat alone is a real energy sinker
 

yerrag

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
10,883
Location
Manila

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom