Paul Saladino· MD
the results of the Minnesota coronary experiment were that the people that had more linoleic acid had more cardiovascular events despite having lower ldls am I correct with that statement Tucker yes
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.
the results of the Minnesota coronary experiment were that the people that had more linoleic acid had more cardiovascular events despite having lower ldls am I correct with that statement Tucker yes
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.
they were given like beef patties that had either saturated fat or linoleic acid in them so it was a blinded experiment
as Chris Ramson points out importantly 2 355 Minnesota coronary experiment participants were exposed to the Minnesota Corner experiment diet for greater than one year the original investigators emphasized this sub-sample which alone is much larger than any other RCT testing the effects of replacing saturated fat with linoleic acid
the Minnesota coronary experiment was probably one of the best studies that have I mean you could make an argument that it's a very well date ever been done it's never been done that nothing like this will ever be repeated