Here's a link to the study (which, by the way, was unnecessarily difficult to find): <a href="http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(17)32252-3/fulltext" rel="nofollow">http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-67...</a><p>What a sensationalist and <i>wrong</i> headline. All it says is that "Total fat and saturated and unsaturated fats were not significantly associated with risk of myocardial infarction or cardiovascular disease mortality." So whether you have low or high fat in your diet, you could fill a good portion of that total caloric intake with protein instead of carbohydrates and that would still satisfy the claims that you can mitigate against "Higher carbohydrate intake was associated with an increased risk of total mortality".<p>They also don't define what "low" means in "low-fat" to define at what threshold would "kill you" (<i>eyes roll</i>). Doctors generally recommend 20-35% already[1] so I'm not sure how any of this is groundbreaking.<p>[1] <a href="https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/articles/reducing-fat-intake" rel="nofollow">https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/articles/reducing-fat-...</a>
Sigh. I mean, they're right, but they're also still missing the concept of "What kind of fat?". Different kinds of fats effect you differently. This has been known for a long time.<p>One my favorite blog posts summarizing some research on this point, on Butter vs Margarine, is 8 years old now, and it still hasn't penetrated the mainstream.<p><a href="http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2009/10/butter-vs-margarine-showdown.html" rel="nofollow">http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2009/10/butter-vs-marg...</a>
Last time I've been to US, in Cambridge, MA, it was next to impossible to buy a decent non-low fat yoghurt. It was like observing shelves full of junk food everywhere. Sigh.
PSA: Death is coming. You are going to die. Your parents are going to die. Your kids are going to die. Everyone you know is going to die.<p>Are there things which you can do to reduce your risk of dying earlier than the average person born at the same time as you? Sure.<p>Are there things which you can do to definitely prolong your life? No.<p>Death is a statistics game and 1 out of every 1 people will die at some point in their life.<p>I don't begrudge anyone their interest in dietary/health news, but articles like this get tossed about as justifications for making huge swings in your diet or telling others to do the same. Whenever I see things like this, it strikes me the same as an article like "The next iphone will use transparent, flexible, waterproof plastic".<p>Like engineering, your diet involves making tradeoffs about the food you input into your body, optimizing for a desired result (in terms of longevity of life, physical capability while alive, enjoyment of food you are eating, scarcity of resources, environmental impact, cruelty to animals - perceived or otherwise, etc.). Also like engineering, there are hard constraints which hem in the possible solution space. Pick your desired result, and make the tradeoffs you want, just don't forget the hard constraint that death is coming, my friends.<p><i>Anecdotally, this might be more on-my-mind than usual because my 66-year-old uncle, who eats fish, fresh fruit and vegetables, and jogs every day, collapsed this weekend from a heart attack and is now in the hospital in a coma. I would have said the above regardless, but it's a rather poignant reminder for me at the moment.</i>
Am I missing something or is there not a single link to the study in this article? Didn't see it anywhere on mobile.<p>After the title there isn't really any info about dietary fats but instead will read about how basically all this study may have found is that those doing "low fat diets" might end up eating really crappy carbs. I can't find the link to the study though so maybe they found something else..<p>I don't think people eating crappy carbs and drinking soda could really be considered "dieters" they seem more like "unhealthy eaters who happen to be eating low fat".<p>From the article:
"Those doing so tended to eat far too much stodgy food like bread, pasta and rice, the experts said, while missing out on vital nutrients.<p>Participants eating the highest levels of carbohydrates – particularly refined sugars found in fizzy drinks and processed meals – faced a 28 per cent higher risk of early death."<p>Also their suggestion goes on to say a good balance is 35% of calories from fat which I would say is still fairly 'low-fat' of a diet IMO but I guess that's pretty subjective and I'm not a dietician.
Sigh... this article presents a false dichotomy: you either eat a high fat diet, or you mostly eat refined carbs.<p>Based on dozens of nutritionists I've talked to, focusing on macronutrients as the primary metric is not great. Personally, I look at these things before macros: is it plant-based, is it whole (not refined/processed).
This article is an example of one reason why AMP is bad. I'm on a laptop and still seeing the AMP (restricted) version. I just saw a blank screen and it took about 4 seconds for any content to appear. The publisher was prevented from displaying their full website to me, because someone linked to the AMP version.
I keep thinking that diet, and fitness in general, is a complex thing to keep track of. I'm reminded that the wealthy, who can afford a personal trainer or physician to give advice for a significant proportion of the time would be better able to manage this, and I wonder when it will be that our own personal digital assistants will be able to help more of us do that.<p>Problem is of course, privacy.. if <i>Ltd</i> create a PDA which monitors you, then it is <i>Ltd</i> who are doing that for their own purposes. If the PDA is owned by the people who use it, that is better.. but thats unlikely to happen I fear.
Not too much and not too little, seems to be the way to go. But, given the amount of previous research about harmful effects of fat, it's hard to tell whether this is just an outlier. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if "High-fat diet could kill you, major study shows" has appeared in headlines more than once.<p>"Loosening the restriction on total fat and saturated fat and imposing limits on carbohydrates <i>when high</i> to reduce intake to moderate levels would be optimal."<p>Emphasis mine. What...?
Whenever I ask who we should send to colonize Mars, I humorously propose Bedouins since they are use to living in the harsh desert climate. Joke aside, inside our cultural realm the most sustainable group seems to be the "family in 50s". I take the same approach to dieting, eating a normal portion of variated traditional food will give you all the nutrients you need. Naturally not arguing that you should reject scientific studies.
<p><pre><code> early death
</code></pre>
So... what exactly does that mean? Before 50? Under 65? Any age lower than normal? Anything earlier than expected? Especially if injured or ill, for any reason? Otherwise healthy?<p><pre><code> ...risk
...heart attack
</code></pre>
I don't know what these vague qualitative assessments indicate. Link between "risk" of heart attack and "low-fat" diet?
Another article covering the same story, minus the scary headline:<p><a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/canadian-researchers-fat-carbohydrates-the-lancet-1.4266130" rel="nofollow">http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/canadian-researchers-fat-carbo...</a>
I think the real news here is that the NHS, FDA, and all other government agencies cannot be trusted. They lie to make money for corporations. Following their recommendations is just stupid. That'd be a good thing for parents to teach their children.
This isn't the most reputable source, but there are a lot of good points in here <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLtQLDptI1g" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLtQLDptI1g</a>
You don't need carbs to survive. You do need both fats and proteins (for production of hormones and tissues).<p>You can get glucose through glucogenesis of fats AND proteins not just carbs.
Stick to getting 1/3 of your calories from each one of 3 main groups: carbs, proteins and fat.
And while you're at it, stick to good carbs and good fat.
I'm still confused if apoe4s should do a low fat diet?<p>I've seen it recommended but with all the damage carbs can do I'm thinking high fat is still the way to go?
seems like articles like this are always read as justification for KFC, butter, cheese and burgers rather than "hey maybe eating all those nuts and avocados <i>is</i> a good idea???"
as a consumer I don't know what to believe.<p>It seems like every other day some counter study is released.<p>I gave up and just decided to eat whatever the fuck I want.