Dietary Cholesterol Concerns Reversed After 40 Years

[Midpack]

Yet another seemingly iron clad dietary recommendation appears about to fall by the wayside. It's amazing how many health and other recommendations we're presented with that ultimately prove inaccurate or unfounded, and how long it takes.

Moderation, common sense, moderation...

The nation’s top nutrition advisory panel has decided to drop its caution about eating cholesterol-laden food, a move that could undo almost 40 years of government warnings about its consumption.

While Americans may be accustomed to conflicting dietary advice, the change on cholesterol comes from the influential Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee, the group that provides the scientific basis for the “Dietary Guidelines.” That federal publication has broad effects on the American diet, helping to determine the content of school lunches, affecting how food manufacturers advertise their wares, and serving as the foundation for reams of diet advice.

The U.S. government is poised to withdraw longstanding warnings about cholesterol - The Washington Post

 

[audreyh1]

Can't believe this hadn't officially gone by the wayside years ago. But I do still occasionally hear people say things like they avoid shrimp because of the cholesterol, etc. Horrible!!!

Interesting article, thanks!

 

[Dash man]

I'm glad I never listened to my doctor about diet cholesterol all these years. I've always eaten in moderation, but wanted to enjoy what I eat. I've never been put on a prescription statin either, but I do take a red yeast rice capsule daily.

 

[imoldernu]

Watched this on the news this AM... the clip ended with a caveat... that the "safe" amount of cholesterol recommended, could be classified as about 1/4 more than is found in a single large egg.

 

[donheff]

I ignore dietary cholesterol and saturated fat guidelines. The science behind them is far to squishy. Speaking of which, it is time to go cook bacon and eggs.

 

[athena53]

Remember the movie "Sleeper" with Woody Allen? The main character, who was owner of the Happy Carrot Health Food Store, wakes up after many years in a coma and is told that the things people used to believe were healthy are not, and vice versa. I remember when nuts were bad. Now I have a snack of 1 oz. of mixed nuts (no peanuts) every day.



A coworker in her 20s has familial high cholesterol; she's active and thin as a rail and watched her diet but it's just high. She told me she once tried to eat a cholesterol-free diet. She was miserable, of course, and it lowered her levels by a lousy 10 points.

Moderation in all things.

 

[rodi]

Glad to hear I have something to discuss with DH about. He's held fast to the "too many eggs will raise your cholesteral" meme... I eat eggs 4-5 days a week - and have low cholesteral.

 

[Meadbh]

One more recommendation based on bad science has been debunked.

I have given up on nutritional "science" and now eat whatever seems tasty and balanced.

Now how about a nice omelette for breakfast?

 

[athena53]

Now how about a nice omelette for breakfast?

If it's got a lot of lovely green veggies and is topped with a good, hot salsa, I'll be right over!

 

[Meadbh]

If it's got a lot of lovely green veggies and is topped with a good, hot salsa, I'll be right over!

How about sautéed mushrooms, Parmesan and a dollop of pesto?

 

[RonBoyd]

More thoughts:

The Anointed Know Why You’re Fat And What To Do About It

here’s a recap of how The Anointed (who are nearly always members of the intellectual class) operate:

• The Anointed identify a problem in society
• The Anointed propose a Grand Plan to fix the problem
• Because they are so supremely confident in their ideas, The Anointed don’t bother with proof or evidence that the Grand Plan will actually work
• If possible, The Anointed will impose the Grand Plan on other people (for their own good, of course)
• The Anointed assume anyone who opposes the Grand Plan is either evil or stupid
• If the Grand Plan fails, The Anointed will never, ever, ever admit the Grand Plan was wrong

Of course that’s not what happened. These bozos with PhDs went looking for a reason to blame Wal-Mart and – ta-da! – they found it. Intellectuals blaming Wal-Mart for the ills of society … now that is a shock.

In case you haven’t noticed, The Anointed are contemptuous of Wal-Mart and the people who shop there.

If I’ve said it once, I’ve said it at least twice: whenever The Anointed come up with a Grand Plan to fix a problem, it somehow always requires confiscating other people’s money or limiting their freedom to make their own decisions — or both, for a REALLY Grand Plan.

So there’s the mind of The Anointed at work: people are fat because Wal-Mart has made food too cheap.

 

[donheff]

Watched this on the news this AM... the clip ended with a caveat... that the "safe" amount of cholesterol recommended, could be classified as about 1/4 more than is found in a single large egg.

I read a long article on this in the Washington Post and suspect your TV outlet confused the current guidelines which would be about an egg and a half and the new guidelines which will not specify an amount. Some of the Board members still recommend keeping to one egg a day but the guidelines will not say that. They are shifting their focus to sat fat and red meat. I plan to ignore that too unless and until better studies support real concern.

 

[Chuckanut]

What a huge surprise! I am shocked!

Now, maybe somebody can explain to me why our dietary recommendations come from the Department of Agriculture? Seems like a conflict of interest to me.

 

[RonBoyd]

Now, maybe somebody can explain to me why our dietary recommendations come from the Department of Agriculture? Seems like a conflict of interest to me.

No conflict. The DoA's primary purpose is to sell farm products -- ranch products, also, but they don't pursue that as diligently. The food industry is a pretty powerful Lobby -- think Archer Daniels Midland and McDonalds. The national economy depends on this promotion/marketing more than any other segment.

Nowhere is it written that they must (or even should) have the consumer's interest uppermost. You know the old saw -- "I'm here from the government and I'm here to help you."

(I am sure someone can -- or has -- said this more eloquently.)

 

[audreyh1]

Watched this on the news this AM... the clip ended with a caveat... that the "safe" amount of cholesterol recommended, could be classified as about 1/4 more than is found in a single large egg.

No, that was the old dietary guideline. There will be no cholesterol restriction recommended in future. They are dropping the restriction.

 

[Midpack]

More thoughts:

The Anointed Know Why You’re Fat And What To Do About It

No conflict. The DoA's primary purpose is to sell farm products -- ranch products, also, but they don't pursue that as diligently. The food industry is a pretty powerful Lobby -- think Archer Daniels Midland and McDonalds. The national economy depends on this promotion/marketing more than any other segment.

Nowhere is it written that they must (or even should) have the consumer's interest uppermost. You know the old saw -- "I'm here from the government and I'm here to help you."

(I am sure someone can -- or has -- said this more eloquently.)

Go easy?

 

[razztazz]

Over the years within this cholesterol argument, I have been told/lectured, even from various doctors I have seen: The cholesterol you ingest doesn't matter. Your body just eliminates it. It's the saturated fat you ingest that your body uses to manufacture cholesterol that's why you get high cholesterol from eating animal products. Eggs are a LOW saturated fat food. High cholesterol, but low sat fat. Read the label. So, while I am glad their castle is crumbling they still cannot make up their minds on just what the eff they're talking about. They never ever want to be clear and come clean.

 

[M Paquette]

Scientists! They say they want to help us, but what they really want to do is Take Over The World!

View attachment 21089

 

[Bestwifeever]

Today, Cholesterol is thanking Sugar for taking over the part of Big Bad Food.

 

[Walt34]

Yet another seemingly iron clad dietary recommendation appears about to fall by the wayside. It's amazing how many health and other recommendations we're presented with that ultimately prove inaccurate or unfounded, and how long it takes.

Moderation, common sense, moderation...http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...gstanding-warnings-about-dietary-cholesterol/

 

[imoldernu]

Comes a time when the body has leveled off, all systems working well, weight stabilized, the nourishment regimen comfortable, and the blood testing the same for many years... that eating becomes a matter of taste and choice... less so counting calories, balancing food class intake and recommended daily requirements.

So far, so good except for idiopathic hand neuropathy and mild arthritis, and moderate obesity. (hasn't changed a single pound since the day I retired 26 years ago).

And so, moderately high cholesterol and triglycerides on same medication for 20 years... year to year results the same. BP 120 over 75 and holding.

Yup... won't live to 100, but so far so good. Expect AD long before that, but plan to enjoy every minute between now and then.

 

[clifp]

I friend of mine gave me a DVD Fed Up, which basically calls for eliminating all process sugar and most process food from your diet. The one thing that it claims that conventional wisdom that a calorie in = calorie out and if you want to lose weight make sure the calories out > calories in. The DVD claims that sugar triggers the body to make fat cells, and the all the sugar tricks the brain into thinking we are still hungry.

I am thinking of doing the their 2 weeks with no sugar challenge next month when I return from the mainland. Now I doubt that cutting sugar from my diet will hurt, but will it help? I'd be interested in the opinion of doctors/nutritionist others is there some validity to this approach or is sugar just this years, fat, cholesterol fad ?

 

[donheff]

I don't think there is any disagreement that large amounts of sugar are bad just disagreement about how much you can have without harm. There would also be no disagreement on the fact that cutting sugar out entirely will be good - just questions as to whether it is better than small amounts

 

[ls99]

Eh, just another data point in the"settled science" rubrik.

 

[eytonxav]

Will this lead to the medical community easing up on blood cholesterol levels?