sf wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Apr 2011 12:13:21 -0400, "Steve Freides" >
> wrote:
>
>> sf wrote:
>>> On Tue, 5 Apr 2011 00:54:57 -0500, "Polly Esther"
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Steve Freides" <> wrote > My understanding of recent research is
>>>> that there is very little, if
>>>>> any, connection between dietary cholesterol and the level in one's
>>>>> blood.
>>>>>
>>>>> -S-
>>>>> I know, Steve. I know. But - we've been through the by-pass
>>>>> trauma ( twelve years ago) and being very careful about dietary
>>>>> cholesterol may / may not have made the difference. Polly
>>>
>>> "Very little" evidence becomes "enough to be cautious" about when
>>> you're actually playing with your spouse's life instead of making it
>>> an academic exercise.
>>
>> "Very little evidence" means you may be worsing your overall health
>> by not eating enough dietary fat. Please do not oversimplify the
>> argument to view those who eat dietary fat, including eggs, as being
>> somehow carefree - I am not. I make it a point to eat certain kinds
>> of fat precisely because they're good for me, good for my health,
>> good for my heart, and not because I happen to like the taste of a
>> spoonful of coconut oil in the morning.
>>
>> If you or anyone else wishes to rest easy because you're following
>> what you think is the conservative course of action, "very little
>> evidence" should become "enough evidence with which to delude
>> yourself." Read, read, and read some more, and then undertake a
>> careful experiment with your own body - have blood work done, then
>> alter your diet to include healthy fats (and zero trans fats,
>> partially and fully hydrogenated oils, etc.) for a few months, then
>> have bloodwork done again. See how you feel, and see what your
>> doctor says. Please post your results here when you do.
>>
>
> I don't know why you took that to mean *no* fat. Just because you and
> others have gone overboard on no fat diets doesn't mean everyone does
> crazy things like that.

I have not gone overboard, I don't diet ...

> People eat far more than their recommended
> daily allowance and that's a fact; otherwise there wouldn't be so many
> morbidly obese people walking around (and posting to rfc).

.... I'm not obese, I don't have a weight problem.

> I am
> talking about limiting saturated fats to the 20 or so mg that a
> healthy diet allows and not going over it. If you want to waste part
> of your saturated fat intake on a gratuitous spoonful or coconut oil
> or translate what I said into some crazy no fat diet, knock yourself
> out.

Your choice of words suggests a lack of information. Again, please read
on this subject.

Saturated fat is far from monolithic. There are good saturated fats and
bad saturated fats, and the goods one ought to be encouraged, not
limited, because we don't get enough of them in a typical Western diet.
You sound like you're blindly following your own, questionable
interpretation of an already questionable dietary guideline. What
you're suggesting as moderate is an immoderate limitation on foods that
help improve health in measurable ways like improving cholesterol
profiles.

I've got nothing new to add - the Internet is full of good information
on this topic. The last word is yours if you wish it.

-S-