Andrew Huberman· PhD
Then if you look at the effects of polyunsaturated fats on markers of cardiovascular disease, again, tends to either be a neutral or positive effect when you substitute saturated fat for polyunsaturated fat.
Loading…
The evidence is convergent. Multiple independent sources reach the same conclusion, the underlying mechanism is well-characterized, and even the field's most cautious voices treat it as worth doing.
Then if you look at the effects of polyunsaturated fats on markers of cardiovascular disease, again, tends to either be a neutral or positive effect when you substitute saturated fat for polyunsaturated fat.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
So what you tend to find is when you substitute saturated fats for polyunsaturated fats, it's either neutral or positive in terms of the effects on-- inflammation is basically neutral. There's some studies that show a positive effect of doing polyunsaturated fats.
What I would say, based on the human randomized controlled trials, is that you're probably better off consuming monounsaturated and polyunsaturated in place of saturated fat.
some of the studies I've seen on like inflammation between uh polyunsaturated fats and liver and and saturated fats don't really show a difference in inflammation but I'm not aware of any that show it going in the opposite Direction Where substituting in polyunsaturated fats actually raises inflammatory markers like CRP and il6 those sorts of things
Controlled trials replacing PUFA with saturated fats have shown positive effects in humans.