The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
imagine this in the polynesian atolls they eat tons of saturated fat from coconut and they remain very healthy vascular disease is uncommon in both populations no evidence of the high saturated fat intake having a harmful effect in these populations
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 their diet was 53 fat 48 saturated fat and so here's what we can say well let me finish here so their diet is about two percent total pufa now that's omega-6 and omega-3 together so i don't know exactly what their omega-6 is but it's probably about one percent maybe one and a half percent but in 1982 men aged 40 to 69 none of them had any evidence of heart attack so they have the highest saturated fat consumption in the world and this is coming from a tropical oil and no heart disease and while the maasai have the highest animal fat saturated fat up to 45 percent and no heart disease right essentially
these people although they had a huge amount of saturated fat in their diet did not have vascular disease vascular disease is uncommon in both populations there's no evidence of a high saturated fat intake have a harmful effect in these populations further evidence that saturated fat is probably not a harmful thing for humans