Who is behind the claim that coconut oil is pure poison?
Who is behind the claim that coconut oil is pure poison?
You've probably seen the latest headlines that claim that coconut oil is "pure poison." 1,2,3 That statement was made at a conference ...
You've probably seen the latest headlines that claim that coconut oil is "pure poison."1,2,3 That statement was made at a conference posted on YouTube by Karin Michels, Ph.D., Harvard professor T.H. Chan School of Public Health and director of the Institute of Tumor Prevention and Epidemiology of the University of Freiburg in Germany.In the conference,4 which is delivered in German and published on YouTube on July 10, 2018, Michels proclaims that coconut oil is "one of the worst foods you can eat."
Such statements are in accordance with the advice of the American Heart Association (AHA), which last year sent a presidential notice5 to cardiologists around the world, telling them to warn their patients about the dangers of saturated fats, such as butter and coconut oil.
According to the AHA, replacing these fats with polyunsaturated fats (PUFAs), such as margarine and vegetable oil, could reduce the risk of heart disease by up to 30 percent, which is almost the same as statins. In general, for those who need to reduce their cholesterol, the AHA recommends limiting the daily intake of saturated fat to 6 percent of daily calories or less.6The proponent of the HPV vaccine says that coconut oil is a 'pure poison'
Michels' statements are almost identical to those of the AHA. While it may be tempting to assume that it is a sock puppet for the processed vegetable oil industry, it does not seem to have any direct link to the industry.
His work has been funded almost exclusively by the National Institutes of Health,7 an agency of the US Department of Health. UU., And has no obvious conflicts of interest.
That said, although Michels supports breastfeeding and has made several positive studies on vitamins and nutrition in general, he deviates from rational thinking with his views on the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, which is detailed in a 2009 article.8 entitled "Vaccine against HPV for all", which advocates the use of the HPV vaccine not only in girls and boys, but also in older men and women who test positive for certain types of HPV.
It is also quite clear that it has been against saturated fats for a long time. This is not unusual, considering how deeply rooted that myth has been. The decisive factor and the most direct explanation of his views on coconut oil are his clear and direct links with Professor Frank Sacks at the Harvard School of Public Health.
Sacks was, in fact, the lead author of that 2017 AHA Presidential Advisory against saturated fats. In a 1995 joint letter to the editor of The New England Journal of Medicine, Michels and Sacks noted that:9
"The content of trans fatty acids in our foods has been a cause of concern due to the reported adverse effects on serum lipid levels and coronary heart disease, even a typical western diet may have enough of these trans isomers to significantly increase the risk. of coronary disease ...
"To achieve the solid consistency of dietary margarines, manufacturers are allowed to mix unmodified liquid oils with a small amount of" hard stuff ", which are naturally solid fats ... which produces a fat richer in acid Stearic, a saturated fatty acid that does, does not raise serum levels of low density lipoprotein cholesterol.
"These products have a favorable composition of fatty acids: the content of trans fatty acids is negligible and the content of saturated fatty acids is low ... Margarines can be produced that attract the consumer and do not contain trans fatty acids or high levels of acids saturated fatty acids ".
Michels promotes obsolete views of AHA
In other words, while Michels and Sacks correctly identify the dangers of Trans fat, incorrectly state that margarines that contain saturated fats are also a health hazard. Last year, when the AHA warned against coconut oil and butter, several experts spoke, highlighting the serious errors of the AHA review.
So, it really seems that Michels is simply promoting the views of the AHA, a position that she and Sacks have maintained for decades. A basis for this view is that if a fat is solid at room temperature, it should clog the arteries. But that's the kind of thought that brought us trans fats in the first place, which has proven to be the real poison.
The most interesting part of this is that your lecture was too dark to be found and picked up by the mainstream English-speaking media to the extent that it has done so, and this makes me wonder if the vegetable oil industry had a hand in its promotion and turning it into "great news".
The AHA, with its strong links to the processed food industry, would also have a great interest in promoting the circulation of this information.
AHA still defends failed hypothesis
About six decades ago, the AHA stated that saturated fats were a danger to heart health, and last year, they reviewed the science and concluded that it has always been good. Unfortunately, the science used to support this outdated vision is as old as the wrong posture towards saturated fats themselves.
As noted by the American science writer Gary taubes in his extensive rebuttal to the advice of the AHA:10
"The history of science is full of failed hypotheses based on the selective interpretation of evidence ... Today's presidential adviser ... may be the most egregious example of the epidemiology of Bing Crosby. ['accentuate the positive and eliminate the negative'] that I have ever seen ...
"[T]Hey, methodically eliminate the negative and accentuate the positive until they can argue that they are correct, clear and unambiguous ...
"[T]The AHA concludes that only four clinical trials have been conducted with a sufficiently reliable methodology to enable them to assess the value of replacing AGS with PUFA (in practice, replacing animal fats). [with] vegetable oils) and concludes that this replacement will reduce heart attacks by 30 percent ...
"These four trials are the ones that remain after the AHA experts have systematically reviewed the others and found reasons to reject everything that did not find such a positive effect, including a significant number that suggested otherwise ...
"They do this for each trial, but all four, including among the rejections, the largest trials ever done: the Minnesota Coronary Survey, the Sydney Heart Study and, most notably, the Women's Health Initiative, which was the Largest and most expensive clinical trial. Have you ever done it?
"All this resulted in evidence that refuted the hypothesis, all are rejected from the analysis."
Taubes, journalist researcher of science and health that has written three books on obesity and the diet, notes that the AHA's advisory document actually reveals the long-standing prejudice of the AHA and the method by which it reaches its conclusions.
In 2013, the AHA published a report.eleven state that "the strongest possible evidence" supported the recommendation to replace saturated fats with PUFA. However, several meta-analyzes, produced by independent researchers, concluded that the evidence to restrict saturated fats was, in fact, weak or non-existent.
The 2017 advisory document reveals how the AHA could conclude that they had the "strongest evidence possible". In short, they methodically devised justifications to simply exclude any evidence to the contrary. All that remained, then and now, was a small number of studies that support the preconceived vision of what the AHA wants the truth to be.
The studies included in the AHA Assessment are based on obsolete science
The low-fat myth was born and grew to take hold in the 60s and early 70s, and are studies of these times that the AHA uses as a basis for its recommendation to avoid saturated fats, and as noted by Taubes, are less than a handful of these studies: four to be precise.
A great deal of nutritional science has been published since the early 1970s, however, AHA chooses to cling to outdated science. The reason why someone guesses. One of the studies included in the review of the AHA was the Oslo Diet-Heart Study,12 published in 1970.
In this study, 412 patients who had had a heart attack or had a high risk of heart disease were randomized into two groups: one group received a diet low in saturated fat, high in PUFA along with continuous long-term instructions and supervision "while the other group ate what they wanted and received no nutritional advice, as explained by Taubes:13
"This is technically called performance bias and is the equivalent of performing an unblinded drug trial without a placebo - it's literally an uncontrolled trial, despite randomization.
"([A]All physicians involved also knew if their patients were assigned to the intervention or control group, which makes the researcher's bias much more likely. We would never accept such proof as a valid proof of a medication. Why do it by diet? Well, maybe because it can be used to support our preconceptions. "
Taubes continues by stating that he was so curious about this Oslo study that he bought a monograph published by the original author. In it, the author describes in more detail how he performed the test.
Interestingly, this monograph reveals that the consumption of sugar in the treatment group was only 50 grams per day, an amount that Taubes estimates could be approximately half of the per capita consumption in Norway at that time, according to extrapolated data.14
"In this test, the variable that is supposed to be different is the [saturated fat]PUFA ratio, but the performance bias introduces another. One group receives ongoing counseling to eat healthy, one group does not. Now, how can that advice continue to influence health status?
"One way is that, apparently, the group that took it decided to eat a lot less sugar." This unintended consequence now provides another possible explanation as to why these people had so many fewer heart attacks.
"I do not know if this is true, the point is that neither Leren nor our AHA authorities," writes Taubes. "All four studies used to support the 30 percent number had significant failures, often with the same performance bias." Reason for rejection. "
AHA makes false claims about coconut oil
What's more, the AHA actually makes false claims by specifying coconut oil as a source of dangerous saturated fat, since none of the four studies that included in its analysis included coconut oil. This was raised last year by Dr. Cate Shanahan,fifteen A family doctor and author of "Deep nutrition: why your genes need traditional food. "
In an email to me, he noted that "this AHA message is not only false, it is dangerous". While it is true that most of the initial studies on coconut oil had less than favorable results, it is important to recognize that these studies were conducted with partially hydrogenated coconut oil, not Unrefined virgin coconut oil.sixteen
As always, the devil is in the details, and hydrogenated oil is not the same as unrefined oil, even when talking about something as healthy as coconut. This small but crucial detail is what led to the unmerited vilification of coconut oil in the first place.
Shanahan went on to declare:
"Most doctors do not realize that medical leadership is making unfounded claims, and the reason why they do not notice it is because ... articles that claim the existence of human clinical trial evidence against coconut and all other foods high in saturated fats, combine sources of saturated fat with saturated fat itself.
"Saturated fat does not really exist in the food chain, what they talk about are saturated fatty acids, the components of triglyceride fat, the substance that chefs simply call" fat. "We often say things like 'oil Coconut is a saturated fat "and" butter is a saturated fat. "But it would be more correct to say that 'coconut oil is rich in saturated fatty acids'.
"Coconut oil, butter, lard, tallow and any other animal fat also contain monounsaturated fatty acids and even some polyunsaturated fatty acids, in addition to saturated fatty acids ... The idea is that the foods contain mixtures of fatty acids in varying proportions. "
Put another way, most foods contain a mixture of fatty acids, not just one. Margarine and butter also contain saturated fatty acids, however, the AHA makes no mention of this. The harder the margarine is, the more saturated fat it tends to contain, in some cases more than butter or shortening.
"Then, when people eat margarine and butter, in addition to the trans-toxic fatty acids, they also eat saturated fatty acids, and that means that when a study says they're exchanging saturated fats for vegetable oils, that does not mean exchanging butter and butter. .
"It could very well be the case that margarine and shortening were among the foods that were eliminated," says Shanahan.
"And because most doctors do not realize that margarine and shortening contain saturated fatty acids, they do not think it's particularly important to ask whether studies like the four basic dates mentioned in the Assessment are really confusing. by the fact that in the baseline, the diet high in saturated fats included a significant amount of margarines and shortenings that contain trans toxic fats.
"Because if they did, then that means that any health benefits seen in the studies may have nothing to do with the reductions in saturated fat, it's reducing the consumption of trans fats that make a difference to health."
Reducing saturated fat has had disastrous consequences for public health
Since the 1950s, when vegetable oils began to be promoted over saturated fats such as butter, Americans have followed this advice diligently, dramatically increasing vegetable oil consumption. Soybean oil, for example, has increased by 600 percent (10,000 percent since 1900), while the consumption of butter, tallow and lard has been reduced by half. We have also dramatically increased the consumption of sugar.17
Unfortunately, the rates of heart disease have not improved even though people have followed the dietary recommendations of the AHA. Common sense tells us that if the AHA council has not worked in the last 65 years, it probably will not start working now.
As Shanahan pointed out, the technology that allows us to study molecular reactions is relatively recent and certainly was not available in the 60s and 70s. Modern research has just begun to reveal what really happens at the molecular level when vegetable oil is consumed and margarine, and that's not good.
How vegetable oils become toxic
For example, Dr. Sanjoy Ghosh,18 A biologist at the University of British Columbia has shown that mitochondria can not easily use PUFA as fuel due to the unique molecular structure of fats.
Other researchers have shown that linoleic PUFA can cause cell death as well as hinder mitochondrial function.19 PUFAs are also not easily stored in subcutaneous fat. Instead, they tend to deposit in your liver, where they contribute to fatty liver disease.twenty and in your arteries, where they contribute to atherosclerosis. Research in animals and humans has also found that vegetable oils promote:
According to Frances Sladek,29 Ph.D., a toxicologist and professor of cell biology at UC Riverside, PUFAs behave like a toxin that builds up in tissues because your body can not easily get rid of it.When processed vegetable oils, such as sunflower oil and corn oil, are heated, the chemicals that cause cancer, such as aldehydes they are also produced in quantities that are in stark contrast to the low levels produced by coconut oil, which has much less double bonds to be damaged by heat.30
Biochemistry Versus StatisticsAccording to Shanahan, the idea that PUFAs are healthier than saturated fats fades when you enter the field of biochemistry, because it is "biochemically implausible."
In other words, the molecular structure of PUFA is such that it is prone to react with oxygen, and these reactions disrupt cellular activity and cause inflammation.31 Oxidative stress and inflammation, in turn, are distinctive not only of heart disease And attacks to the heart but of the majority of the chronic diseases.32.33
"Meanwhile, people in the AHA claim that saturated fat is proinflammatory and causes arterial plaque and heart attacks, but there is no biochemically plausible explanation for their argument.
"Saturated fat is very stable and will not react with oxygen the way PUFA does, not until the fundamental laws of the universe are altered," Shanahan writes.
"Our bodies do need some PUFA fat, but we need them to come from foods like nuts and salmon or gently processed oils (such as in cold pressing, unrefined) such as flax and artisanal grape seed, not from vegetable oils because they are refined, bleached and deodorized, and PUFA fats are transformed molecularly into toxins that our body can not use. "
High cholesterol does not lead to heart disease
Researchers have also spoiled the notion that having high cholesterol is the main contributor to heart disease in the first place, and this is the central premise on which Michels and the AHA conclude that coconut oil and other saturated fats They are bad for you
For example, a 2016 study.3. 4 published in The BMJ, the data of the Minnesota Coronary Experiment that took place between 1968 and 1973, after gaining access to previously unpublished data, was reanalyzed.
This was a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial to evaluate whether replacing saturated fats with vegetable oil (high in linoleic acid) would reduce cholesterol levels, thereby reducing heart disease and related deaths. Interestingly, although the treatment group significantly reduced its cholesterol, no mortality benefit could be found.
In fact, for every 30 milligrams per deciliter (mg / dL) of reduction in serum cholesterol, the risk of death actually increased by 22 percent. The exchange of saturated fats for vegetable oil also had no effect on rates of atherosclerosis or heart attacks. As the authors have pointed out:
"The available evidence ... shows that the replacement of saturated fat in the diet with linoleic acid effectively reduces serum cholesterol, but does not support the hypothesis that this translates into a lower risk of death from coronary heart disease or all Causes.
"The findings ... add to growing evidence that incomplete publication has contributed to overestimate the benefits of replacing saturated fats with vegetable oils ..."
The AHA does not take either LDL particle number in consideration. There are large, spongy, small, dense LDL particles. We did not have this information in the 1960s, but we sure have it now. This is another crucial detail, since large LDL particles have been shown to be harmless and do not increase your risk of heart disease.
And guess what? Sugar promotes small, dense, harmful LDLs, while the saturated fats found in butter and coconut oil promote large, fluffy, safe LDL.35
Is the coconut oil healthy or not?
The short answer is yes, unrefined virgin coconut oil is a healthy option. It has been a staple food for millennia, providing you with high quality fat that is important for optimal health.
Coconut oil:
- Supports thyroid function (unlike many other oils, coconut oil does not interfere with the conversion of T4 to T3, and T4 must be converted to T3 to create the enzymes needed to convert fats into energy)
- Normalizes the sensitivity to insulin and leptin.
- Provides excellent fuel and readily available to your body instead of carbohydrates (which you should avoid if you want to lose weight)
A really important benefit of coconut oil It is related to the fact that it contains medium chain triglycerides (MCTs). The smaller particle size of MCTs helps them to penetrate more easily into cell membranes. MCTs also do not require special enzymes, and your body can use them more efficiently, which puts less pressure on your digestive system.However, the most important thing is that MCTs avoid the storage process of bile and fat and go directly to the liver, where they are converted into ketones. Your liver quickly releases ketones into the bloodstream, where they are transported around your body to be used as fuel.
In fact, ketones are the preferred fuel for your body, especially your heart and brain, and can be key to the prevention of heart disease and Alzheimer's.
By immediately converting to energy instead of being stored as fat, MCTs stimulate your body's metabolism and help promote weight loss. So, yes, coconut oil really is a healthy food that belongs to everyone's kitchen.
(To clarify, while coconut oil contains MCT, direct MCT oil has a much higher concentration of shorter chain fats that are more efficiently converted to ketones; C8 or caprylic acid has the best ability to convert to ketones) .
Coconut oil may be contraindicated if you have a leaky casing
For all its benefits, there is at least one case in which coconut oil is contraindicated due to its lauric acid content. In his book, "The paradox of the plant: the hidden dangers in 'healthy' foods that cause disease and weight gain", Dr. Steven Gundry explains how coconut oil can be problematic if you have a leaky gut.
As a result, lipopolysaccharide (LPS), an endotoxin, adheres to lauric acid, facilitating its transport beyond its intestinal lining into the bloodstream. Interestingly, the MCT oil does not do this.
Therefore, if you have a leaky gut, or unless you are healthy and consume a diet without lectins, it may be best to avoid coconut oil and use MCT oil instead. Caprylic acid would be best, but none of these will allow LPS to enter the bloodstream.
A flawed 60-year research on saturated fat does not "demystify" the benefits of coconut oil
So, to summarize, Michels advocates decades of old recommendations that are still held by the AHA.
Once again, she has a professional connection with Sacks, who was the lead author of the AHA's advice on saturated fats, and in that document, Sacks specifically addressed coconut oil, although coconut oil did not participate in any of the the studies that they included in their scientific review. .
When considering the recommendations for heart health, it is important to remember that heart disease is mainly caused by chronic inflammation, which is caused by excessive amounts of omega-6 (omega-6 unbalanced to omega-336), dangerous trans fats, processed vegetable oils and excess sugar.
Saturated fats, on the other hand, have been repeatedly exonerated, with studies showing that they do not contribute to heart disease and that they are in fact a very important source of fuel for your body.
Of course, it's hard to admit that you've been wrong for over 65 years. Such admission can damage the reputation of an organization. But by trying to roll back the clock to 1960 and promote margarine and vegetable oils over butter and coconut oil, the AHA has proven to be professionally irresponsible and outdated, and a lecture from one of its ideological supporters can not change that . To learn more about how Coconut oil benefits your health, and why, see "Why coconut oil is so good for you. "
By Dr. Joseph Mercola, Guest Author
From the author: The existing medical establishment is responsible for killing and permanently injuring millions of Americans, but the growing number of visitors to Mercola.com Since I started the site in 1997, now we are routinely among the top 10 health sites on the Internet, it convinces me that you are also fed up with your deception. You want practical health solutions without exaggeration, and that's what I offer.References:
!function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s)
{if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function(){n.callMethod?
n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)};
if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n;n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version='2.0';
n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0;
t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0];
s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)}(window, document,'script',
'https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/fbevents.js');
fbq('init', '369524843414444');
fbq('track', 'PageView');
(function(d, s, id) {
var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];
if (d.getElementById(id)) return;
js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;
js.src = "http://connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1";
fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);
}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk')); .
SOURCE LINK ERESVIRAL.COM https://www.beviral.online
Comentarios
Publicar un comentario