Re: The n-3 to n-6 ratio is nonsense
- From: monty1945@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 15:56:45 -0800 (PST)
I'll also add, for those who are unaware, that the molecular-level
evidence is now clear. Oxidized LDL is the problem, and LDL rich in
PUFAs are much more susceptible to oxidation. However, other factors
are at work, such as antioxidant content of the diet, and here is
where it's possible that someone on a meat-rich diet that is a bit
higher in SFAs might be more likely to die of CHD (and so the
statistical studies can show that SFAs are "correlated" with
"increased" CHD risk. "Taka" cited a study (I think on my web site)
showing that Asian vegetarians with PUFA consumption that was a bit
higher than the meat eaters had less oxidized LDL, for example. This
is why I make it clear that I advocate a diet low in PUFAs and high in
SFAs, as well as being very low in cooked animal products. However,
our great "experts" like Willett probably have never even considered
doing a study on such a diet.
.
- References:
- The n-3 to n-6 ratio is nonsense
- From: Taka
- Re: The n-3 to n-6 ratio is nonsense
- From: Steve Young
- Re: The n-3 to n-6 ratio is nonsense
- From: monty1945
- The n-3 to n-6 ratio is nonsense
- Prev by Date: Re: The n-3 to n-6 ratio is nonsense
- Next by Date: BALONEY: Acme Juicer One of the Best Find a Sale on Acme Juicers
- Previous by thread: Re: The n-3 to n-6 ratio is nonsense
- Next by thread: Re: The n-3 to n-6 ratio is nonsense
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|