Fats are our friends!

We so hate the fat on our own bodies, we often avoid it when shopping
for foods. But, surprise! Many fats are actually our friends, and
important to a healthy body.

Enemy Fats

* Trans fat removes good cholesterol and adds bad cholesterol to your
body. Limit your intake to less than 1% of your daily calories.

* Saturated fat adds bad cholesterol to your body. Limit your intake
to less than 10% of your daily calories, or 20g--whichever is less.

* Trans and saturated fats cause heart disease and high blood
pressure.

Friendly Fats

* Monounsaturated fats reduce bad cholesterol and can be found in
olive oil, almonds, and peanuts. It truly is our friend.

* Polyunsaturated fats reduce both good and bad cholesterol. It's
almost a neutral effect, but the star of polyunsaturated fats is
omega-3. It's an essential fatty acid that strengthens your immune
system and fights depression, diabetes, cancer, etc. Get 3g per day
from tuna, salmon, walnuts, and flaxseed oil.

* Get 20% - 35% of your daily energy from fats, mostly the friendly
kind. Fat is necessary to absorb vitamins and to keep your skin looking
healthy.

335/332/215

Legal Disclaimer: This information is based on USDA and AHA guidelines.
I am not a registered dietitian and guarantee neither the accuracy of
the original guidelines nor my paraphrasing of them.

comp_n_chess@hotmail.com wrote:
> We so hate the fat on our own bodies, we often avoid it when shopping
> for foods. But, surprise! Many fats are actually our friends, and
> important to a healthy body.
>
> Enemy Fats
>
> * Trans fat removes good cholesterol and adds bad cholesterol to your
> body. Limit your intake to less than 1% of your daily calories.
>
> * Saturated fat adds bad cholesterol to your body. Limit your intake
> to less than 10% of your daily calories, or 20g--whichever is less.
>
> * Trans and saturated fats cause heart disease and high blood
> pressure.
>
> Friendly Fats
>
> * Monounsaturated fats reduce bad cholesterol and can be found in
> olive oil, almonds, and peanuts. It truly is our friend.
>
> * Polyunsaturated fats reduce both good and bad cholesterol. It's
> almost a neutral effect, but the star of polyunsaturated fats is
> omega-3. It's an essential fatty acid that strengthens your immune
> system and fights depression, diabetes, cancer, etc. Get 3g per day
> from tuna, salmon, walnuts, and flaxseed oil.
>
> * Get 20% - 35% of your daily energy from fats, mostly the friendly
> kind. Fat is necessary to absorb vitamins and to keep your skin looking
> healthy.
>
> 335/332/215
>
> Legal Disclaimer: This information is based on USDA and AHA guidelines.
> I am not a registered dietitian and guarantee neither the accuracy of
> the original guidelines nor my paraphrasing of them.

Good post, but the govt's recommendation is no more than 30% of
calories from fat. Less is OK. The essesntial fats that you need plus
some extra omega-3 would put you at about 5% of calories from fat. All
the rest is probably not helpful and some could argue it is harmful for
some people like those with heart problems. dkw

dkw12002@yahoo.com wrote:
> comp_n_chess@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>>We so hate the fat on our own bodies, we often avoid it when shopping
>>for foods. But, surprise! Many fats are actually our friends, and
>>important to a healthy body.
>>
>>Enemy Fats
>>
>> * Trans fat removes good cholesterol and adds bad cholesterol to your
>>body. Limit your intake to less than 1% of your daily calories.
>>
>> * Saturated fat adds bad cholesterol to your body. Limit your intake
>>to less than 10% of your daily calories, or 20g--whichever is less.
>>
>> * Trans and saturated fats cause heart disease and high blood
>>pressure.
>>
>>Friendly Fats
>>
>> * Monounsaturated fats reduce bad cholesterol and can be found in
>>olive oil, almonds, and peanuts. It truly is our friend.
>>
>> * Polyunsaturated fats reduce both good and bad cholesterol. It's
>>almost a neutral effect, but the star of polyunsaturated fats is
>>omega-3. It's an essential fatty acid that strengthens your immune
>>system and fights depression, diabetes, cancer, etc. Get 3g per day
>>from tuna, salmon, walnuts, and flaxseed oil.
>>
>> * Get 20% - 35% of your daily energy from fats, mostly the friendly
>>kind. Fat is necessary to absorb vitamins and to keep your skin looking
>>healthy.
>>
>>335/332/215
>>
>>Legal Disclaimer: This information is based on USDA and AHA guidelines.
>>I am not a registered dietitian and guarantee neither the accuracy of
>>the original guidelines nor my paraphrasing of them.
>
>
> Good post, but the govt's recommendation is no more than 30% of
> calories from fat. Less is OK. The essesntial fats that you need plus
> some extra omega-3 would put you at about 5% of calories from fat. All
> the rest is probably not helpful and some could argue it is harmful for
> some people like those with heart problems. dkw
>
There seems to be considerable disagreement over the effects of mono and
poly unsaturated fats in the diet. Saying "probably not helpful and
some could argue it is harmful....." is almost certainly overstating the
evidence. There is some evidence that monounsaturated fats contribute
to increasing HDL which are beneficial.

del

--
Del Cecchi
"This post is my own and doesn’t necessarily represent IBM’s positions,
strategies or opinions.”

dkw12002@yahoo.com wrote:
> Good post

Thanks. I hoped others might be interested, or perhaps someone would
have a different view and I would learn something.

> but the govt's recommendation is no more than 30% of calories from fat. Less is OK.

The US Government, American Heart Association, and Mayo Clinic changed
their recommendations to 20% - 35%. Some suggest 20%-30%, and others
suggest 25%-35%. What's more important is to limit your intake of trans
and saturated fats and add more good fats to your diet.

> The essesntial fats that you need plus some extra omega-3 would put you
> at about 5% of calories from fat. All the rest is probably not helpful and some
> could argue it is harmful for some people like those with heart problems. dkw

I'm only presenting the mainstream guidelines. Before you embark on a
diet very low in fat, consider the following:

In a 1999 World Health Organization publication, a large group of
doctors asserted that very low fat intake may have adverse effects.
They showed that Greeks in the 1960s ate more than 30% of their daily
energy at fat, mostly monounsaturated fat, and had the lowest rates of
heart disease, colon cancer, and breast cancer in the world.
Populations that restricted their fat intake to 15% faced much higher
rates of heart disease.

A recent, eight-year study of 49,000 women demonstrated that reducing
fat intake by 25% did not reduce the risk of heart disease or cancer.
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritio...e/low_fat.html

Trans and saturated fats are still your enemy--eliminate them as much
as possible. They do cause heart disease.

Modern research suggests you have friends in the fat world that will
help you combat heart disease, cancer, depression, diabetes, etc. Try
to eat 3g of omega-3 fatty acids per day, and get 20%-35% of your
energy from fats, mostly the monounsaturated kinds.

335/331/215

<comp_n_chess@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1162838858.976664.253010@m73g2000cwd.googlegr oups.com...
> What's more important is to limit your intake of trans
> and saturated fats and add more good fats to your diet.

Bingo.

> Modern research suggests you have friends in the fat world that will
> help you combat heart disease, cancer, depression, diabetes, etc. Try
> to eat 3g of omega-3 fatty acids per day, and get 20%-35% of your
> energy from fats, mostly the monounsaturated kinds.

I've never been a big fan of counting. But I know that if I'm getting some
olive oil and some salmon regularly, I'm doing myself a favor, while butter
and fried foods are not doing me any health favors.

I take flax seed oil capsules and B complex supplements when I'm under a lot
of stress.

Like most matters nutritional, choosing fats seems to be a matter of a
certain amount of education and a certain amount of common sense. But some
people seem to like to discuss numbers, and that's cool by me, of course!

ep
size 22/16-18/10-12

Del Cecchi wrote:
> There seems to be considerable disagreement over the effects of mono and
> poly unsaturated fats in the diet.

It's all very interesting. This past week I've only worried whether the
percent fat I ate ended up in the 20% - 35% range and saturated fat
ended up below 10%. Now I've learned that since I don't eat seafood my
diet is deficient in omega-3 fatty acids and perhaps vitamin e. I'm
going to focus on reducing my "bad" fats and making sure I eat some
"good" fats.

335/331/215

comp_n_chess@hotmail.com wrote:
> Del Cecchi wrote:
>
>>There seems to be considerable disagreement over the effects of mono and
>>poly unsaturated fats in the diet.
>
>
> It's all very interesting. This past week I've only worried whether the
> percent fat I ate ended up in the 20% - 35% range and saturated fat
> ended up below 10%. Now I've learned that since I don't eat seafood my
> diet is deficient in omega-3 fatty acids and perhaps vitamin e. I'm
> going to focus on reducing my "bad" fats and making sure I eat some
> "good" fats.
>
> 335/331/215
>
If you won't eat fatty fish, then fish oil capsules are considered a
good idea and recommended/required/prescribed (sorry, no word exactly
fits.) for those with high cardiac risk factors. Apparently the vegan
omega-3s don't do the job.

--
Del Cecchi
"This post is my own and doesn’t necessarily represent IBM’s positions,
strategies or opinions.”

comp_n_chess@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> I'm only presenting the mainstream guidelines.

Guideliens that utterly ignore the health benefits of low carbing.
While there's nothing wrong with low fatting there's everything
wrong with assuming it's the only process that is beneficial.

> A recent, eight-year study of 49,000 women demonstrated that reducing
> fat intake by 25% did not reduce the risk of heart disease or cancer.
> http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritio...e/low_fat.html

Saying that low fat isn't a magic cure is not the same as saying
low fat doesn't work. But it does point out the option of low carb.

> Trans and saturated fats are still your enemy--eliminate them as much
> as possible. They do cause heart disease.

Not true. Saturated fats are only a problem when combined with
high carb eating. Go low carb and there are no problems at all
from saturated fats. It's not the saturated fat it's the
*combiniation*
of them with high carb. So the part about the saturated fat is
only true for low fatters. Transfats, different story, bad for
everyone.

> Modern research suggests you have friends in the fat world that will
> help you combat heart disease, cancer, depression, diabetes, etc. Try
> to eat 3g of omega-3 fatty acids per day, and get 20%-35% of your
> energy from fats, mostly the monounsaturated kinds.

If you pick the minimum healthy grams of protein, fat and carb,
your total calories end up too low. There's nothing wrong with
going over 60% of calories from fat as long as you stay low carb
and vice versa. Again you're quoting low-fat-only obsolete figures.

Doug Freyburger wrote:
> comp_n_chess@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > I'm only presenting the mainstream guidelines.
>
> Guideliens that utterly ignore the health benefits of low carbing.
> While there's nothing wrong with low fatting there's everything
> wrong with assuming it's the only process that is beneficial.

And to balance it out -

Carbs are not essential in the diet. It's doable to stay healthy
eating near zero carbs for years on end. The body just makes
its own blood sugar from fat and protein. But the diet it takes
to pull off health at these low carb levels is one most would not
be willing to eat - Almost all meat raw and certain selective
organs are important. The all meat diet may work, but it
requires extreme measures just like the opposite extreme of
vegan does.

So what that carbs are not essential, there is a mimimum
amount that is healthy without extreme measures. Plenty of
veggies makes health far easier to achieve.

When do excess carbs become a problem? That depends more
on glycemic index and such. There's an enormous range
that's healthy all the way from low carb to low fat.

Doug Freyburger wrote:
> comp_n_chess@hotmail.com wrote:
> >
> > Trans and saturated fats are still your enemy--eliminate them as much
> > as possible. They do cause heart disease.
>
> Not true. Saturated fats are only a problem when combined with
> high carb eating. Go low carb and there are no problems at all

A diet low in saturated fat should work for people eating high- or
medium-carbohydrate diets. I wasn't aware of the very-low-carbohydrate
exception. Thanks! Part of why I posted this was to get different
viewpoints and point me towards what I should read up on next.

> So the part about the saturated fat is only true for low fatters.

It's also true for moderate- and even high-fat diets, like the
Mediterranean Diet. As I pointed out, in Greece in the 1960s people got
more than 30% of their calories from fat and yet had the highest
longevity rate in the world and very low heart disease and cancer
rates. Doctors believe this is in part because they ate lots of good
(monounsaturated) fats and few bad (saturated) fats.

> Transfats, different story, bad for everyone.

Good to know.

335/331/215

comp_n_chess@hotmail.com wrote:
> Doug Freyburger wrote:
>
>>comp_n_chess@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>Trans and saturated fats are still your enemy--eliminate them as much
>>>as possible. They do cause heart disease.
>>
>>Not true. Saturated fats are only a problem when combined with
>>high carb eating. Go low carb and there are no problems at all
>
>
> A diet low in saturated fat should work for people eating high- or
> medium-carbohydrate diets. I wasn't aware of the very-low-carbohydrate
> exception. Thanks! Part of why I posted this was to get different
> viewpoints and point me towards what I should read up on next.
>
>
>>So the part about the saturated fat is only true for low fatters.
>
>
> It's also true for moderate- and even high-fat diets, like the
> Mediterranean Diet. As I pointed out, in Greece in the 1960s people got
> more than 30% of their calories from fat and yet had the highest
> longevity rate in the world and very low heart disease and cancer
> rates. Doctors believe this is in part because they ate lots of good
> (monounsaturated) fats and few bad (saturated) fats.
>
>
>>Transfats, different story, bad for everyone.
>
>
> Good to know.
>
> 335/331/215
>
Well so far as I know, no part of the medical establishment has endorsed
a 60% saturated fat diet with no carbs. I guess I would want to see
some studies of that before trying it.

del

--
Del Cecchi
"This post is my own and doesn’t necessarily represent IBM’s positions,
strategies or opinions.”

Del Cecchi wrote:
> comp_n_chess@hotmail.com wrote:
> > Doug Freyburger wrote:

> >>Not true. Saturated fats are only a problem when combined with
> >>high carb eating. Go low carb and there are no problems at all
> >
> > A diet low in saturated fat should work for people eating high- or
> > medium-carbohydrate diets. I wasn't aware of the very-low-carbohydrate
> > exception. Thanks! Part of why I posted this was to get different
> > viewpoints and point me towards what I should read up on next.

> Well so far as I know, no part of the medical establishment has endorsed
> a 60% saturated fat diet with no carbs. I guess I would want to see
> some studies of that before trying it.

I found one paper online written by a minority of doctors who believe
that restricting saturated fat intake is unnecessary on a short-term,
very low carbohydrate diet. There's at least some support in the
medical community for what Doug's saying. As for me, I'll restrict my
saturated fat intake, which the majority of doctors endorse.


"The case for not restricting saturated fat on a low carbohydrate diet"

No actual study here, but a clear argument referencing a dozen other
papers which they believe support their point of view.

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/art...tid=1208952#B2


"Comparison of isocaloric very low carbohydrate/high saturated fat and
high carbohydrate/low saturated fat diets on body composition and
cardiovascular risk".

28 people got 4% of their energy from carbohydrates and 20% of their
energy from saturated fats for 12 weeks. Their LDL levels increased 7%
(bad), but their HDL levels increased (good) and their tryglycerides
decreased (good). Overall, their risk of heart disease increased
slightly. The doctor recommend this only as a short-term diet for
patients with insulin-resistance and hypertriacglycerolemia.

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/art...?artid=1368980


335/330/215

Del Cecchi wrote:
> If you won't eat fatty fish, then fish oil capsules are considered a
> good idea and recommended/required/prescribed (sorry, no word exactly
> fits.) for those with high cardiac risk factors. Apparently the vegan
> omega-3s don't do the job.

Yeah, I read plant-sources have most but not all of the omega-3 acids.
Capsules don't sound so bad. I'll look into ordering them. I haven't
had a medical checkup in years, but according to the blood pressure
cuffs at the drugstore my blood pressure is on the high end.

335/330/215

Edna Pearl wrote:
> <comp_n_chess@hotmail.com> wrote in message

> I've never been a big fan of counting. But I know that if I'm getting some
> olive oil and some salmon regularly, I'm doing myself a favor, while butter
> and fried foods are not doing me any health favors.

> I take flax seed oil capsules and B complex supplements when I'm under a lot
> of stress.

"B complex supplements", huh? If you're taking flax seed capsules, you
must have gone through this same learning process at some point. It's
getting easier. I can walk 1.5 hours/day now without my legs feeling
sore, and I'm holding at about 2700 calories/day without starving.

335/330/215

On 7 Nov 2006 12:03:31 -0800, comp_n_chess@hotmail.com wrote:

>Del Cecchi wrote:
>> If you won't eat fatty fish, then fish oil capsules are considered a
>> good idea and recommended/required/prescribed (sorry, no word exactly
>> fits.) for those with high cardiac risk factors. Apparently the vegan
>> omega-3s don't do the job.
>
>Yeah, I read plant-sources have most but not all of the omega-3 acids.
>Capsules don't sound so bad. I'll look into ordering them. I haven't
>had a medical checkup in years, but according to the blood pressure
>cuffs at the drugstore my blood pressure is on the high end.
>
>335/330/215

My husband takes the EFA supplement sold by my gym chain:

http://shop.lifetimefitness.com/item...cfm?ITEM_ID=67

Their products have done well in comparative tests that I've seen, but
I'm not really recommending one way or another -- just fyi.

Chris
262/130s/130s
started dieting July 2002, maintaining since June 2004

comp_n_chess@hotmail.com wrote:
> Del Cecchi wrote:
>
>>If you won't eat fatty fish, then fish oil capsules are considered a
>>good idea and recommended/required/prescribed (sorry, no word exactly
>>fits.) for those with high cardiac risk factors. Apparently the vegan
>>omega-3s don't do the job.
>
>
> Yeah, I read plant-sources have most but not all of the omega-3 acids.
> Capsules don't sound so bad. I'll look into ordering them. I haven't
> had a medical checkup in years, but according to the blood pressure
> cuffs at the drugstore my blood pressure is on the high end.
>
> 335/330/215
>
I buy mine at sam's club, although discount store versions are nearly as
cheap if on sale. From what I am told, there isn't a great deal of
difference between brands.

--
Del Cecchi
"This post is my own and doesn’t necessarily represent IBM’s positions,
strategies or opinions.”

<comp_n_chess@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1162930714.473462.112450@m73g2000cwd.googlegr oups.com...
> If you're taking flax seed capsules, you
> must have gone through this same learning process at some point.

I guess so, sure, but not as systematically as you are doing it. I learned
about flax seed oil from a friend while we were quitting smoking, years ago,
then had further experience with it and read more about it when I got
involved with my SO, who has Crohns disease.

Here's a link I like re fats:
http://www.stumptuous.com/cms/displayarticle.php?aid=33 .

> It's
> getting easier. I can walk 1.5 hours/day now without my legs feeling
> sore, and I'm holding at about 2700 calories/day without starving.

Well, that's really great. Keep it up, and don't forget weight training.
Here's a good explanation of why we need muscle to lose weight (from my
always favorite fitness website):
http://www.stumptuous.com/cms/displayarticle.php?aid=33 and a great
weight-training primer: http://www.trygve.com/mfw_faq.html

Comp, coming from where you started, just about anything was an improvement.
What is really great is that you are trying to learn a lot of good stuff.
You're getting really interested. That's good. So keep accumulating info
about fats and muscle and other good stuff, and gradually it's just going to
become a natural part of your daily life -- and your life will be better for
it. Some of us have to unlearn a lot of mainstream, mass-media lies about
fitness and weight loss; the best way to do this is to learn from reputable
sources instead. You're on the right track.

I hope you're gratified by the changes you're seeing. I hope you are
realizing that the numbers on the scale are less important than is popularly
believed, and that it may be best for you to ignore the scale for a while,
and focus on building muscle mass instead, especially now, while you're in
the beginning stages, and before you've restricted your calorie intake too
much. You really are on the right track.

Keep reading and posting. It helps both us and you.

ep

On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 22:45:01 GMT, "Edna Pearl"
<edna_pearl@BiteMeSpammeryahoo.com> wrote:

><comp_n_chess@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:1162930714.473462.112450@m73g2000cwd.googleg roups.com...

>> It's
>> getting easier. I can walk 1.5 hours/day now without my legs feeling
>> sore, and I'm holding at about 2700 calories/day without starving.
>
>Well, that's really great. Keep it up, and don't forget weight training.
>Here's a good explanation of why we need muscle to lose weight (from my
>always favorite fitness website):
>http://www.stumptuous.com/cms/displayarticle.php?aid=33 and a great
>weight-training primer: http://www.trygve.com/mfw_faq.html

Comp, I didn't read far enough to see the paragraph Edna quoted about
your current walking and calorie levels. Let me second what she said:
you're doing great!

Let me also recommend another site on weight training that I like, in
addition to the two she cited: www.exrx.net.

Chris
262/130s/130s
started dieting July 2002, maintaining since June 2004

"Chris Braun" <braun@mill-creek-systems.com> wrote in message
news:3q62l25koevuajisarnntf5fhm8qds2khr@4ax.com...
> Let me also recommend another site on weight training that I like, in
> addition to the two she cited: www.exrx.net.

This would have been the next site on my list, too. It is awesome. If I
have an injury, I go to ExRx. If I want to figure out why I'm not advancing
on a particular lift, I go to ExRx. If I never heard of a lift someone
recommends, I go to ExRx. It really is an example of the best possible use
of Internet technology.

ep

Del Cecchi wrote:
> I buy mine at sam's club, although discount store versions are nearly as
> cheap if on sale. From what I am told, there isn't a great deal of
> difference between brands.

I read a bit more. There are three major omega-3 fatty acids:

ALA : Prevents heart disease but associated with prostate cancer
DHA+EPA : Prevents heart disease and prevents prostate cancer
EPA : Improves mood and concentration

I had my blood pressure checked today, and it seems like a 500mg mix of
EPA/DHA with slightly more EPA and some Vitamin E is a good match for
me. Consumerlabs says most omega-3 supplements these days are
mercury-free and contain what they claim--like you said, brand doesn't
matter too much.

I'll probably get these. They're well-rated, and a few blocks away:

http://www.vitaminshoppe.com/store/e...jsp?id=VS-1044

Another trick is to lower one's omega-6 fatty acids. Most Americans eat
10x as much omega-6 as omega-3, but dietitians recommend only 1x - 5x.

335/329/315

Del Cecchi wrote:
> > Doug Freyburger wrote:
> >>comp_n_chess@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> >>>Trans and saturated fats are still your enemy--eliminate them as much
> >>>as possible. They do cause heart disease.
>
> >>Not true. Saturated fats are only a problem when combined with
> >>high carb eating. Go low carb and there are no problems at all
> >>So the part about the saturated fat is only true for low fatters.
>
> Well so far as I know, no part of the medical establishment has endorsed
> a 60% saturated fat diet with no carbs. I guess I would want to see
> some studies of that before trying it.

A point that has zero relevance to the topic.

When folks discuss low fat do you also automatically jump to the
conclusion that they are vegans who don't bother trying to get B12?

Show my some popular no-carb diet then we'll try again.