I read an article last week in Time Magazine about saturated fat and I found it very interesting. Unfortunately Time doesn't give it away for free on the net but here's some of it:
Here's a video of it:
Remember when we were all eating weight watcher margarine and eating fat free chips, cookies and skim milk? Well the now they're saying that such eating was actually bad for you. Instead of eating fat we were eating carbs and artificial additives and it's led to a rise in diabetes and obesity. How 'bout foods like red meat? Well the thinking now is that these foods do not kill you because they contain both some good and bad fats thus they're a wash. For example they contain both LDL and HDL cholesterol.
How 'bout margarine vs butter? That's not even a wash anymore butter wins in a landslide
Back in 2000, the journalist Nina Teicholz got a gig reviewing restaurants in New York City for a small paper. It didn’t pay much, but it did come with free meals out, which is how Teicholz found herself eating the kind of rich, fatty food—choice cuts of beef, creamy soups, foie gras—that she’d avoided all of her life. She was breaking every nutritional dictate in the book and yet Teicholz lost 10 lbs. Her cholesterol, which should have been spiking since she was all but mainlining saturated fat, remained at healthy levels.
I take a couple things out of this:
1) It's good news for everyone 'cause who likes the taste of fat free things anyway?
2) How did science get it so wrong?
There's a moral here too as to what's "settled science". This was "settled" 20-30 yrs ago and now trans fat is being banned in certain places. These articles don't even touch on what some doctors are saying such as Dr Perlmutter says in this book:
He claims that no one should be taking statins because your brain needs cholesterol in order to function. This goes against what we were told 5 yrs ago.
It's all quite a change from what we were told a generation ago