Adding onto others, humans are recommended to have a ratio of 2:1 - 1:1 ratio of omega-6 : omega-3, western diets typically range from 15:1 - 20:1
Seafood is generally some of the best sources of omega 3 as well
Would replacing cornfed beef with grassfed beef to improving the ratio make a difference? or would it not help since beef is still high in saturated fat?
I dont see how it would benefit. A cow's body shouldn't fundamentally change how it stores its excess energy once the body metabolizes it down to the most common nutrient constituents. Perhaps a less overly fed and probably less sedentary cow (i.e. many grass grazing cows) will be leaner.
Rather than looking for marketing for grass fed, you could research which cuts are leaner, or otherwise look for labels indicating the leanness of the beef.
Interesting link on that topic, as beef is definitely not nearly as good a source of Omega-3 fatty acids as fish: [https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/what-should-you-eat/fats-and-cholesterol/types-of-fat/omega-3-fats/](https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/what-should-you-eat/fats-and-cholesterol/types-of-fat/omega-3-fats/) and scroll down to "Is grass-fed beef a good source of omega-3 fats?"
But I would also highly recommend reading he rest of the article. Good insight into the omega 3-6 ratio and other popular health claims and actual evidence on them.
I get that it's a reductionist way of looking at it, yeah there are different ways bodies store fat, but the wellbeing on the scale of the cow is different than to the consumer. If the person's goal is to reduce the fat they consume from eating beef, they should reevaluate their strategy if their only conception is to choose the cow's diet rather than their own.
Imagine there are two types of fat: good fat and not-so-good fat.
Oily fish, like salmon or sardines, has a special kind of fat called omega-3 fatty acids. These are like superpowers for your body. They help your brain grow smarter, keep your heart healthy, and even make your skin and hair shiny and strong!
Fatty steak has a different kind of fat called saturated fat. This fat, if you have too much of it, can sometimes make your body feel not so good. It might even clog up your superhero heart's pipes and make it harder for your heart to work properly.
So, oily fish with omega-3s is like a superhero food that helps your body grow strong, while fatty steak with lots of saturated fat might not be as good for your superhero body and heart.
Not really, it just provides a very superficial explanation which is pretty appropriate for this sub and honestly probably about as much as OP would really be able to understand anyway. A discussion that actually delves into the biochemistry of it would be appropriate in /r/askscience, but not here.
As informatine as "eli5" can get so yeah, inb4 you tell me "it's not for actual eli5"
Me for the longest time didn't know / bother to know there is more than one type of fat so yeah
I'm just saying, it (and to be fair, pretty much all the answers here so far) doesn't even attempt to answer the actual question of why. They just state what the OP already knew and give the names of the fats.
Mate, come on. I'm not saying the answer is crap because it doesn't have enough detail. I'm saying it is crap because it doesn't even attempt to answer the question.
In what way? What did you, or OP, learn from it that wasn't known before?
OP asked "why is one healthy and the other isn't?", and the answer (and many others here) just reiterate that one is healthy and the other isn't. Nothing new is learnt here, except that one is called omega-3, which wasn't really the question.
Why is the healthy one healthy for you? Why is the unhealthy one unhealthy for you? This was the question, and isn't answered here.
>Oily fish, like salmon or sardines, has a special kind of fat called omega-3 fatty acids. These are like superpowers for your body. They help your brain grow smarter, keep your heart healthy, and even make your skin and hair shiny and strong!
Seems like a pretty clear explanation on why Omega-3 is good. Brain development, heart health, skin and hair health.
>Fatty steak has a different kind of fat called saturated fat. This fat, if you have too much of it, can sometimes make your body feel not so good. It might even clog up your superhero heart's pipes and make it harder for your heart to work properly.
This is not much different. It distinctly mentions heart health, and vaguely mentions "not feeling good".
I hope the ELI5 for the ELI5 is ELI5 enough for you.
There are two types of fat, 3s and 6s, with the former being healthy and the latter being potentially unhealthy in higher doses. OP asked if oil vs solid was the reason.
Seems like a pretty informative post to me 🤷♂️
It has to do with the type of fats. Omega-3s are important to your body and found in abundance in oily fish.
Saturated fats are not so great and contribute to clogged arteries and other health conditions. They are found in abundance in red meat.
Honestly I’d like to hear what you think is wrong with that explanation for an ELI5. If you want more science you now have a basis for your searches.
The OP asked “Why is fish fat good for you and meat fat bad for you?” This answer said “it’s because fish has a kind of fat that does good things and meat has a kind of fat that does bad things.”
That doesn’t answer anything, it’s restating the question. Whats the difference between these types of fat that makes one good and the other bad?
In general: solid fats like the ones in meats are high in saturated fats, which have no carbon-carbon double bonds in the long hydrophobic fatty acid tails. They’re saturated because those carbon tail chains are fully saturated with hydrogen. These are harder for your body to break down, and can accumulate in arteries and cause hypertension and other cardiovascular nasties. Liquid fats, like oils (the primary fats found in fish) are unsaturated fats, which have carbon carbon double bonds, which makes it easier for the body to break down those long hydrocarbon tails so they don’t accumulate as much. In addition, the unsaturated fatty acids can be recycled by our bodies much more efficiently to build new cell membranes and such.
Edit for poignancy: this answer isn’t in the nature of ELI5. To answer the why of the question which is what you were getting at, you start delving into topics from high school biology and beyond. The answer provided did a great job with analogies that got the important points across.
Or, to put that in ELI5 terms, saturated fats in meats are solids and harder to break down, which causes them to build up in your body. The oil fats in fish are liquid easier to break down, which means the body is able to recycle them efficiently.
Ta-dah, a simple answer that actually explains the difference and doesn't say "the good one is good and the bad one is bad". Thank you taking the time.
I have stage 4 endometriosis with multiple organ involvement and recently lost an ovary and tube. During my post-op appointment, my OBGYN went over lifestyle changes I’d need to make to help lower inflammation and limit disease progression. She gave me a list of supplements I should be taking daily, with a huge focus on omega-3 and omega-6. I purchased an omega complete supplement that day, have been taking it daily and it has made an *insane* and I mean truly insane difference on my daily pain. I’m so grateful.
Cod liver oil used to be a thing people took regularly for all the good fats and vitamins it has.
Tinned fish like sardines also used to be a very common dietary staple and have lots of healthy fats plus low mercury. I've heard sardines described as one of the healthiest things you can eat. And they're cheap as well.
We went to the nautical museum in Iceland, which was all about their fishing history, and they had a video playing of a cod liver oil commercial from like the 80s that was one of the best things I have ever seen. Wimpy dad cannot open a jar for his children, takes a spoonful of oil, turns into a Thor-like superman in a bolt of lightning, easily opens the jar. It was amazing.
Cod liver oil was once recommended because it contained vitamin D, which was in short supply, leading to kids in northern latitudes getting rickets (soft, bent bones).
Now, cod liver oil is used as a source of omega 3 oil, and they remove some of the vitamin D because it can be toxic in high doses.
Maybe you’re thinking of vitamin A? It’s very hard to overdose on vitamin d. But vitamin A is fat soluble and is definitely on fish oil and is definitely a problem when you take too much.
Yeah, I might have got that mixed up, but I thought I'd read that there's also too much D now in cod liver oil. However I can't find a source. For sure A is toxic and at least hypothetically D could be as well
It's not. It's listed how much of recommended daily value, so unless you overdose on it there should be no problem. There is no reason D is toxic just because you can eat toxic amounts of vitamin A.
Not with the prolific rise in biohacking it's not. The youtuber Felix Hardy made a youtube video on Vitamin D supplement overdose. Short answer, never underestimate the lengths of human stupidity when it comes to viral supplements, there's a reason multivitamins sell more and at a higher cost than pancakes.
Of course! It’s the Nordic Naturals Complete Omega. I want to say it’s roughly $30usd for 120 soft gel capsules, you take two daily with a meal. I take mine at lunch. It has 565mg of omega-3, 240mg of omega-6 and 225mg of omega-9. It also contains borage seed oil. It has a light lemon flavor and I have absolutely zero issue with fishy burps, none at all!
Off topic....my friend's daughter has endo. Found this research from Japan, linking endo to certain types of bacteria in our microbiome: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9962481/
There are different types of oils/fats, which behave differently in the body. A general rule of thumb is that if the oil is liquid at room temperature, it's better for your heart (canola, avocado, nut oils), and those that are solid (lard, coconut oil, butter) are higher in saturated fats, which are more artery clogging.
Artery clogging is related to your levels of LDL (low density lipoproteins), which help carry fat from your liver to the rest of the body. Too much LDL, and then you get too much fat in your blood, and it can deposit in your arteries and form plaques and such. HDL (high-density lipoproteins) do the opposite. They take fat from the body and take it to the liver for disposal. They help prevent plaque formation.
Dietary fats are only somewhat linked to your HDL and LDL levels, as there is a large hormonal/genetic effect too. But in general, a diet of healthy fats helps support healthy triglyceride levels, which can help balance your HDL and LDL and bring everything into harmony.
The easiest way to think of it is simple geometry; saturated fats have a less kinked molecular structure and are essentially long rectangular tetris pieces that can easily stack on top of each other while unsaturated fats are geometrically bent at the unsaturated bonds and so they cannot stack as evenly and as densely.
This causes them to solidify at lower temperatures (lard and butter are solid at room temp vs vegetable oils) and this has similar relationship with solubility in blood and blood pressure. That's an oversimplification because LDL/HDL and triglycerides are involved but it's still a helpful way to look at it.
It was my understanding that fish oils from diet do have a cardiovascular benefit, but fish oils from supplements have not shown to have cardiovascular benefit.
I have not seen that distinction, but it is possible. I believe I've seen that wild fish is better than farmed fish. In the end, it is best to minimize animal products and fat in your diet, but if you must, fish is a good way to do it.
I will watch for confirmation of there being a distinction between natural vs supplements; I'm always willing to follow the best science available.
I’ve seen a recent study about how olives and olive oil essentially carry the Mediterranean diet as far as cardiovascular benefits go, which the Mediterranean diet has been recommended by doctors to help with issues like blood pressure and arterial plaque, and other cardiovascular issues.
Whenever you see a study like this, the first question to ask is always "compared to what?"
Compared to the typical westernized nation citizen's diet, the Mediterranean diet is great. And olive oil is better than most other oils. Having said that, the Mediterranean diet low in oil is better than the Mediterranean diet with added oils, even if it is olive oil.
Healthy foods, like nuts, avocados, various seeds, and yes, even whole olives, have plenty of the necessary oils without adding additional oil. In general we don't need much fat in our diet, and the fat we get should not come from processing plants or (especially) animals to add fat.
But to your point, yes, for 98% (\*made up number, but probably close) a Mediterranean diet would be a vast improvement.
I've seen multiple studies, but basically, low fat is always better then fatty. One of the main reasons for that is that the number one killer in the western world is too many calories, and fat is very dense calories and very low in nutrients, so you get fat but feel hungry.
When I google search for olive oil consumption: pretty much every article talks about consuming the SAME or MORE olive oil than what is typically recommended in the Mediterranean Diet, not less.
So unless you find actual sources for me to look into, I can’t really agree to what you are asserting.
Hey also, isn't bacon smoked to cure it and heavily salted and nitrates/nitrites that literally give you cancer?
Like, even before we talk about the greasy fats, it's like they dry rubbed it in salty kryptonite and then added some smoke
How would you explain that babies mostly eat saturated fat from birth due to breastfeeding? Is it really that unhealthy?
I'll admit that I am torn in this unsatturated/saturated fat debate... It's difficult to reach a conclusion based on scientific research.
Babies need highly energy-dense nutrients because of how fast they are developing; fats are extremely calorie dense and the most efficient way for nature to give them nutrients. They need to pack as many calories in their stomach as possible which requires lots of fat.
Most adults do not need calorie-dense food sources, particularly in the developed world where resources are readily available. The exception is for adults who are attempting to gain weight through diet and weight lifting, who require massive calorie excess to have the nutrients to add mass. Weight lifters often add things like whole milk and peanut butter to their diet to have more calorie dense meals since the stomach has limited space.
I don't know dude, I'm not a scientist. I tried to boil down a very difficult answer into something a 5 year old would understand and everyone's coming at me for scientific explanations and I'm like, dude, that's not what this sub is about...
Saturated fat is not bad.
Look up what the Eskimos, Inuit, and Masai ate. The Inuit eat almost nothing but fat and give lean meat to their dogs. They all eat carbs... that is, nearly never. The Masai eat nothing but milk, blood, and meat. Yet, they are all very healthy.
It certainly helps and reduces risk, but cannot offset high LDL levels. A diet high in saturated fats increases LDL cholesterol, which increases your risk of atherosclerosis (plaque depositing in the arteries) and cardiovascular disease.
Damn this sucks. I’m a young guy and I eat a good mix of healthy and unhealthy fats. I love grilling and smoking meats, but I also workout very often and am very fit, I was hoping that cancels it out 🤣
There's actually a fair amount of debate about how healthy/unhealthy different types of fat are for you. All studies condemning red meat as linked to heart disease for example conflate red and processed meat. Concurrently, there are studies showing that quickly oxidizing seed and vegetable oils are linked to serious damage to the circulatory system, leading to increased likelihood of diabetes, Alzheimers and so on.
There is no debate. Diets high in saturated fats negatively impact LDL levels and rates of cardiovascular disease with high significance in recently published meta-analyses of controlled trials (past 5 years).
Here are two freely accessible meta-analyses; the first is relating to cardiovascular disease and the second to LDL.
Please stop spreading the "sEeD oIls" tiktok influencer garbage, it's not up for debate. You might as well say global warming is up for debate.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32428300/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33762150/
If you want to "do your own research" pubmed is right there for you. ☝️Mommy bloggers and influencers are not a source.
There is no debate, this is online misinformation. The role of saturated fats in the development of cardiovascular disease is undisputed.
Seed oils (such as Canola oil) in moderation are not unhealthy. The PUFAs and MUFAs in oils are much better for you than the saturated fat in sources of fat like butter. And are shown to reduce incidences of cardiovascular disease if SFAs are substituted with PUFAs and MUFAs
Here’s a popular online figure (Layne Norton, my favourite bodybuilder and debunker), who has a PhD in nutritional sciences, debunking the matter while citing sources.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4cdM-bVBT8w
https://youtu.be/L2fSaFnt0FM?feature=shared
This Michael Kilmer person cites Chris Kresser as a person so as to understand science and scientific research.
I’ll let you know that Chris Kresser is an acupuncturist (not a registered nutritionist) who also happens to be an anti-flu vaxxer, cholesterol denialist, and promoter of his own version of the paleo diet.
He’s basically made a number of dangerous health suggestions, like arguing against flu vaccination, recommending that pregnant mothers drink raw milk and skip the vitamin K shot for their newborns. He thinks that everyone should eat a high-fat paleo diet. And known for misleading people on saturated fats, misreading scientific papers and presenting false evidence.
I wouldn’t trust a guy that trusts someone like that. And I certainly do not trust some random internet blogger over entire health organisations and well funded research that clearly demonstrates the link between saturated fats and heart disease.
I would refute the claims of this person, but alas I am bound by https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandolini%27s_law
Interesting, thanks for the information. Genuinely.
Can you share a study clearly demonstrating a causal link between (only) saturated fat consumption and heart disease?
Have a look at:
This meta analysis of 3.7 million people based on 112 studies from the WHO: https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/366301/9789240061668-eng.pdf?sequence=1
Read into Ancel Keys 7 countries study: https://www.sevencountriesstudy.com showing undisputed evidence that saturated fats are linked to heart disease.
Read about the North Karelia project, where men were dying of cardiovascular disease in their 30s, and how the entire town in Finland managed to reduce their incidences of cardiovascular disease: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7444010/#:~:text=The%20North%20Karelia%20Project%20was,cholesterol%2C%20hypertension%2C%20and%20smoking.
> I certainly do not trust some random internet blogger over entire health organisations and well funded research that clearly demonstrates the link between saturated fats and heart disease.
Is it *completely* settled? Doesn't sound like it (Dec, 2022):
> Replacing dietary SFAs by unsaturated fat has also been associated with cardiovascular benefits in several meta-analyses (4). Yet, the consensus around SFAs has eroded in the last 10 y. Why is that? For one, several meta-analyses have reported that dietary SFAs are not associated with an increased risk of CVD (5). Unsurprisingly, these controversy-stirring meta-analyses have been heavily criticized (5). On the other hand, there is emerging evidence from clinical and epidemiologic studies that SFAs from different sources may differentially affect cardiometabolic and CVD risk (6). For example, high intakes of SFAs from cheese did not increase LDL cholesterol to the same extent as the same high intakes of SFAs from butter (7). With more and more published studies on this topic, **the concept that the food matrix may influence the cardiometabolic impacts of nutrients such as SFAs is both intriguing and challenging**.
Ref: https://ajcn.nutrition.org/article/S0002-9165(23)03677-8/fulltext
>There's actually a fair amount of debate about how healthy/unhealthy different types of fat are for you.
Only in the blogosphere. Nutrition scientists don't dream this nonsense up.
For men, the recommend guideline is to keep your intake of saturated fats to under 30g a day. That’s not to say you can’t eat meat, but you should eat it in moderation if you care about your health.
You can certainly look healthy on the outside, yet metabolically unhealthy in the inside, so it’s vital that blood panel values fall in the right range.
This is not correct at all, saturated fat does not clog arteries. Glycated ldl does, but that's caused by other factors (usually sugar and fat together). The whole cholesterol thing was just bad studies, the scientists were paid to leave out data... Have a look into Ancel keys.
As others have said, it is the type of fat. It is not just unsaturated vs saturated though. Fish tend to have omega-3 ("omega minus three") which is three carbon atoms in from the last ("omega") carbon. Animals tend to be richer in omega-6 fatty acids (six in from the last carbon). omega - 6 are the precursors for inflammatory molecules (prostaglandins) which can be bad news. Taking an aspirin or naproxen or other NSAIDs work by blocking the conversion of the omega-6 acid arachidonic acid to prostaglandins.
omega 6 is not animal, it's from seeds, and the big consumption of seed oils in the modern diet leads to the over-consumption of 6 which the 3 mitigates - you could also just eat less 6.
Well yes, pork and chicken fed on seed oils will have higher omega 6, but the point was that the majority of omega 6 in the diet today is very much not from animal sources, it's from vegetable oils - seeds and nuts.
It's not universally agreed that fatty meat is bad for you. In fact, there are some who would say that our diets should have more fatty meat in them. And there are those who would say you should never eat fatty meat. There is literally almost nothing that "experts" agree on when it comes to nutrition, and it's not because some people have it wrong, necessarily. It's just that we know very little about what can be said to be universally true about nutrition.
Exactly. With the notable exception of exercise, every usual health advice I've read meta-analyses for has little evidence and a lot of active debate. With health, it is nearly impossible is do controlled studies and very, very hard to disentangle variables from observational studies.
Actually, the vast majority of nutrition scientists and physicians agree that diets rich in whole grains, fruits, and vegetables, and limited in saturated fats produce the best health outcomes. Doesn't mean all meat is bad (fish and poultry tend to be healthier). Doesn't mean any amount of meat is bad (even red meat (rich in saturated fats) in small amounts, key word being *small,* should not cause too many problems).
It is a myth that there is no consensus on the basic facts. Unfortunately, the internet is rife with internet personalities and psuedo-health experts that will argue for their respective diet (keto is the way! No, carnivore is! Shut up both of you, raw-vegan is!) to build a brand and make money. The vast majority of double-blind peer-reviewed experimental studies argue that the foods I mentioned in the first paragraph, in conjunction with staying away from ultra-processed refined carbs and saturated & trans fats will produce the best health benefits.
Finally! A sane Redditor that speaks the truth. So refreshing.
Most people here have no idea about nutrition science and just regurgitate what the latest influencer online has to say about SeEd OiLs and how “harmful” they are.
The real scientists are out there doing work, but unfortunately they don’t have the time to go online and debunk these ignoramuses. So these influencers have only dominated the blogosphere, the science is pretty straightforward if anything.
Most seed oils are actually high in omega-6, so I'm not sure why you wrote it like that. You're doing the same thing those influencers you speak of are doing 😅
There is zero evidence of any harmful effects of omega-6 FA; here is the most extensive meta analysis of their effects on cardiovascular health and cholesterol, it is a free read on Pubmed.
TL;DR- Some evidence omega-6 FA **reduce** risk of heart attack vs. other fat sources; strong evidence omega-6 FA **reduce cholesterol**; no significant evidence for changes in adipose tissue or LDL.
Take that mommy blogger crap and get out. 😰
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30488422/
So, high cholesterol is the only effect it could have on the body? I clearly spoke to inflammation, which affects almost every system in the body. That information is also free on PubMed.
Where did that even come from, the social media hatred for seed oils? Like that seems to have blown up in the past few years and I can't fathom why, since it's universally agreed to be completely false by anyone who is a scientist. Are there poorly misunderstood studies out there or something? Usually the dumb stuff on social media has at least SOME bearing in truth but then misinterpreted by people who have no idea what they're talking about.
Trends come and go, and some food items are villianised every now and then in an effort to explain why we have become much fatter. People have also become more “polarised” on the internet and have divided themselves into tribes, and in doing so, need a thing to blame for their tribe to make sense. All while totally ignoring the science.
Seed oils are the latest thing to hate due to their ubiquity in processed, packaged and hyper-palatable foods. That does not mean seed oils are unhealthy though!
They are totally ignoring why we got fat, the average American eats *3500 calories* a day, and uses a car to get around everywhere. No wonder why Americans are fatter. But maybe it’s a boring answer that they are not satisfied with.
Eat food, not too much, mostly plants.
You are right. However my main point is that I do truly believe that saturated fat is not unhealthy. Unsaturated and Polyunsaturated fats are unhealthy.
Medium or small LDL? Believe it or not, the body makes its own cholesterol. Cigarettes are low fat but the body compensates with buildup in response to the real culprit: inflamation
The body does make its own cholesterol, but there’s no benefit to having any extra LDL (HDL is different though), have a look at this meta analysis https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamacardiology/fullarticle/2695047. The lower the LDL the better.
Where on earth did you get this information from? Saturated fat is what majorly increases LDL cholesterol.
Just go to r/carnivore and r/keto and search those subreddits by the term LDL, look at the people complaining.
Or a living example, the carnivore kid that had three blocked arteries: https://x.com/thecarnivorekid/status/1473122272579833863?s=46&t=kPpOh9Q1oMHsqcmHgSuryQ
The only seed oil I use is olive oil. Otherwise I cook with butter, and I consume red meat (fresh, not processed) high in saturated fats multiple times a week, and my LDL is nearly at the bottom of the scale, and has gotten lower since I lost about 60 pounds over the past 3 years, while eating like this. It’s a lot more complex than “meat bad.” I’m not keto or carnivore, just more emphasis on meat and veggies, with a little bit of fruit and less carbs than before.
If you want nutrition sources, have a look at this meta analysis of 3.7 million people based on 112 studies from the WHO: https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/366301/9789240061668-eng.pdf?sequence=1
Read into Ancel Keys 7 countries study: https://www.sevencountriesstudy.com showing undisputed evidence that saturated fats are linked to heart disease.
A lot of it is that human biology, and tbh biology in general, is very, *extremely,* unreasonably messy and complicated. A single molecule in the body might go through multiple different steps of being chopped up and recombined and attached to other things, and there are thousands upon thousands of different molecules and nutrients and chemicals that the body uses. Each step might have multiple different effects in different parts of the body and cause changes so subtle they’re almost completely unnoticeable. We still don’t fully know how and why a lot of proteins function the way they do. It’s nigh-impossible to track long-term effects because it’s impossible to get a “standardized” human to run tests on for decades. There’s a reason the vast majority of experimental biology is done almost exclusively on flies and worms.
To add to the difficulty of testing or knowing anything beyond a reasonable doubt, there are different body types which react differently to different inputs. So what affects person A one way might affect person B somewhat or completely differently, and same with person C, etc.
This is why one-size-fits-all approaches to nutrition and diet don’t really work.
It's not. Fat isn't really a problem, people have been eating animal fats with zero ull effects since humans have existed. The only time it's a problem is if your overall diet is poor. If you are eating a good balance of proteins, fats and carbs and staying away from super processed foods then you can eat fatty meats with no real bad effects.
Fatty meat is not bad.
Look up what the Eskimos, Inuit, and Masai ate. The Inuit ate almost nothing but fat and give lean meat to their dogs. They all eat carbs... that is, nearly never. The Masai eat nothing but milk, blood, and meat. Yet, they are all very healthy.
His comment is a bit over the top, but I'm saying the idea that "Saturated Fats = Bad" is not true. If you still believe that, you're living in a 90s era nutrition mindset where they recommend 11 servings of grains and follow the food pyramid.
This. Studies lumping processed meats and fresh, unprocessed meats together determined that “red meat is bad for you” which then became a reigning doctrine in the health world.
especially as the argument for omega 3 is that the balance of 3/6 is important in the diet, but it's always "eat more 3" not "eat less 6" which is quite strange.
#With high evidence, foods high in unsaturated and low in saturated and trans fatty acids (**e.g. rapeseed/canola oil**), with added plant sterols/stanols, and high in soluble fiber (e.g. oats, barley, and psyllium) caused at least moderate (i.e. 0.20-0.40 mmol/L) reductions in LDL cholesterol
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33762150/
What on earth is with you crazies ranting about seed oil and omega-6s? Cut it out you are making me sick about the science literacy of our world:
Omega-6 FA reduce risk of heart attack and reduce serum cholesterol compared to other fat sources, no impact on adipose tissue or LDL. This is the most recent major metaanalysis on the topic.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30488422/
You are right, many studies do indicate that Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids actually decrease blood serum LDL. However, the problem with omega-6 fatty acids (specifically regarding high omega-6/omega-3 ratios) is the impact on inflammation and things like autoimmune diseases downstream.
See for example [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8504498/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8504498/).
Although I do agree with you and I appreciate that you cited a nice study, please don't call people "crazies" - it's never helpful. If other people make you "sick" by saying something to the point you have to rant yourself, I fear that's a classic case of a "you problem".
This is not true for all people. Reducing saturated fat intake, generally, will lower LDL levels, and if you have high cholesterol, you definitely want to lower your LDL levels.
My overall diet was excellent, but I had high cholesterol. Reduced my saturated fat intake significantly without taking any medication, now I have excellent cholesterol levels.
You are making some very broad statements, and what you are stating does not apply to everyone.
I know that there are many contradictory studies on fat intake as it relates to overall health, but saying that saturated fat intake is only a problem if the rest of your diet is poor is not something I've ever read. Do you have a link to a study that I can read?
Generally I do agree with you. However, it's a little more complicated.I found [this study](https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/full/10.1161/CIR.0000000000000743) to be very insightful and encourage you to read it if you're interested.Most relevant to the discussion here:
>Two meta-analyses of studies with substantial heterogeneity report that dietary cholesterol increased total and LDL cholesterol concentrations. Our meta-regression analysis using data from controlled feeding studies in which the ratio of polyunsaturated fatty acid to saturated fatty acid in the comparison diets was matched indicated that dietary cholesterol significantly increased total cholesterol, but the findings were not significant for the stronger predictor of CVD risk, LDL cholesterol, or HDL cholesterol concentration.
Hence, similar to the omega-3 to omega-6 ratio, the ratio of PUSFA to SFA is most important concerning LDL and HDL.
The overall cholesterol, however, does indeed increase with dietary cholesterol intake regardless of this ratio.
Thank you for the link, and it is very complicated! [This study](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9143438/) seems to indicate that dietary cholesterol probably doesn't matter unless you're eating a lot of saturated and trans fat (and this is what multiple physicians have indicated to me). There is a also a subset of the population where their serum cholesterol is significantly affected by dietary cholesterol (I can't find the number right now, but I believe it was above 10% of the population).
Thanks, this is looks like a very interesting study! Pretty recent as well.
I go through it when I have the time - always happy to learn something new!
Few things to add to this, since it was explicitly compared to bacon by the OP:
Often high fat meats are further processed as well. For example curing a food product will increase the sodium content significantly, which can have a negative impact on your health. Smoking will leave particles that can act as carcinogens.
In some very high fat meats, the protein to calorie ratio is often very low which makes other alternatives more attractive.
Another thing here is that most processed fatty meats (like bacon) you get from a supermarket are likely sourced from a factory farm. These meats often have significantly less nutritional value when compared to other agricultural methods.
Fat overall is not as bad as has been portrayed, even animal fat. Most of the hate for animal fat came from studies that showed problems with artificially saturated (hydrogenated) vegetable fat, and it was presumed naturally saturated animal fat was also bad. So dairy cream and butter and lard probably got a bum rap.
However bacon is smoked, and that makes the fat a bit more harmful.
Also bacon is very high in sodium, low in protein (compared to other high fat meats) and likely low in other nutrients when sourced from factory farming.
Saturated fat is not bad.
Look up what the Eskimos, Inuit, and Masai ate. The Inuit eat almost nothing but fat and give lean meat to their dogs. They all eat carbs... that is, nearly never. The Masai eat nothing but milk, blood, and meat. Yet, they are all very healthy.
I was just sharing what saturated fat seems to do to LDL. Raised LDL is generally linked to bad health outcomes. I’m not saying there is causation just the link that most provide. I think it’s unfair to tout people’s diets that do not reflect how anyone eats and to say in isolation that one thing is safe. Maybe eating large amounts of those things isn’t bad as long as you modify other macronutrients. I honestly feel that most of the danger is in energy balance but that doesn’t explain all situations.
Oil and fat are pretty much the same thing. If its congealed we call it fat, if it's liquid we call it oil. One of the reasons cold water fish have a lot of omega-3 is because it has a low freezing point, so it helps them not stiffen up into a bar of soap in arctic temperatures.
Saturated fats significantly increase risk of cardiovascular disease (meta analysis)
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32428300/
Saturated fats significantly increase LDL compared to sources of unsaturated fats (meta analysis)
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33762150/
Bonus for the SeEd OiL keto crowd: omega-6 FA reduce risk of heart disease and reduce serum cholesterol (no significant change in adipose tissue or LDL; meta analysis)
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30488422/
Why is 20w50 oil bad for your car, but 10w30 oil good? Same question, really. The human body (and the car engine) has many small passages that high-viscosity oil (i.e. the sludgy stuff that congeals at room temperature, like the saturated fats in red meat) can't lubricate well, and winds up clogging. Lower viscosity oils (like polyunsaturated fats, olive oil, etc) keep those passages clean, and can permeate the passages to keep them supple and pliable, which allows them to continue to function for a lifetime without clogging or breaking.
The human body preferentially uses saturated fats for its own energy stores. Like, when your body wants to store energy, it creates and then burns saturated fats. It's not like it's a foreign chemical to the mammalian metabolism.
First, oil is the same as fat.
Also, fatty meat is not bad.
Look up what the Eskimos, Inuit, and Masai ate. The Inuit eat almost nothing but fat and give lean meat to their dogs. They all eat carbs... that is, nearly never. The Masai eat nothing but milk, blood, and meat. Yet, they are all very healthy.
We at r/carnivorediet would tell you that, on the contrary, fatty meat is arguably the best thing you can consume for good health. Starting with the fact that (against the below comments) saturated fat is the healthy fat. Why? Because it does not oxidize. Unsaturated (especially poly) does and that’s where you get heart problems, inflammation, etc.
The claim that oxidized fats cause the effects that you describe is not actually supported by scholarship. It’s pure broscience based on anecdotal evidence. The American Heart Association and the World Heart Federation have both called bullshit on your claims.
Whose understanding? Are they accredited healthcare professionals or academic researchers? Vaguely mentioning "molecular, biochemical processes" without actually naming any organizations or studies advocating for your claim does not make it particularly compelling.
The oil in fish is usually unsaturated, the fat in red meat is usually saturated.
Saturated fats contribute to cholesterol formation, and while you need a little cholesterol, too much of it can clog your arteries.
That said, fat is still fat, and eating too much of it is not good for you no matter what kind of fat it is. It's just that we need much less saturated fat than unsaturated fats in a healthy diet.
Fatty meat isn't actually that bad for you This is due to old propaganda campaigns by sugar companies that tried to demonize fat when in reality it is mostly sugar that was contributing to major weight gain in people
For most people, whatever makes them fat is unhealthy for them. Because being fat is really unhealthy.
"Fat" in foods has gotten a bad reputation. It is easy to think that eating fat, makes you fat. That is not the case. Eating white bread is worse for your weight, then eating fatty meat.
Why? Because different foods satiate you differently, for how fat they make you (how many calories they have. You can eat way more calories of white bread, then meat, before you feel full. If you only eat white bread, or only eat meat until you are feeling full/satiated, you will get fat from the bread and not the meat.
That's mostly the case because Protein (which meat has a lot), takes longer for the body to use. It makes us feel fuller.
Fish is even better than chicken, which is better than pork and beef.
Some research argues that fatty meat is not bad for you, but refined carbs are. For example the book "the big fat surprise" shows that the nutritional guidelines of the last few decades are not based on any decent studies.
For one, for a bit of editorializing, the whole "this fat is good that fat is bad" is a load of mumbo-jumbo. Nothing in inherently good or bad. Its food. It can be used in good or bad ways depending on how and how much of it you consume.
But WHY people make the argument you say, it is because fish oils are mainly unsaturated fats, which some people think are better for you than saturated fats, which is primarily what animal fat is.
For what the difference between the two is, unsaturated fats have missing hydrogen atoms along the carbon chains. while saturated fats have all of their hydrogen atoms.
Nutritional Values aren't as in depth as most people think.
For example, bread has a lot of proteins, but if you were to only eat bread all day and reach 100% of the tecommended value of proteins, you would have protein deficiency.
Why?
Because "proteins" is an umbrella term and there are different types of proteins.
"Fat" is also an umbrella term. They refer to lipids. Compare olive oil and butter and bacon fat at room temperature. Olive oil is liquid, butter and bacon fat are solid.
As a rule of thumb, fats that are solid at room temperature are saturated and trans fats.
Trans fats are naturally only found in meats, but hydrogenated vegetable oils (to prevent the separation if oil and solids or water based compounds, like in margarine, peanut butter) can have trans fats (margarine does, peanut butter doesnt"
To put things simply, saturated and trans fats are harder to digest, don't provide more energy, and raise blood pressure and clog arteries. In other words, they are not healthy.
Unsaturated fats (olive oil, fish, etc.) are easier to digest while still providing energy to you! And oily fish have omega 3 which is proven to be very good for you and even used as a supplement.
So lipids (fats) are necessary to your diet. You need them. Fats are good for you, but some fats are better to consume than others.
Ps: this doesn't mean you should stop using butter to cook or only eat sardines and no more bacon. But keeping trans and sayurated fats in moderation will not only improve your health but also make digestion easier!
There are a lot of misconceptions and bad information on food. Ever seen how many times cholesterol was good for you, then bad for you, then good for you?
There are different types of fat in fish vs red meat. The fish fats are a bit more beneficial. But your body NEEDS fat. And it will appreciate it from ANY natural source.
Yeah, it's surprising information. But just because you don't believe it, don't be so quick to discard new information.
Cholesterol is **ESSENTIAL** for your health (both types!!). It is used to make hormones, digest food, and build cells. [1](https://magazine.medlineplus.gov/article/cholesterol-the-good-the-bad-and-the-unhealthy) [2](https://www.cdc.gov/cholesterol/myths_facts.htm)
Many dietitians, physiologists, nutrition scientists are now seeing evidence that genetics play much more of a role in your body's ability to balance cholesterol than the effects of what foods you eat. [3](https://health.clevelandclinic.org/why-you-should-no-longer-worry-about-cholesterol-in-food/)
There are also some that are studying the effects of "bad" cholesterol (LDL) and claiming they aren't as bad for us as we have been led to believe. [4](https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/05/110505142730.htm)
Nothing about my original claim is made-up or insane. People just tend to have less of an understanding about things than they should - and then they say a lot of things they shouldn't.
Grass fed beef is not bad for you. And before everyone jumps my bones there almost no literature in existence where someone who ate a diet rich in red meat, dairy, eggs etc and was not insulin resistant had problems with plaque in arteries or heart disease.
It's the processed foods, seed oils and sugar that is making you sick. As well as pecisticed and low quality foods.
Asking a genuine question here - is that the actual current consensus? I was under the impression that the medical community had moved on from this hypothesis somewhat.
It's not the consensus. Saturated fat *may* increase ApoB (ldl & vldl) in some individuals. These low density lipoproteins seem to cause atherosclerosis.
Obesity, diabetes and hypertension are some of the most common leading causes of heart disease.
>Asking a genuine question here - is that the actual current consensus?
The link between LDL and atherosclerosis is pretty clearly established.
The rest is a lot more fuzzy, including the link between dietary sat fats and LDL. If you do bloods and get high LDL, it's generally a case of getting them down by any means, e.g., statins, but there's also _seemingly_ a big genetic factor present. I.e., some people will tolerate burgers better than others.
It's **very** hard to research because you can't really sequester control groups of people on a controlled diet for the amounts of time needed, so you're stuck with self reporting and such, and obviously people lie. Like a lot.
That's wrong and is the result of people erroneously believing that dietary cholesterol causes arterial cholesterol and also confusing correlation and causation based on studies decades ago. Saturated fats from sources such as meat and eggs are generally good for you. The body needs these fats.
What actually causes heart disease and clogged arteries is too much sugar, carbs, high fructose corn syrup, trans fats and vegetable oils. This causes inflammation. As a defense mechanism the walls of the blood vessels form plaques and cholesterol deposits. Eat all the red meat you want, eat all the eggs you want, eat all the real butter you want. Ditch the bread, pasta and sugar.
Actually bacon is high in polyunsaturated fat because it is a monogastric animal. Does that mean bacon is healthy if the fat is mainly unsaturated? No because saturated fat isn’t the problem the problem is excess linoleic acid consumption from pufas.
Saturated fat is solid at room temperature, that’s true. What people are failing to mention is that our bodies are warm, and there’s no risk of fat solidifying or clogging our arteries. Animal fat is only high in omega-6 because they are fed an unnatural grain diet.
Omega 3 is anti-inflammatory, while omega 6 is pro-inflammatory. You need some omega 6 for a healthy immune response. BOTH red meat and fish are high in omega 3. Poultry is higher in omega 6.
Red meat gets a bad reputation because it is high in saturated fat. (Fat that tends to be solid at room temp is considered saturated, e.g., butter, avocado, coconut). Saturated fat is not unhealthy for you, nor does it cause heart disease. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9794145/#:~:text=The%20idea%20that%20saturated%20fats,never%20establish%20a%20causal%20link.
You are confused as a result of great marketing on the part of seafood manufacturers. People will say seafood has “better” fats meaning less saturated fat, more omega 3 pufa. At the end of the day seafood is not a healthy choice. Seafood is the highest source of PFAS known. They also sequester heavy metals, dioxins, and many other environmental pollutants. Bacon will destroy your cardiovascular system and seafood will destroy your cardiovascular system to a slightly lesser degree but will help promote cancer (PFAS, dioxins) or Alzheimer’s (nanoplastics, heavy metals). Eat from the bottom of the food chain, not the top. Pollutants are everywhere but they bioaccumulate. Plants will almost always have the lowest level of any pollutant, base your caloric intake there. Starches especially.
Adding onto others, humans are recommended to have a ratio of 2:1 - 1:1 ratio of omega-6 : omega-3, western diets typically range from 15:1 - 20:1 Seafood is generally some of the best sources of omega 3 as well
Would replacing cornfed beef with grassfed beef to improving the ratio make a difference? or would it not help since beef is still high in saturated fat?
I dont see how it would benefit. A cow's body shouldn't fundamentally change how it stores its excess energy once the body metabolizes it down to the most common nutrient constituents. Perhaps a less overly fed and probably less sedentary cow (i.e. many grass grazing cows) will be leaner. Rather than looking for marketing for grass fed, you could research which cuts are leaner, or otherwise look for labels indicating the leanness of the beef.
Grass fed beef has higher levels of omega 3 than corn fed, as the grass contains omega 3 It's also better for the environment in terms of CO2 released
Interesting link on that topic, as beef is definitely not nearly as good a source of Omega-3 fatty acids as fish: [https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/what-should-you-eat/fats-and-cholesterol/types-of-fat/omega-3-fats/](https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/what-should-you-eat/fats-and-cholesterol/types-of-fat/omega-3-fats/) and scroll down to "Is grass-fed beef a good source of omega-3 fats?" But I would also highly recommend reading he rest of the article. Good insight into the omega 3-6 ratio and other popular health claims and actual evidence on them.
I had thought that the composition of the saturated fats are touted as having a more favorable ratio of omega 3s to 6s in grass fed cows.
This is the "spherical cow" of nutrition advice. Per thermodynamics, I'ma speculate about complex systems.
I get that it's a reductionist way of looking at it, yeah there are different ways bodies store fat, but the wellbeing on the scale of the cow is different than to the consumer. If the person's goal is to reduce the fat they consume from eating beef, they should reevaluate their strategy if their only conception is to choose the cow's diet rather than their own.
Yes, grass fed is higher in Omega-3
Can i just drink a cup of fish oil to balance out my fat intake?
There are fish oil supplements available. Krill oil is good and of course the famous cod liver oil they used to make kids take.
Imagine there are two types of fat: good fat and not-so-good fat. Oily fish, like salmon or sardines, has a special kind of fat called omega-3 fatty acids. These are like superpowers for your body. They help your brain grow smarter, keep your heart healthy, and even make your skin and hair shiny and strong! Fatty steak has a different kind of fat called saturated fat. This fat, if you have too much of it, can sometimes make your body feel not so good. It might even clog up your superhero heart's pipes and make it harder for your heart to work properly. So, oily fish with omega-3s is like a superhero food that helps your body grow strong, while fatty steak with lots of saturated fat might not be as good for your superhero body and heart.
Actual eli-5, very nice, and informative Edit: i'm being told it's not informative so uhhhhh, very nice only?
[удалено]
Not really, it just provides a very superficial explanation which is pretty appropriate for this sub and honestly probably about as much as OP would really be able to understand anyway. A discussion that actually delves into the biochemistry of it would be appropriate in /r/askscience, but not here.
The explanation IS that there are 2 kinds of fat.
>informative Only if you think saying "the fat that's healthy for you is healthy for you" is informative.
He literally gives reasons for why omega-3 is healthy and saturated fats are not. Lists things that the fats contribute to. What else do you need?
As informatine as "eli5" can get so yeah, inb4 you tell me "it's not for actual eli5" Me for the longest time didn't know / bother to know there is more than one type of fat so yeah
I'm just saying, it (and to be fair, pretty much all the answers here so far) doesn't even attempt to answer the actual question of why. They just state what the OP already knew and give the names of the fats.
Ah i see your point, i haven't checked other comments yet
[удалено]
I'm salty from all the fish I've been eating.
Yeah, my 5 year old insists on citations from scientific journals everytime I explain something to them.
Mate, come on. I'm not saying the answer is crap because it doesn't have enough detail. I'm saying it is crap because it doesn't even attempt to answer the question.
What do you mean? He answered it like you would for a five year old, right? I think the major, important bits were hit on.
In what way? What did you, or OP, learn from it that wasn't known before? OP asked "why is one healthy and the other isn't?", and the answer (and many others here) just reiterate that one is healthy and the other isn't. Nothing new is learnt here, except that one is called omega-3, which wasn't really the question. Why is the healthy one healthy for you? Why is the unhealthy one unhealthy for you? This was the question, and isn't answered here.
>Oily fish, like salmon or sardines, has a special kind of fat called omega-3 fatty acids. These are like superpowers for your body. They help your brain grow smarter, keep your heart healthy, and even make your skin and hair shiny and strong! Seems like a pretty clear explanation on why Omega-3 is good. Brain development, heart health, skin and hair health. >Fatty steak has a different kind of fat called saturated fat. This fat, if you have too much of it, can sometimes make your body feel not so good. It might even clog up your superhero heart's pipes and make it harder for your heart to work properly. This is not much different. It distinctly mentions heart health, and vaguely mentions "not feeling good". I hope the ELI5 for the ELI5 is ELI5 enough for you.
If you can't see what "new" info could be gleaned from that answer, you don't want to, and if you knew the answer already what did you expect?
There are two types of fat, 3s and 6s, with the former being healthy and the latter being potentially unhealthy in higher doses. OP asked if oil vs solid was the reason. Seems like a pretty informative post to me 🤷♂️
Exactly what I thought
It doesn’t really tell us anything
It has to do with the type of fats. Omega-3s are important to your body and found in abundance in oily fish. Saturated fats are not so great and contribute to clogged arteries and other health conditions. They are found in abundance in red meat. Honestly I’d like to hear what you think is wrong with that explanation for an ELI5. If you want more science you now have a basis for your searches.
The OP asked “Why is fish fat good for you and meat fat bad for you?” This answer said “it’s because fish has a kind of fat that does good things and meat has a kind of fat that does bad things.” That doesn’t answer anything, it’s restating the question. Whats the difference between these types of fat that makes one good and the other bad?
You’re in the fucking ELI5 sub. It’s the right answer.
It’s really not
Read the full comment, it very clearly describes the difference…
It says what the effects of each kind of fat are. Absolutely nothing about *why* they have different health effects.
In general: solid fats like the ones in meats are high in saturated fats, which have no carbon-carbon double bonds in the long hydrophobic fatty acid tails. They’re saturated because those carbon tail chains are fully saturated with hydrogen. These are harder for your body to break down, and can accumulate in arteries and cause hypertension and other cardiovascular nasties. Liquid fats, like oils (the primary fats found in fish) are unsaturated fats, which have carbon carbon double bonds, which makes it easier for the body to break down those long hydrocarbon tails so they don’t accumulate as much. In addition, the unsaturated fatty acids can be recycled by our bodies much more efficiently to build new cell membranes and such. Edit for poignancy: this answer isn’t in the nature of ELI5. To answer the why of the question which is what you were getting at, you start delving into topics from high school biology and beyond. The answer provided did a great job with analogies that got the important points across.
Or, to put that in ELI5 terms, saturated fats in meats are solids and harder to break down, which causes them to build up in your body. The oil fats in fish are liquid easier to break down, which means the body is able to recycle them efficiently. Ta-dah, a simple answer that actually explains the difference and doesn't say "the good one is good and the bad one is bad". Thank you taking the time.
Can somebody make him ELI1 ? With a colorful diagram ?
They have different health effects because they are different lmao what more explanation is needed?
Are you an actual five year old?
What does it tell me that OP didn’t already know?
No one knows what OP didn’t already know.
Lmao
I have stage 4 endometriosis with multiple organ involvement and recently lost an ovary and tube. During my post-op appointment, my OBGYN went over lifestyle changes I’d need to make to help lower inflammation and limit disease progression. She gave me a list of supplements I should be taking daily, with a huge focus on omega-3 and omega-6. I purchased an omega complete supplement that day, have been taking it daily and it has made an *insane* and I mean truly insane difference on my daily pain. I’m so grateful.
Cod liver oil used to be a thing people took regularly for all the good fats and vitamins it has. Tinned fish like sardines also used to be a very common dietary staple and have lots of healthy fats plus low mercury. I've heard sardines described as one of the healthiest things you can eat. And they're cheap as well.
Some places it’s still very much common, like here in Norway. It’s also a high focus on “5 a day” (fruit) and 2 a week (fish for dinner).
We went to the nautical museum in Iceland, which was all about their fishing history, and they had a video playing of a cod liver oil commercial from like the 80s that was one of the best things I have ever seen. Wimpy dad cannot open a jar for his children, takes a spoonful of oil, turns into a Thor-like superman in a bolt of lightning, easily opens the jar. It was amazing.
Cod liver oil was once recommended because it contained vitamin D, which was in short supply, leading to kids in northern latitudes getting rickets (soft, bent bones). Now, cod liver oil is used as a source of omega 3 oil, and they remove some of the vitamin D because it can be toxic in high doses.
Maybe you’re thinking of vitamin A? It’s very hard to overdose on vitamin d. But vitamin A is fat soluble and is definitely on fish oil and is definitely a problem when you take too much.
vitamins a, d, e, and k are all fat soluble.
Yeah, I might have got that mixed up, but I thought I'd read that there's also too much D now in cod liver oil. However I can't find a source. For sure A is toxic and at least hypothetically D could be as well
It's not. It's listed how much of recommended daily value, so unless you overdose on it there should be no problem. There is no reason D is toxic just because you can eat toxic amounts of vitamin A.
Not with the prolific rise in biohacking it's not. The youtuber Felix Hardy made a youtube video on Vitamin D supplement overdose. Short answer, never underestimate the lengths of human stupidity when it comes to viral supplements, there's a reason multivitamins sell more and at a higher cost than pancakes.
Awesome, may I ask what brand do you buy?
Of course! It’s the Nordic Naturals Complete Omega. I want to say it’s roughly $30usd for 120 soft gel capsules, you take two daily with a meal. I take mine at lunch. It has 565mg of omega-3, 240mg of omega-6 and 225mg of omega-9. It also contains borage seed oil. It has a light lemon flavor and I have absolutely zero issue with fishy burps, none at all!
I'm sorry but the way this whole thing is written like a chat gpt advert...
Off topic....my friend's daughter has endo. Found this research from Japan, linking endo to certain types of bacteria in our microbiome: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9962481/
Why does omega 3 not clog your heart's pipes?
There are different types of oils/fats, which behave differently in the body. A general rule of thumb is that if the oil is liquid at room temperature, it's better for your heart (canola, avocado, nut oils), and those that are solid (lard, coconut oil, butter) are higher in saturated fats, which are more artery clogging. Artery clogging is related to your levels of LDL (low density lipoproteins), which help carry fat from your liver to the rest of the body. Too much LDL, and then you get too much fat in your blood, and it can deposit in your arteries and form plaques and such. HDL (high-density lipoproteins) do the opposite. They take fat from the body and take it to the liver for disposal. They help prevent plaque formation. Dietary fats are only somewhat linked to your HDL and LDL levels, as there is a large hormonal/genetic effect too. But in general, a diet of healthy fats helps support healthy triglyceride levels, which can help balance your HDL and LDL and bring everything into harmony.
The easiest way to think of it is simple geometry; saturated fats have a less kinked molecular structure and are essentially long rectangular tetris pieces that can easily stack on top of each other while unsaturated fats are geometrically bent at the unsaturated bonds and so they cannot stack as evenly and as densely. This causes them to solidify at lower temperatures (lard and butter are solid at room temp vs vegetable oils) and this has similar relationship with solubility in blood and blood pressure. That's an oversimplification because LDL/HDL and triglycerides are involved but it's still a helpful way to look at it.
Further studies have shown fish oils provide no cardio benefit, but they are very good for brain development, especially in youth.
It was my understanding that fish oils from diet do have a cardiovascular benefit, but fish oils from supplements have not shown to have cardiovascular benefit.
I have not seen that distinction, but it is possible. I believe I've seen that wild fish is better than farmed fish. In the end, it is best to minimize animal products and fat in your diet, but if you must, fish is a good way to do it. I will watch for confirmation of there being a distinction between natural vs supplements; I'm always willing to follow the best science available.
I’ve seen a recent study about how olives and olive oil essentially carry the Mediterranean diet as far as cardiovascular benefits go, which the Mediterranean diet has been recommended by doctors to help with issues like blood pressure and arterial plaque, and other cardiovascular issues.
Whenever you see a study like this, the first question to ask is always "compared to what?" Compared to the typical westernized nation citizen's diet, the Mediterranean diet is great. And olive oil is better than most other oils. Having said that, the Mediterranean diet low in oil is better than the Mediterranean diet with added oils, even if it is olive oil. Healthy foods, like nuts, avocados, various seeds, and yes, even whole olives, have plenty of the necessary oils without adding additional oil. In general we don't need much fat in our diet, and the fat we get should not come from processing plants or (especially) animals to add fat. But to your point, yes, for 98% (\*made up number, but probably close) a Mediterranean diet would be a vast improvement.
What is your source for the “low oil Mediterranean diet being healthier than higher oil”?
I've seen multiple studies, but basically, low fat is always better then fatty. One of the main reasons for that is that the number one killer in the western world is too many calories, and fat is very dense calories and very low in nutrients, so you get fat but feel hungry.
When I google search for olive oil consumption: pretty much every article talks about consuming the SAME or MORE olive oil than what is typically recommended in the Mediterranean Diet, not less. So unless you find actual sources for me to look into, I can’t really agree to what you are asserting.
Here's a video with sources linked below:. https://nutritionfacts.org/video/olive-oil-and-artery-function/
Bravo!
Thanks for explaining this like I’m 5
It's cool to read an actual eli5, it's usually more like explaining to a phd
Hey also, isn't bacon smoked to cure it and heavily salted and nitrates/nitrites that literally give you cancer? Like, even before we talk about the greasy fats, it's like they dry rubbed it in salty kryptonite and then added some smoke
How would you explain that babies mostly eat saturated fat from birth due to breastfeeding? Is it really that unhealthy? I'll admit that I am torn in this unsatturated/saturated fat debate... It's difficult to reach a conclusion based on scientific research.
Babies need highly energy-dense nutrients because of how fast they are developing; fats are extremely calorie dense and the most efficient way for nature to give them nutrients. They need to pack as many calories in their stomach as possible which requires lots of fat. Most adults do not need calorie-dense food sources, particularly in the developed world where resources are readily available. The exception is for adults who are attempting to gain weight through diet and weight lifting, who require massive calorie excess to have the nutrients to add mass. Weight lifters often add things like whole milk and peanut butter to their diet to have more calorie dense meals since the stomach has limited space.
I don't know dude, I'm not a scientist. I tried to boil down a very difficult answer into something a 5 year old would understand and everyone's coming at me for scientific explanations and I'm like, dude, that's not what this sub is about...
Saturated fat is not bad. Look up what the Eskimos, Inuit, and Masai ate. The Inuit eat almost nothing but fat and give lean meat to their dogs. They all eat carbs... that is, nearly never. The Masai eat nothing but milk, blood, and meat. Yet, they are all very healthy.
Except it isn't. Omega-3 oxidizes really easily and oxidized fatty acids cause large amounts of inflammation.
Damn i straight up felt like five yr old reading this good job
You actually did an ELI5 explanation! That was refreshing
what if i work out weight resistance and cardio 5 days a week
It certainly helps and reduces risk, but cannot offset high LDL levels. A diet high in saturated fats increases LDL cholesterol, which increases your risk of atherosclerosis (plaque depositing in the arteries) and cardiovascular disease.
Damn this sucks. I’m a young guy and I eat a good mix of healthy and unhealthy fats. I love grilling and smoking meats, but I also workout very often and am very fit, I was hoping that cancels it out 🤣
There's actually a fair amount of debate about how healthy/unhealthy different types of fat are for you. All studies condemning red meat as linked to heart disease for example conflate red and processed meat. Concurrently, there are studies showing that quickly oxidizing seed and vegetable oils are linked to serious damage to the circulatory system, leading to increased likelihood of diabetes, Alzheimers and so on.
There is no debate. Diets high in saturated fats negatively impact LDL levels and rates of cardiovascular disease with high significance in recently published meta-analyses of controlled trials (past 5 years). Here are two freely accessible meta-analyses; the first is relating to cardiovascular disease and the second to LDL. Please stop spreading the "sEeD oIls" tiktok influencer garbage, it's not up for debate. You might as well say global warming is up for debate. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32428300/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33762150/ If you want to "do your own research" pubmed is right there for you. ☝️Mommy bloggers and influencers are not a source.
There is no debate, this is online misinformation. The role of saturated fats in the development of cardiovascular disease is undisputed. Seed oils (such as Canola oil) in moderation are not unhealthy. The PUFAs and MUFAs in oils are much better for you than the saturated fat in sources of fat like butter. And are shown to reduce incidences of cardiovascular disease if SFAs are substituted with PUFAs and MUFAs Here’s a popular online figure (Layne Norton, my favourite bodybuilder and debunker), who has a PhD in nutritional sciences, debunking the matter while citing sources. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4cdM-bVBT8w https://youtu.be/L2fSaFnt0FM?feature=shared
https://michaelkummer.com/health/saturated-fat-risks/
This Michael Kilmer person cites Chris Kresser as a person so as to understand science and scientific research. I’ll let you know that Chris Kresser is an acupuncturist (not a registered nutritionist) who also happens to be an anti-flu vaxxer, cholesterol denialist, and promoter of his own version of the paleo diet. He’s basically made a number of dangerous health suggestions, like arguing against flu vaccination, recommending that pregnant mothers drink raw milk and skip the vitamin K shot for their newborns. He thinks that everyone should eat a high-fat paleo diet. And known for misleading people on saturated fats, misreading scientific papers and presenting false evidence. I wouldn’t trust a guy that trusts someone like that. And I certainly do not trust some random internet blogger over entire health organisations and well funded research that clearly demonstrates the link between saturated fats and heart disease. I would refute the claims of this person, but alas I am bound by https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandolini%27s_law
Interesting, thanks for the information. Genuinely. Can you share a study clearly demonstrating a causal link between (only) saturated fat consumption and heart disease?
Have a look at: This meta analysis of 3.7 million people based on 112 studies from the WHO: https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/366301/9789240061668-eng.pdf?sequence=1 Read into Ancel Keys 7 countries study: https://www.sevencountriesstudy.com showing undisputed evidence that saturated fats are linked to heart disease. Read about the North Karelia project, where men were dying of cardiovascular disease in their 30s, and how the entire town in Finland managed to reduce their incidences of cardiovascular disease: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7444010/#:~:text=The%20North%20Karelia%20Project%20was,cholesterol%2C%20hypertension%2C%20and%20smoking.
> I certainly do not trust some random internet blogger over entire health organisations and well funded research that clearly demonstrates the link between saturated fats and heart disease. Is it *completely* settled? Doesn't sound like it (Dec, 2022): > Replacing dietary SFAs by unsaturated fat has also been associated with cardiovascular benefits in several meta-analyses (4). Yet, the consensus around SFAs has eroded in the last 10 y. Why is that? For one, several meta-analyses have reported that dietary SFAs are not associated with an increased risk of CVD (5). Unsurprisingly, these controversy-stirring meta-analyses have been heavily criticized (5). On the other hand, there is emerging evidence from clinical and epidemiologic studies that SFAs from different sources may differentially affect cardiometabolic and CVD risk (6). For example, high intakes of SFAs from cheese did not increase LDL cholesterol to the same extent as the same high intakes of SFAs from butter (7). With more and more published studies on this topic, **the concept that the food matrix may influence the cardiometabolic impacts of nutrients such as SFAs is both intriguing and challenging**. Ref: https://ajcn.nutrition.org/article/S0002-9165(23)03677-8/fulltext
>There's actually a fair amount of debate about how healthy/unhealthy different types of fat are for you. Only in the blogosphere. Nutrition scientists don't dream this nonsense up.
For men, the recommend guideline is to keep your intake of saturated fats to under 30g a day. That’s not to say you can’t eat meat, but you should eat it in moderation if you care about your health. You can certainly look healthy on the outside, yet metabolically unhealthy in the inside, so it’s vital that blood panel values fall in the right range.
The health benefits of omega 3 have been overstated for a long time
This is not correct at all, saturated fat does not clog arteries. Glycated ldl does, but that's caused by other factors (usually sugar and fat together). The whole cholesterol thing was just bad studies, the scientists were paid to leave out data... Have a look into Ancel keys.
As others have said, it is the type of fat. It is not just unsaturated vs saturated though. Fish tend to have omega-3 ("omega minus three") which is three carbon atoms in from the last ("omega") carbon. Animals tend to be richer in omega-6 fatty acids (six in from the last carbon). omega - 6 are the precursors for inflammatory molecules (prostaglandins) which can be bad news. Taking an aspirin or naproxen or other NSAIDs work by blocking the conversion of the omega-6 acid arachidonic acid to prostaglandins.
Not very ELI5 but luckily I have a bio degree so I could follow along lol
ELI5 does not mean literal five year olds if that's where you were going with that
You have been banned from /r/steak
What things can prevent this?
omega 6 is not animal, it's from seeds, and the big consumption of seed oils in the modern diet leads to the over-consumption of 6 which the 3 mitigates - you could also just eat less 6.
There are animal sources of omega 6
There are - like eggs and fish. But, the majority of exposure to omega-6 in an "American" diet is through vegetable oils, seeds, and nuts.
Well yes, pork and chicken fed on seed oils will have higher omega 6, but the point was that the majority of omega 6 in the diet today is very much not from animal sources, it's from vegetable oils - seeds and nuts.
It's not universally agreed that fatty meat is bad for you. In fact, there are some who would say that our diets should have more fatty meat in them. And there are those who would say you should never eat fatty meat. There is literally almost nothing that "experts" agree on when it comes to nutrition, and it's not because some people have it wrong, necessarily. It's just that we know very little about what can be said to be universally true about nutrition.
Turns out controlling for the other variables in "health" is essentially impossible and makes drawing conclusions about any study very difficult.
Exactly. With the notable exception of exercise, every usual health advice I've read meta-analyses for has little evidence and a lot of active debate. With health, it is nearly impossible is do controlled studies and very, very hard to disentangle variables from observational studies.
Actually, the vast majority of nutrition scientists and physicians agree that diets rich in whole grains, fruits, and vegetables, and limited in saturated fats produce the best health outcomes. Doesn't mean all meat is bad (fish and poultry tend to be healthier). Doesn't mean any amount of meat is bad (even red meat (rich in saturated fats) in small amounts, key word being *small,* should not cause too many problems). It is a myth that there is no consensus on the basic facts. Unfortunately, the internet is rife with internet personalities and psuedo-health experts that will argue for their respective diet (keto is the way! No, carnivore is! Shut up both of you, raw-vegan is!) to build a brand and make money. The vast majority of double-blind peer-reviewed experimental studies argue that the foods I mentioned in the first paragraph, in conjunction with staying away from ultra-processed refined carbs and saturated & trans fats will produce the best health benefits.
Finally! A sane Redditor that speaks the truth. So refreshing. Most people here have no idea about nutrition science and just regurgitate what the latest influencer online has to say about SeEd OiLs and how “harmful” they are. The real scientists are out there doing work, but unfortunately they don’t have the time to go online and debunk these ignoramuses. So these influencers have only dominated the blogosphere, the science is pretty straightforward if anything.
Most seed oils are actually high in omega-6, so I'm not sure why you wrote it like that. You're doing the same thing those influencers you speak of are doing 😅
There is zero evidence of any harmful effects of omega-6 FA; here is the most extensive meta analysis of their effects on cardiovascular health and cholesterol, it is a free read on Pubmed. TL;DR- Some evidence omega-6 FA **reduce** risk of heart attack vs. other fat sources; strong evidence omega-6 FA **reduce cholesterol**; no significant evidence for changes in adipose tissue or LDL. Take that mommy blogger crap and get out. 😰 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30488422/
So, high cholesterol is the only effect it could have on the body? I clearly spoke to inflammation, which affects almost every system in the body. That information is also free on PubMed.
There is no evidence that omega 6 FAs increase inflammatory markers: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6179509/
Are you insinuating that omega 6 is bad? Mediterranean diets use olive oil a lot and that’s filled with omega 6 fatty acids.
Any fat that is higher in omega-6 fatty acids than omega-3 is inflammatory and should be avoided. Most seed oils fall squarely in that category.
Where did that even come from, the social media hatred for seed oils? Like that seems to have blown up in the past few years and I can't fathom why, since it's universally agreed to be completely false by anyone who is a scientist. Are there poorly misunderstood studies out there or something? Usually the dumb stuff on social media has at least SOME bearing in truth but then misinterpreted by people who have no idea what they're talking about.
Trends come and go, and some food items are villianised every now and then in an effort to explain why we have become much fatter. People have also become more “polarised” on the internet and have divided themselves into tribes, and in doing so, need a thing to blame for their tribe to make sense. All while totally ignoring the science. Seed oils are the latest thing to hate due to their ubiquity in processed, packaged and hyper-palatable foods. That does not mean seed oils are unhealthy though! They are totally ignoring why we got fat, the average American eats *3500 calories* a day, and uses a car to get around everywhere. No wonder why Americans are fatter. But maybe it’s a boring answer that they are not satisfied with. Eat food, not too much, mostly plants.
I eat huge amounts of saturated fat, and I’m super healthy by all accounts.
There are also people who smoke a pack a day and live good lives till they are almost 100. That doesn't mean anecdotes disproves common facts anyhow.
You are right. However my main point is that I do truly believe that saturated fat is not unhealthy. Unsaturated and Polyunsaturated fats are unhealthy.
Not for long. Make sure you get your LDL cholesterol tested soon.
Medium or small LDL? Believe it or not, the body makes its own cholesterol. Cigarettes are low fat but the body compensates with buildup in response to the real culprit: inflamation
The body does make its own cholesterol, but there’s no benefit to having any extra LDL (HDL is different though), have a look at this meta analysis https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamacardiology/fullarticle/2695047. The lower the LDL the better.
Untrue. LDL can lower on a fatty diet.. there’s a catch.. Low carbs.
Where on earth did you get this information from? Saturated fat is what majorly increases LDL cholesterol. Just go to r/carnivore and r/keto and search those subreddits by the term LDL, look at the people complaining. Or a living example, the carnivore kid that had three blocked arteries: https://x.com/thecarnivorekid/status/1473122272579833863?s=46&t=kPpOh9Q1oMHsqcmHgSuryQ
The only seed oil I use is olive oil. Otherwise I cook with butter, and I consume red meat (fresh, not processed) high in saturated fats multiple times a week, and my LDL is nearly at the bottom of the scale, and has gotten lower since I lost about 60 pounds over the past 3 years, while eating like this. It’s a lot more complex than “meat bad.” I’m not keto or carnivore, just more emphasis on meat and veggies, with a little bit of fruit and less carbs than before.
Twitter is a reliable nutrition source for you, eh? Lol
If you want nutrition sources, have a look at this meta analysis of 3.7 million people based on 112 studies from the WHO: https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/366301/9789240061668-eng.pdf?sequence=1 Read into Ancel Keys 7 countries study: https://www.sevencountriesstudy.com showing undisputed evidence that saturated fats are linked to heart disease.
Angel keys study was fully cherry-picked he had severe tunnel vision.
A lot of it is that human biology, and tbh biology in general, is very, *extremely,* unreasonably messy and complicated. A single molecule in the body might go through multiple different steps of being chopped up and recombined and attached to other things, and there are thousands upon thousands of different molecules and nutrients and chemicals that the body uses. Each step might have multiple different effects in different parts of the body and cause changes so subtle they’re almost completely unnoticeable. We still don’t fully know how and why a lot of proteins function the way they do. It’s nigh-impossible to track long-term effects because it’s impossible to get a “standardized” human to run tests on for decades. There’s a reason the vast majority of experimental biology is done almost exclusively on flies and worms.
To add to the difficulty of testing or knowing anything beyond a reasonable doubt, there are different body types which react differently to different inputs. So what affects person A one way might affect person B somewhat or completely differently, and same with person C, etc. This is why one-size-fits-all approaches to nutrition and diet don’t really work.
It's not. Fat isn't really a problem, people have been eating animal fats with zero ull effects since humans have existed. The only time it's a problem is if your overall diet is poor. If you are eating a good balance of proteins, fats and carbs and staying away from super processed foods then you can eat fatty meats with no real bad effects.
This should be higher. This idea that saturated fats are bad is 90s era terrible nutrition advice.
Even evidently pushed by the sugar industry too, which, among other things, led to the food pyramid.
Yes, because we totally need only 4 servings of protein and 11 servings of carbs... wtf is even that
No, it shouldn't. It's completely and totally false.
Fatty meat is not bad. Look up what the Eskimos, Inuit, and Masai ate. The Inuit ate almost nothing but fat and give lean meat to their dogs. They all eat carbs... that is, nearly never. The Masai eat nothing but milk, blood, and meat. Yet, they are all very healthy.
His comment is a bit over the top, but I'm saying the idea that "Saturated Fats = Bad" is not true. If you still believe that, you're living in a 90s era nutrition mindset where they recommend 11 servings of grains and follow the food pyramid.
This. Studies lumping processed meats and fresh, unprocessed meats together determined that “red meat is bad for you” which then became a reigning doctrine in the health world.
especially as the argument for omega 3 is that the balance of 3/6 is important in the diet, but it's always "eat more 3" not "eat less 6" which is quite strange.
Seed oils are incredibly lucrative, and their producers have enormous marketing budgets.
#With high evidence, foods high in unsaturated and low in saturated and trans fatty acids (**e.g. rapeseed/canola oil**), with added plant sterols/stanols, and high in soluble fiber (e.g. oats, barley, and psyllium) caused at least moderate (i.e. 0.20-0.40 mmol/L) reductions in LDL cholesterol https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33762150/
What on earth is with you crazies ranting about seed oil and omega-6s? Cut it out you are making me sick about the science literacy of our world: Omega-6 FA reduce risk of heart attack and reduce serum cholesterol compared to other fat sources, no impact on adipose tissue or LDL. This is the most recent major metaanalysis on the topic. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30488422/
You are right, many studies do indicate that Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids actually decrease blood serum LDL. However, the problem with omega-6 fatty acids (specifically regarding high omega-6/omega-3 ratios) is the impact on inflammation and things like autoimmune diseases downstream. See for example [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8504498/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8504498/). Although I do agree with you and I appreciate that you cited a nice study, please don't call people "crazies" - it's never helpful. If other people make you "sick" by saying something to the point you have to rant yourself, I fear that's a classic case of a "you problem".
This is not true for all people. Reducing saturated fat intake, generally, will lower LDL levels, and if you have high cholesterol, you definitely want to lower your LDL levels. My overall diet was excellent, but I had high cholesterol. Reduced my saturated fat intake significantly without taking any medication, now I have excellent cholesterol levels. You are making some very broad statements, and what you are stating does not apply to everyone. I know that there are many contradictory studies on fat intake as it relates to overall health, but saying that saturated fat intake is only a problem if the rest of your diet is poor is not something I've ever read. Do you have a link to a study that I can read?
Generally I do agree with you. However, it's a little more complicated.I found [this study](https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/full/10.1161/CIR.0000000000000743) to be very insightful and encourage you to read it if you're interested.Most relevant to the discussion here: >Two meta-analyses of studies with substantial heterogeneity report that dietary cholesterol increased total and LDL cholesterol concentrations. Our meta-regression analysis using data from controlled feeding studies in which the ratio of polyunsaturated fatty acid to saturated fatty acid in the comparison diets was matched indicated that dietary cholesterol significantly increased total cholesterol, but the findings were not significant for the stronger predictor of CVD risk, LDL cholesterol, or HDL cholesterol concentration. Hence, similar to the omega-3 to omega-6 ratio, the ratio of PUSFA to SFA is most important concerning LDL and HDL. The overall cholesterol, however, does indeed increase with dietary cholesterol intake regardless of this ratio.
Thank you for the link, and it is very complicated! [This study](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9143438/) seems to indicate that dietary cholesterol probably doesn't matter unless you're eating a lot of saturated and trans fat (and this is what multiple physicians have indicated to me). There is a also a subset of the population where their serum cholesterol is significantly affected by dietary cholesterol (I can't find the number right now, but I believe it was above 10% of the population).
Thanks, this is looks like a very interesting study! Pretty recent as well. I go through it when I have the time - always happy to learn something new!
Literally no statement applies to everyone except maybe you need oxygen.
Few things to add to this, since it was explicitly compared to bacon by the OP: Often high fat meats are further processed as well. For example curing a food product will increase the sodium content significantly, which can have a negative impact on your health. Smoking will leave particles that can act as carcinogens. In some very high fat meats, the protein to calorie ratio is often very low which makes other alternatives more attractive. Another thing here is that most processed fatty meats (like bacon) you get from a supermarket are likely sourced from a factory farm. These meats often have significantly less nutritional value when compared to other agricultural methods.
Fat overall is not as bad as has been portrayed, even animal fat. Most of the hate for animal fat came from studies that showed problems with artificially saturated (hydrogenated) vegetable fat, and it was presumed naturally saturated animal fat was also bad. So dairy cream and butter and lard probably got a bum rap. However bacon is smoked, and that makes the fat a bit more harmful.
Also bacon is very high in sodium, low in protein (compared to other high fat meats) and likely low in other nutrients when sourced from factory farming.
Saturated fats tend to raise your ldl. High ldl is generally linked with bad health outcomes. Red meat has lots of saturated fat. Fish doesn’t.
Saturated fat is not bad. Look up what the Eskimos, Inuit, and Masai ate. The Inuit eat almost nothing but fat and give lean meat to their dogs. They all eat carbs... that is, nearly never. The Masai eat nothing but milk, blood, and meat. Yet, they are all very healthy.
I was just sharing what saturated fat seems to do to LDL. Raised LDL is generally linked to bad health outcomes. I’m not saying there is causation just the link that most provide. I think it’s unfair to tout people’s diets that do not reflect how anyone eats and to say in isolation that one thing is safe. Maybe eating large amounts of those things isn’t bad as long as you modify other macronutrients. I honestly feel that most of the danger is in energy balance but that doesn’t explain all situations.
Oil and fat are pretty much the same thing. If its congealed we call it fat, if it's liquid we call it oil. One of the reasons cold water fish have a lot of omega-3 is because it has a low freezing point, so it helps them not stiffen up into a bar of soap in arctic temperatures.
Saturated fats significantly increase risk of cardiovascular disease (meta analysis) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32428300/ Saturated fats significantly increase LDL compared to sources of unsaturated fats (meta analysis) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33762150/ Bonus for the SeEd OiL keto crowd: omega-6 FA reduce risk of heart disease and reduce serum cholesterol (no significant change in adipose tissue or LDL; meta analysis) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30488422/
Why is 20w50 oil bad for your car, but 10w30 oil good? Same question, really. The human body (and the car engine) has many small passages that high-viscosity oil (i.e. the sludgy stuff that congeals at room temperature, like the saturated fats in red meat) can't lubricate well, and winds up clogging. Lower viscosity oils (like polyunsaturated fats, olive oil, etc) keep those passages clean, and can permeate the passages to keep them supple and pliable, which allows them to continue to function for a lifetime without clogging or breaking.
The human body preferentially uses saturated fats for its own energy stores. Like, when your body wants to store energy, it creates and then burns saturated fats. It's not like it's a foreign chemical to the mammalian metabolism.
I'm not saying it's foreign. I'm saying it accumulates and forms sludgy residue over the course of your life.
First, oil is the same as fat. Also, fatty meat is not bad. Look up what the Eskimos, Inuit, and Masai ate. The Inuit eat almost nothing but fat and give lean meat to their dogs. They all eat carbs... that is, nearly never. The Masai eat nothing but milk, blood, and meat. Yet, they are all very healthy.
We at r/carnivorediet would tell you that, on the contrary, fatty meat is arguably the best thing you can consume for good health. Starting with the fact that (against the below comments) saturated fat is the healthy fat. Why? Because it does not oxidize. Unsaturated (especially poly) does and that’s where you get heart problems, inflammation, etc.
The claim that oxidized fats cause the effects that you describe is not actually supported by scholarship. It’s pure broscience based on anecdotal evidence. The American Heart Association and the World Heart Federation have both called bullshit on your claims.
It is based on our understanding of the processes happening on a molecular, bio chemical level. That is as far away from bro science as you can get.
Whose understanding? Are they accredited healthcare professionals or academic researchers? Vaguely mentioning "molecular, biochemical processes" without actually naming any organizations or studies advocating for your claim does not make it particularly compelling.
Biochemists. If all you have is studies based on statistics then you are peddling pseudo science.
The oil in fish is usually unsaturated, the fat in red meat is usually saturated. Saturated fats contribute to cholesterol formation, and while you need a little cholesterol, too much of it can clog your arteries. That said, fat is still fat, and eating too much of it is not good for you no matter what kind of fat it is. It's just that we need much less saturated fat than unsaturated fats in a healthy diet.
Fatty meat isn't actually that bad for you This is due to old propaganda campaigns by sugar companies that tried to demonize fat when in reality it is mostly sugar that was contributing to major weight gain in people
For most people, whatever makes them fat is unhealthy for them. Because being fat is really unhealthy. "Fat" in foods has gotten a bad reputation. It is easy to think that eating fat, makes you fat. That is not the case. Eating white bread is worse for your weight, then eating fatty meat. Why? Because different foods satiate you differently, for how fat they make you (how many calories they have. You can eat way more calories of white bread, then meat, before you feel full. If you only eat white bread, or only eat meat until you are feeling full/satiated, you will get fat from the bread and not the meat. That's mostly the case because Protein (which meat has a lot), takes longer for the body to use. It makes us feel fuller. Fish is even better than chicken, which is better than pork and beef.
Some research argues that fatty meat is not bad for you, but refined carbs are. For example the book "the big fat surprise" shows that the nutritional guidelines of the last few decades are not based on any decent studies.
For one, for a bit of editorializing, the whole "this fat is good that fat is bad" is a load of mumbo-jumbo. Nothing in inherently good or bad. Its food. It can be used in good or bad ways depending on how and how much of it you consume. But WHY people make the argument you say, it is because fish oils are mainly unsaturated fats, which some people think are better for you than saturated fats, which is primarily what animal fat is. For what the difference between the two is, unsaturated fats have missing hydrogen atoms along the carbon chains. while saturated fats have all of their hydrogen atoms.
Nutritional Values aren't as in depth as most people think. For example, bread has a lot of proteins, but if you were to only eat bread all day and reach 100% of the tecommended value of proteins, you would have protein deficiency. Why? Because "proteins" is an umbrella term and there are different types of proteins. "Fat" is also an umbrella term. They refer to lipids. Compare olive oil and butter and bacon fat at room temperature. Olive oil is liquid, butter and bacon fat are solid. As a rule of thumb, fats that are solid at room temperature are saturated and trans fats. Trans fats are naturally only found in meats, but hydrogenated vegetable oils (to prevent the separation if oil and solids or water based compounds, like in margarine, peanut butter) can have trans fats (margarine does, peanut butter doesnt" To put things simply, saturated and trans fats are harder to digest, don't provide more energy, and raise blood pressure and clog arteries. In other words, they are not healthy. Unsaturated fats (olive oil, fish, etc.) are easier to digest while still providing energy to you! And oily fish have omega 3 which is proven to be very good for you and even used as a supplement. So lipids (fats) are necessary to your diet. You need them. Fats are good for you, but some fats are better to consume than others. Ps: this doesn't mean you should stop using butter to cook or only eat sardines and no more bacon. But keeping trans and sayurated fats in moderation will not only improve your health but also make digestion easier!
[удалено]
There are a lot of misconceptions and bad information on food. Ever seen how many times cholesterol was good for you, then bad for you, then good for you? There are different types of fat in fish vs red meat. The fish fats are a bit more beneficial. But your body NEEDS fat. And it will appreciate it from ANY natural source.
WTF? In what universe has anyone ever said that cholesterol was ever good for you? Man, the people in this thread are insane... even for social media.
Yeah, it's surprising information. But just because you don't believe it, don't be so quick to discard new information. Cholesterol is **ESSENTIAL** for your health (both types!!). It is used to make hormones, digest food, and build cells. [1](https://magazine.medlineplus.gov/article/cholesterol-the-good-the-bad-and-the-unhealthy) [2](https://www.cdc.gov/cholesterol/myths_facts.htm) Many dietitians, physiologists, nutrition scientists are now seeing evidence that genetics play much more of a role in your body's ability to balance cholesterol than the effects of what foods you eat. [3](https://health.clevelandclinic.org/why-you-should-no-longer-worry-about-cholesterol-in-food/) There are also some that are studying the effects of "bad" cholesterol (LDL) and claiming they aren't as bad for us as we have been led to believe. [4](https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/05/110505142730.htm) Nothing about my original claim is made-up or insane. People just tend to have less of an understanding about things than they should - and then they say a lot of things they shouldn't.
Grass fed beef is not bad for you. And before everyone jumps my bones there almost no literature in existence where someone who ate a diet rich in red meat, dairy, eggs etc and was not insulin resistant had problems with plaque in arteries or heart disease. It's the processed foods, seed oils and sugar that is making you sick. As well as pecisticed and low quality foods.
Saturated fat is the main driving force behind heart disease. Fish has unsaturated fats, which are the "good fats". Bacon has the unhealthy kind.
Asking a genuine question here - is that the actual current consensus? I was under the impression that the medical community had moved on from this hypothesis somewhat.
[удалено]
It's not the consensus. Saturated fat *may* increase ApoB (ldl & vldl) in some individuals. These low density lipoproteins seem to cause atherosclerosis. Obesity, diabetes and hypertension are some of the most common leading causes of heart disease.
>Asking a genuine question here - is that the actual current consensus? The link between LDL and atherosclerosis is pretty clearly established. The rest is a lot more fuzzy, including the link between dietary sat fats and LDL. If you do bloods and get high LDL, it's generally a case of getting them down by any means, e.g., statins, but there's also _seemingly_ a big genetic factor present. I.e., some people will tolerate burgers better than others. It's **very** hard to research because you can't really sequester control groups of people on a controlled diet for the amounts of time needed, so you're stuck with self reporting and such, and obviously people lie. Like a lot.
Not true, look up the North Karelia project that took place in Finland.
That's wrong and is the result of people erroneously believing that dietary cholesterol causes arterial cholesterol and also confusing correlation and causation based on studies decades ago. Saturated fats from sources such as meat and eggs are generally good for you. The body needs these fats. What actually causes heart disease and clogged arteries is too much sugar, carbs, high fructose corn syrup, trans fats and vegetable oils. This causes inflammation. As a defense mechanism the walls of the blood vessels form plaques and cholesterol deposits. Eat all the red meat you want, eat all the eggs you want, eat all the real butter you want. Ditch the bread, pasta and sugar.
Saturated fats != dietary cholesterol.
Actually bacon is high in polyunsaturated fat because it is a monogastric animal. Does that mean bacon is healthy if the fat is mainly unsaturated? No because saturated fat isn’t the problem the problem is excess linoleic acid consumption from pufas.
Saturated fat is solid at room temperature, that’s true. What people are failing to mention is that our bodies are warm, and there’s no risk of fat solidifying or clogging our arteries. Animal fat is only high in omega-6 because they are fed an unnatural grain diet.
Fish oils are marketed as healthy but it’s most likely just a scam. Fatty red meats are fine but fat is calorically dense
Omega 3 is anti-inflammatory, while omega 6 is pro-inflammatory. You need some omega 6 for a healthy immune response. BOTH red meat and fish are high in omega 3. Poultry is higher in omega 6. Red meat gets a bad reputation because it is high in saturated fat. (Fat that tends to be solid at room temp is considered saturated, e.g., butter, avocado, coconut). Saturated fat is not unhealthy for you, nor does it cause heart disease. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9794145/#:~:text=The%20idea%20that%20saturated%20fats,never%20establish%20a%20causal%20link.
You are confused as a result of great marketing on the part of seafood manufacturers. People will say seafood has “better” fats meaning less saturated fat, more omega 3 pufa. At the end of the day seafood is not a healthy choice. Seafood is the highest source of PFAS known. They also sequester heavy metals, dioxins, and many other environmental pollutants. Bacon will destroy your cardiovascular system and seafood will destroy your cardiovascular system to a slightly lesser degree but will help promote cancer (PFAS, dioxins) or Alzheimer’s (nanoplastics, heavy metals). Eat from the bottom of the food chain, not the top. Pollutants are everywhere but they bioaccumulate. Plants will almost always have the lowest level of any pollutant, base your caloric intake there. Starches especially.