Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There's more than one way to skin a cat. I notice they didn't mention Weight Watchers, either.
PS - Low-carbers don't cut OUT carbs, they reduce them. My dinner tonight was Carribbean jerk chicken with green beans, onion, and red pepper. When the weather cools, I'll be eating hot cereals that include oat bran. We use soy protein in low-carbing.
I eat a handful of almonds every day on my low carb routine and so according to that article, I'm covered. I still do low carb to get and keep the weight off. I don't see anything there that's inconsistent with what I'm doing now. The good news is it appears sat fats don't have much of an impact either way as long as you get rid of the weight, exercise, and eat enough other good stuff.
There's more than one way to skin a cat. I notice they didn't mention Weight Watchers, either.
No, but WW isn't constantly dissing whole grains and soy, as at least SOME low carb advocates do. Indeed ALL the foods listed could easily fit into WW.
Last edited by brooklynborndad; 08-26-2011 at 10:26 AM..
The good news is it appears sat fats don't have much of an impact either way as long as you get rid of the weight, exercise, and eat enough other good stuff.
Just to clarify low sat fat vs whatever the amount of sat fat the folks eating the "cholesterol lowering fooods" in this study ate doesnt matter. The article doesnt say what that latter amount is.
eating much higher levels of sat fat might well matter - not tested in this study.
and, though I was the OP, let me caveat, as always, its just one study.
Though its consistent with earlier studies on the benefits of oats, for example.
That a serving of nuts is as much protection as oats appears to be new to me - thats where I would like to see more studies.
Also interesting that soy is protective. Even processed soy, apparently, which has been much denigrated based on other studies.
This is incorrect. The study provided evidence that high HDL levels reduced the risk of heart disease.
This thread pertains to LDL levels, which the study confirms is a risk at high levels of heart disease.
Not all cholesterol is the same. High LDL = bad. High HDL = good.
Actually, I read something recently that the difference in people who dies between the control and test groups were something like in group one something like 1.6% of the people died due to heart and in group 2 something like 2% died. it was a difference of around 3 people.
But, they used this data to say something like 20% more people die when cholestoral stays high arent used... even though the total wasnt statistically significant...
All I'm saying is dont take the abstract of a study, or the medias headline to explain what a study says...
I wish medical studies data was a bit more public.
Last edited by Highwyre237; 09-01-2011 at 08:05 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
