Don’t make the mistake that your own article link warns about: “This is just one more piece of evidence showing that we really need to stop making recommendations about food based on theories about one nutrient in food,” says Mozaffarian. “It’s crucial at this time to understand that it’s about food as a whole, and not about single nutrients.”

The segment you quoted (not the sentences above) highlights the findings that while the population as a whole reduced saturated fats, the rate of heart disease did NOT change as expected…but what was NOT anticipated was that the population as a whole replace the calories lost from switching from whole to skimmed milk (for example) were replaced by sugars and starch, not kale and broccoli.

Repeating and re-stating that last paragraph for emphasis: The switch made from whole to skimmed milk, as a part of a broader reduction in calories from saturated fats, did NOT have the anticipated effect of reducing heart disease. Why, because those calories were replaced with more bad stuff, not good stuff; not because more saturated fats are good for you. Nobody considered the diet as a whole. The findings don't mean that less calories from saturated fat isn't still generally a good change from the Standard American Diet (SAD).

Dietary patterns consistently associated with good health tend to be low in saturated fat—but not because they focus on saturated fat—rather, it's because they're made up of the most nutritious foods preferentially. Those foods tend to be low in saturated fat just as they are low in salt and sugar and free of trans fat and so forth. Those foods are also minimally processed and close to nature, including vegetables, fruits, beans, lentils, nuts, seeds, and whole grains. There is no pixie dust involved. There is no magic formula, and there is no scapegoat. Wholesome foods across our entire diet intake in sensible combinations could be our salvation.


“We” are smarter today than we were yesterday, and we’ll be smarter tomorrow than we are today, which is why recommendations evolve. (PSA “screening” guidelines are just another example of this fact.) Don’t fall victim to the oversimplification in the popular press.

Post Edited (JackH) : 4/6/2016 8:58:30 AM (GMT-6)

OK, fair enough.

But keep in mind that this statement (which you just quoted), which sounds really convincing on the surface, but can be misleading unless you understand what's behind it:

“There is no prospective human evidence that people who eat low-fat dairy do better than people who eat whole-fat dairy.”

The human diet is so complex it is next to impossible to conduct a prospective human trial (the gold standard of "proof" is the prospective, double blind, randomized controlled clinical trial) on any one type of food, or as Mozaffarian said, any single nutrient.

Just finished a 4 hour course on the relationship of superbugs, animal protein (meat, milk) and antibiotics (feed to the criteriers and then into you). Makes me glad I quite milk and have cut way back on meat.

I agree with JackH. You cannot control for a single dietary factor, since there are so many variables in people's diets. In addition, these studies are of the general population. Those of us in this forum are part of a subgroup, men with PCa. What is good for the general population,may or may not be harmful to men with PCa. Many studies say dairy is bad for PCa, and whether or not it is harmful or helpful for the general population likely won't change that.

Post Edited (FrackMe) : 4/7/2016 4:03:28 PM (GMT-6)