My point is Willett's reporting on this Nurses's study is just one example of how unclear it is on the significants or risk of many things in our diet.

He has reported that trans fat has a risk factor of 1.93, 1.53 and 1.33 at different times based on the same set of data. Yet it is generally understood that risk factors below 2 are not considered anything but weak associations. 2.9% trans fat is considered high transfat consumption, but at 2% or below trans fat was of no risk, yet we are then told there is no safe level, contridicting that 2% has no risk?

Yet at the same time the Nurse's study finds no risk for extremely high total fat, high animal fat, or the resulting high Cholesteral. Willett sells the Nurse' Health Study as the best available data. He could be reporting instead "All we thought we knew about high fat diets and high cholesterol are unclear, we found no risk", which would be a fair reading of the data.

You're happy with a law banning trans fats which haven't been shown to be anything more than a concern at high consumption, when there are dozens of other commonly consumed items that should also be banned if there is a consistent application of health concerns. I'd rather not see that direction in government help.

You've taken the steps you have without a law, why can't you leave it at that?

 

Why are you restricting your arguments to this Willett fellow, and why on Earth would you defend the use of partially hydrogenated oils in our food supply? What benefit is it to you or anyone else?

I have supplied other reference material more powerful than anything Willett has done, and you choose to ignore it.

I have supplied very personal test results which to me certainly trump any studies out there. I've proven beyond any doubt that banning trans fats from my own diet has resulted in going from horrible cholesterol numbers to perfect cholesterol numbers. What is it about those results that you can't acknowledge or understand?

My best way to deal with you is to urge you to keep consuming trans fats. Have at it.

Have you had your cholesterol tested? Do you care what it is?

(Others around here might be more open-minded, and more concerned with their health than you are.)

This is not some issue of big government versus individual rights. To the contrary, it is a prime example of lobbyists having sway over government policies, policies that are damaging our health.

I really can't fathom why you would argue against health, in favor of allowing lobbyists to put unhealthy substances in our food.

Harry

 

You are apparently not aware that Willett is behind the Nurse's Health Study, and the Harvard report you posted, and just about all the studies used to further the ban in New York. Everything you quoted on transfat has Willett's name on it. Bantransfat.com uses Willett's studies as it's main evidence, there is no stronger evidence than Willett's and it is statistically weak at best.

I'm not defending it's use, just questioning a trivial but legal ban on a substance that may be harmful in high consumption, that appears to have been demonized. You don't like Fox News, here's a New York Times article that agrees with my assessment, that trans fat is a easy whipping boy for feel good legislation that accomplishes nothing. It would apear that we must ban all animal fat to really accomplish any health benefits

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/14/we...rssnyt&emc=rss



You personal tests prove nothing, and trump nothing. What you call perfect cholesterol numbers means nothing if it isn't know what perfect numbers are, and that perople with perfect numbers only die from heart disease with a slightly less frequent rate than those with terrible numbers, which are the facts. People with good cholesteral levels do die every day of heart attacks and heart disease.

This is an issue of big government deciding it has the ability to eliminate things that it feels are dangerous to save the dim-witted masses that can't think for themselves from themselves and the evil corporations that prey on their stupidity.

 

That's nonsense. You home in on one report, and base your whole argument on that. There are numerous reports out there, many from Europe.

I see you ignored the scientific evidence I provided that high levels of cholesterol lead to cognitive decline. The risks from heart attack and stroke are significant, but there are other dangers, very serious ones.
"Dim-witted masses"? Well, more of us are more informed by the day. If you want dim-witted, keep ingesting trans fats so you can then suffer cognitive decline.

This is a case of the government allowing an alien substance into our food supply, back in 1910, and then not acknowledging more recent information that it is indeed harmful.

http://www.afpafitness.com/articles/tranfat.htm


"Some adverse effects of consuming trans fatty acids reported in humans and animals are:
Lowers the "good" HDL cholesterol in a dose response manner (the higher the trans level in the diet, the lower the HDL cholesterol in the serum);
Raises the LDL cholesterol in a dose response manner;
Raises the atherogenic lipoprotein (a) in humans;
Raises total serum cholesterol levels 20-30mg%;
Lowers the amount of cream (volume) in milk from lactating females in all species studied, including humans, thus lowering the overall quality available to the infant;
Correlates to low birth weight in human infants;
Increases blood insulin levels in humans in response to glucose load, increasing risk for diabetes;"
The list goes on, even longer than quoted...

"After closely scrutinizing data from scientific studies and reviews, many European countries have either banned hydrogenated and partially hydrogenated oils altogether or have instituted future dates for elimination of their use in foods. These government actions concerning the trans fatty acids (hydrogenated and partially hydrogenated oils) is directly related to studies that link trans fatty acid (hydrogenated and partially hydrogenated oil) consumption from processed foods to the development of diabetes, cancer and cardiovascular disease."

http://www.recoverymedicine.com/hydrogenated_oils.htm

This site mentions Willet, but also cites other studies. It also goes on to say:

"Because trans fatty acids (hydrogenated and partially hydrogenated oils) increase LDL cholesterol to levels similar to those produced by saturated fatty acids and also decrease HDL cholesterol levels, the net effect of trans fatty acids (hydrogenated and partially hydrogenated oils) on the ratio of LDL cholesterol to HDL cholesterol is approximately double that of saturated fatty acids."

Which is why, when I banned trans fats from my diet, my HDL doubled. By eliminating trans fats, I got rid of the culprit that lowered my HDL to 22.

If you want to argue against the importance of LDL and HDL on heart attack/stroke risk and cognitive decline, you may as well howl at the moon, because every responsible medical person out there will disagree with you.

"Several case-control or cross-sectional studies have also been conducted. In a case-control study of subjects in the Boston area, we found a strong and significant positive association between the intake of trans fatty acids (hydrogenated and partially hydrogenated oils), assessed with the use of dietary questionnaires, and the risk of acute myocardial infarction."

"...prospective studies provide consistent evidence that the consumption of trans fatty acids increases the risk of coronary heart disease. The observed relative risks of coronary heart disease were larger than one might predict from the effects of trans fatty acids on LDL and HDL cholesterol levels alone. The increases in triglyceride and Lp(a) lipoprotein levels account for only a small increase in risk; therefore, other mechanisms may be involved."

"Conclusions
Metabolic and epidemiologic studies indicate an adverse effect of trans fatty acids on the risk of coronary heart disease. Furthermore, on a per-gram basis, the adverse effect of trans fatty acids appears to be stronger than that of saturated fatty acids."

"Editorial Comments:
Has the world become a very tight web of deceit when it comes to what does and what does not constitute good nutrition? The question of the negative health effects associated with hydrogenated oils has been answered several times, yet the regulatory bodies of many countries and big food corporations continue to attempt to discredit the information presented by leading scientists from all over the world. What is wrong with this picture? When things do not make sense, we must question the motives of those groups that are not making sense in their arguments (corporations that produce food and the regulatory bodies that are lobbied by these same big corporations). We must have accountability. When man-made chemicals pose risk they must be eliminated expediently from our food supply. Do you feel safe knowing that government seems to protect industry at the expense of citizens?"

That's what I was trying to say...

good health to all,

Harry

PS: do your own research. I've spent much time Googling the information, and it is backed up by my own cholesterol results, and my improved short term memory. To me, that is the most convincing evidence of all. I am much healthier having banned trans fats the last 18 months.

 

More info:


Trans fats are bad for your heart. Dietary trans fats raise the level of low-density lipoproteins (LDL or "bad cholesterol") increasing the risk of coronary heart disease. Trans fats also reduce high-density lipoproteins (HDL or "good cholesterol"), and raise levels of triglycerides in the blood. Both of these conditions are associated with insulin resistance which is linked to diabetes, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease. Researchers have reported that people who ate partially hydrogenated oils, which are high in Trans fats, worsened their blood lipid profiles and had nearly twice the risk of heart attacks compared with those who did not consume hydrogenated oils.[1,2,3,4] Because of the overwhelming scientific evidence linking Trans fats to cardiovascular diseases, the Food and Drug Administration will require all food labels to disclose the amount of Trans fat per serving, starting in 2006.

Trans fats are bad for your brain. Trans fats also have a detrimental effect on the brain and nervous system. Neural tissue consists mainly of lipids and fats. Myelin, the protective sheath that covers communicating neurons, is composed of 30% protein and 70% fat. Oleic acid and DHA are two of the principal fatty acids in myelin. Studies show that trans fatty acids in the diet get incorporated into brain cell membranes, including the myelin sheath that insulates neurons.[10] These synthetic fats replace the natural DHA in the membrane, which affects the electrical activity of the neuron. Trans fatty acid molecules alter the ability of neurons to communicate and may cause neural degeneration and diminished mental performance. Neurodegenerative disorders such as multiple sclerosis (MS), Parkinson's Disease, and Alzheimer's Disease appear to exhibit membrane loss of fatty acids.[12,19] Unfortunately, our ingestion of trans fatty acids starts in infancy. A Canadian study showed that an average of 7.2% of the total fatty acids of human breast milk consisted of trans fatty acids which originated from the consumption of partially hydrogenated vegetable oils by the mothers.[11]

from: http://www.scientificpsychic.com/fit...ttyacids2.html


Like I said, I banned trans fats, and now my short-term memory has improved, and I scored dramatically better on a Civil Service promotional exam.

That strongly supports paragraph 2, above.

Get the trans fats out, and enjoy better health.

Harry

 

The one study I've honed in on is the Harvard Study YOU posted. This study is a recap of ALL the best studies which can support a risk to trans fat consumption including at least 3 EUROPEAN studies. The Keys study, the Scottish Study, and the Euramic study found risks of 1.24, 1.26-women/1.08-men, and .97 respectively. If you have some other European studies that were missed please let me know.

The Harvard study then used a combination of 3 large studies including Willetts own Nurses Health Study and found a risk of 1.31.

Any epidemiologist that calls a 1.31 risk anything more than a weak association is dishonest.

"Alien Substance", please. Then cooking with heat is alien, churning milk to make butter is alien, whipping cream to make whipped cream is alien, soaking cucumbers in acetic acid is alien. Trans fats do occur naturally.
This site lists no references, I like to see risk analyses with confidence intervals and statistical significance.


Mentions Willett?, no it sites the entire Harvard Report epidemiology section word for word, which again was authored by Willett, we've covered this ground.

No I haven't made that argument, but I have pointed out the possibly the largest study the Nurses Heath Study, didn't find an association between high cholesterol and heart disease.



That was a study of 249 patients in Boston, the Nurses study was around 90,000. Willett did the Boston study by the way.
I'm curious why they only mention man-made chemicals risks. Sounds sort of technophobic, with industry bad as a given. There are lots of natural chemicals that pose risks that are also allowed to remain in the market. Most natural produce hasn't been tested in any way, even though it is known that most plants produce pesticide for their own survival that could be causing all kinds of problems that we haven't made associations with.

That's great as I've said many times, but testimonials aren't strong evidence, you had a good chance of living just as long without doing anything about your cholesterol. You may be an extreme example, didn't you say you lived on cookies and peanut butter, and until 18 months ago you somehow thought that was healthy?

My father-in-law would have me believe that coffee enemas, and rubbing essential oils anally, have made him feel healthier too.

My problem is when you want to ban trans fat with laws, the evidence I see says in moderation trans fats are a non-issue. To me the real issue comes when politicians and activists think they can ban their way to a risk free world.

 

No surprise to me footnote 4 above is the source of nearly twice the risks of heart attacks.
4. Willett WC, Ascherio A. Trans fatty acids: Are the effects only marginal? Am J Public Health 1994; 84:722-724.

That is the relative risk of 1.93 from one permutation of the Nurses Health Study done by Willett. I wish I could find an explanation as to why it is also reported 1.53, and 1.33 from the same data.

I haven't addressed the brain aspect of trans fats as I haven't researched this. It would have been nice if the Scientific Psychic gave more links to the studies it footnotes. I can't evaluate this report with no data.

As you can see I don't trust epidemiological studies that have no statistically significant backing, which is the case with most trans fat studies. Even statistical significants doesn't mean cause, these studies can only corrolate possible causes, not prove cause.

 

From Wikipedia:

Unlike other fats, trans fats are neither required nor beneficial for health.[1] Eating trans fat increases the risk of coronary heart disease.[2] For these reasons, health authorities worldwide recommend that consumption of trans fat be reduced to trace amounts. Trans fats from partially hydrogenated oils are generally considered to be more of a health risk than those occurring naturally.[3]
Trans fats are increasingly being linked to chronic health conditions, are tightly regulated in a few countries, are mandatory on product labels in many others, and are the central issue in several ongoing lawsuits (particularly against fast food outlets). Many companies are voluntarily removing trans fats from their products, or establishing trans-free product lines.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans_fat

Wendy's has removed trans fats from their menu. Kentucky Fried Chicken has announced it will do so in April, 2007.

I'd like to know how anyone can consider partially hydrogenated oils as "normal," when they are created under high temperatures and pressures, in an atomosphere of hydrogen, and in the presence of metal catalysts. I'd call that "alien" every time.

What part of "raises LDL and lowers HDL" do you not understand? That's what partially hydrogenated oil does. That is accepted medical fact. Rather than quibble about the reliability of one study you might better study up on cholesterol and what cholesterol numbers mean, and the mechanism by which cholesterol plugs up coronary heart arteries and leads directly to heart attacks.

Many countries in Europe allow only 4% of trans fatty acids in any foods made with hydrogenated oils, some ban them altogether. Do these countries know something we don't? Some countries like Denmark have banned hydrogenated oils for over 40 years. It is interesting that Denmark has the lowest diagnosed rates of heart disease, cancers, breast cancer, diabetes, auto-immune diseases than any other country in the world. What is even more interesting is that they consume more saturated fat in the form of dairy products. Again, do they know something we don't? No, we know it, we're just not paying attention to the research studies.

from: http://www.dldewey.com/hydroil.htm

and

Dr. Frank Sacks, MD and Karin Michels, M.S. M.P.H. of the Harvard Schools of Public Health issued a statement in February, 1995 in the New England Journal of Medicine. He stated, "American food manufacturers are still manipulating our foods in a way that current scientific research shows that trans fatty acids compromise health. Furthermore, the lack of information on trans-fatty acids on food labels does not allow one to make an informed decision or choice." Recent studies show that as little as 4% of these trans-fatty acids can cause these disease processes. This could open food companies up to lawsuits from people with these diseases. This is no different than what has happened in the tobacco industry lawsuits. Why did it take the FDA ten years to finally issue the mandatory warning on cigarette packets that cigarette smoking is dangerous to your health from the warning that it may be dangerous to your health? The same principals, politics and lobbying from the tobacco industry to keep themselves out of lawsuits for years are at play here. It is all about money and the FDA has gone along with it. It's very simple. 10 - 44% of trans fatty acids in foods are deadly to the human body.

The following is from http://www.bantransfats.com/abouttransfat.html

Click here for a New York Times article about HDL cholesterol. Here is an extract:

"There is considerable evidence linking an increased risk of heart disease and stroke more strongly to low HDL levels than to high LDL levels. For every one-milligram rise in "good cholesterol," the risk for developing cardiovascular disease falls by 2 percent to 3 percent. A level of 60 milligrams or higher helps to protect against this major killer.

In addition to enabling the body to get rid of unwanted cholesterol, HDL also acts in several other protective ways: as an antioxidant deterring the harmful oxidation of LDL, and as an anti-inflammatory agent, helping to repair what is now considered a major player in blood vessel disease. And it has anti-clotting properties, which can help keep blood clots from blocking arteries."

Click here for an article about raising your HDL (good) cholesterol level.

Again, what is it about "trans fats raises LDL and lowers HDL" do you not understand?

go to http://www.bantransfats.com/abouttransfat.html to click on that link.

Again, I've raised my HDL cholesterol from 22 to 42 by eliminating trans fats from my diet.

There is abundant research on the implications of HDL levels to your health. It is accepted fact.

Studies

There have been many studies about the health effects of trans fats. Here are some examples.
1. A major comprehensive study on the health effects of trans fats was published in April 2006 in the New England Journal of Medicine. The study brings together the findings from different studies and contains several findings, including the following:

On a per-calorie basis, trans fats appear to increase the risk of coronary heart disease more than any other macronutrient, conferring a substantially increased risk at low levels of consumption (1 to 3 percent of total energy intake). In a meta-analysis of four prospective cohort studies involving nearly 140,000 subjects, including updated analyses from the two largest studies, a 2 percent increase in energy intake from trans fatty acids was associated with a 23 percent increase in the incidence of coronary heart disease....

Click here to read the study. Click here to read a summary of the study.

2. In a cross-over diet trial, scientists randomly assigned 29 healthy men and women to a diet high in trans fat, or a high saturated fat diet in which the trans fat was replaced by saturated fats. The trans fat came mostly from partially hydrogenated soybean oil and the saturated fat came from palm kernel oil. After four weeks on one diet, the subjects were crossed over to the other diet. For each subject, the researchers took four measurements of artery dilation in the arm. They found that the ability of the blood vessels to dilate was 29 percent lower in people who ate the high trans fat diet compared to those on the saturated fat diet. Blood levels of HDL cholesterol were 21 percent lower in the high trans fat group compared to the high saturated fat group. [De Roos, Bots and Katan: "Replacement of Dietary Saturated Fatty Acids by Trans Fatty Acids Lowers Serum HDL Cholesterol and Impairs Endothelial Function in Healthy Men and Women Atherosclerosis, Thrombosis and Vascular Biology": Journal of the American Heart Association, July 2001.]
3. In a study conducted in Australia, scientists acquired dietary information as well as fat biopsy samples from 79 people. Each had just had a first heart attack. The researchers obtained similar information and biopsy samples from 167 people without heart problems. The researchers inquired specifically about the participants' type and amount of fat intake. The heart patients and healthy individuals were also matched for age, gender, and socioeconomic background. Analysis revealed that trans fats from both animal and vegetable sources were significantly more abundant in the fat tissues of heart attack patients than in the healthy volunteers. The relationship of abundant trans fats with heart risk remained even after the scientists statistically accounted for the effect of saturated fats in the participants’ diets. [Clifton, Keogh and Noakes: "Trans Fatty Acids In Adipose Tissue And The Food Supply Are Associated With Myocardial Infarction."]
4. In a study in Seattle, 179 cases aged 25 to 74 were out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients attended by paramedics in Seattle from 1988 to 1999. 285 controls, matched to the 179 cases by age and sex, were randomly identified from the community. Participants were free of previous clinically diagnosed heart disease. Blood was obtained at the time of cardiac arrest (cases) or at the time of an interview (controls) to assess trans fat intake. Higher total trans fat in red blood cell membranes was associated with a modest increase in the risk of primary cardiac arrest after adjustment for medical and lifestyle risk factors. While trans isomers of oleic acid were not associated with risk, higher levels of trans isomers of linoleic acid were associated with a three-fold increase in risk. [Cell Membrane Trans-Fatty Acids and the Risk of Primary Cardiac Arrest.]
5. A recent study indicates that keeping HDL cholesterol high may help to reduce the risk of clot-related stroke in elderly men. Click herefor information.
6. Click here for a study about the role of trans fats and systemic inflammation in heart failure.

Above from http://www.bantransfats.com/abouttransfat.html

Trans fats are bad.

Ban them from all our foods.

Harry

 

Metabolic studies have clearly shown that trans fatty acids (TFAs) elevate LDL and lower HDL cholesterol.

from: http://jn.nutrition.org/cgi/content/abstract/134/4/874

and

Logistic regression showed that trans 18:1(n-11) (P = 0.03) was an independent predictor of a first MI. (Myocardial infarction - heart attack).

Replacement of Dietary Saturated Fatty Acids by Trans Fatty Acids Lowers Serum HDL Cholesterol and Impairs Endothelial Function in Healthy Men and Women

from: http://atvb.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/full/21/7/1233

Consumption of TFAs resulted in lower HDL-C and a smaller FMD than consumption of saturated fatty acids.

another article:

As compared with the consumption of an equal number of calories from saturated or cis unsaturated fats, the consumption of trans fatty acids raises levels of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, reduces levels of high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, and increases the ratio of total cholesterol to HDL cholesterol, a powerful predictor of the risk of CHD.21 Trans fats also increase the blood levels of triglycerides as compared with the intake of other fats,20 increase levels of Lp(a) lipoprotein,22 and reduce the particle size of LDL cholesterol,23 each of which may further raise the risk of CHD. Thus, trans fatty acids have markedly adverse effects on serum lipids. Although these effects would be expected to increase the risk of CHD, the relation between the intake of trans fats and the incidence of CHD reported in prospective studies has been greater than that predicted by changes in serum lipid levels alone,20,22 suggesting that trans fatty acids may also influence other risk factors for CHD.

from: http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/...ef&siteid=nejm

Ah, so that's why my triglycerides are so much better now: the trans fats caused my original level of 393, which was simply awful.

Recent evidence indicates that trans fats promote inflammation.

Because the presence of inflammation is an independent risk factor for atherosclerosis, sudden death from cardiac causes, diabetes, and heart failure,29,30,31,32 the inflammatory effects of trans fats may account in part for their effects on cardiovascular health.

Wow, right, trans fats are wonderful! Yeah, soak my fries in trans fats please MacDonalds!

Several studies suggest that trans fats cause endothelial dysfunction. After adjustment for other risk factors, greater intake of trans fatty acids was associated with increased levels of several markers of endothelial dysfunction

Great, even more wonderful news about trans fats...

Trans fatty acids may influence other risk factors for cardiovascular disease. In controlled trials, consumption of trans fat reduced the activity of serum paraoxonase,35 an enzyme that is closely associated with HDL cholesterol,and impaired the postprandial activity of tissue plasminogen activator.36 Trials evaluating the effects of the consumption of trans fatty acids on insulin sensitivity have shown variable results

Trans fats are wonderful, no doubt about it...

On a per-calorie basis, trans fats appear to increase the risk of CHD more than any other macronutrient, conferring a substantially increased risk at low levels of consumption (1 to 3 percent of total energy intake).

Gosh, the good news just keeps coming about trans fats...

Clifton et al. showed that the positive association between levels of trans fat in adipose tissue and the risk of nonfatal myocardial infarction was mitigated after 1996, when trans fats were eliminated from margarines sold in Australia and trans fat levels decreased in both case patients and controls.

What, eliminate trans fats from margarine? How dare those Aussies do that! Why that's an affront to liberty, I tells ya.

Some data suggest that trans fatty acids may increase the risk of sudden death from cardiac causes.

Well, now that's more like it...

Three prospective studies have investigated the relation between the intake of trans fatty acids and the incidence of diabetes.

Now we're back on the right track! Keep up the good work, trans fats!

All of the above quotes in italics from http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/...ef&siteid=nejm

and


Conclusions On the basis of evidence from in vitro experimental studies, dietary trials, and prospective observational studies, the consumption of trans fatty acids from partially hydrogenated oils provides no apparent nutritional benefit and has considerable potential for harm.

Note the long list of references at the bottom of that web page.

Ban trans fats...

Harry

 

All this recent Googling convinces me that trans fats are even worse than I thought!

I didn't realize it also contributed to diabetes.

I know for a fact that I am able to lose weight more easily now that I am trans fat free.

good health to all,

Harry