Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

What source of fat do you use? I have trouble increasing my fat intake without frying everything, at which point it becomes a lot harder for me to track my intake.



Olive or coconut oil typically. I go for things like kale, carrots, cauliflower, beets, sweet potatoes, okra, squash, asparagus, etc. It's really easy to make these taste great without much cooking skill. I always add a little salt, but otherwise I don't want to overpower the natural sweetness and flavor of these vegetables with anything else.


I use Avacado oil. It is said olive oil should not be used for high-heat cooking as it has low smoke point unlike avacado oil.


Extra virgin olive oil has a low smoke point, 320F. "Light" olive oil has a high smoke point, 460F.


Muscular with 7-8% body fat (means you are into bodybuilding) and don't mention broccoli? Something doesn't add up :P

I joke, but i do agree with what you have said.


Coconut is mostly saturated fat and terrible for you. Ugh. Every professional body recommends against it.


That's begun to change. I anecdotally know a lot of people on a high-fat diet (Keto and such) and it has really worked for them. Inflammation is way down, energy is way up, weight is down, blood pressure is down, cholesterol is down, etc.

Sugars / refined starches seem to be the nutrition villains, not natural, saturated fats. (But who knows! The recommendations change almost daily, it seems.)


Yep, a lot of the science behind "fat makes you fat" came from cherry picked data.

"The Story of Fat: Why we were Wrong about Health" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5S6-v37nOtY

Anecdotally I too am moving towards LCHF/Keto and so far my health has improved drastically from primarily focusing on adding fats back in after years of carefully measured low-fat low-calorie diets did nothing for me.


Anybody who has done keto and lost weight certainly does not say they had evergy on it. Those first couple weeks are terrible and you never quite have the energy you want. Thankfully it is a short term diet with specific targets in mind. Any positive effects after stopping keto are from the weight loss in general. Even keto diets recommend against a high saturated fat content but with keto your body is in a specific state that blunts the effects of a high saturated fat intake.

When you go off keto you cannot maintain the high saturated fat intake without measurable negative impacts.


Who says it? I had more energy on keto, except for one day (around a week after starting) that felt terrible and was fixed by drinking water with salt and potassium. Keto diets don't recommend against a high saturated fat content, only some do because of the common misconception that it is bad. There are no studies showing bad effects of saturated fat by itself. It's the carbs what causes the problem, fat only makes it worse.


How do you measure inflammation?


In the anecdotal cases I mentioned, inflammation is a catch-all. More specifically, congestion and joint pain decreased significantly. In one case, I know someone who had many days where she wasn't able to walk due to joint pain. Those days appear to be gone.


You don't. The current inflation trend is pure pseudoscience:

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/7465534


Not true: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4155060/

I'm making a documentary about all of this stuff mentioned in the comments. Would like feedback:

http://FoodLies.org

or google "food lies film"


The article i posted specially attacks this. Inflammation is a symptom of many things including cancer, but isn't something you really aim to treat. And there is no good evidence that there is such a thing as an anti inflammatory diet.


Not all dietary saturated fat is created equal.

There are significant differences in the way bodies metabolize the different saturated fatty acids. Sometimes the metabolic pathways compete with one another, so ratios can matter as much as raw quantity.

If you just go by total saturated fat content, without looking at the specific chemical components, you can't tell the difference between coconut oil, palm kernel oil, and palm oil.

While anything you eat has the potential to be terrible for you at a certain level of consumption, a certain level of specificity is called for. Someone who has chosen coconut oil as their staple fat has made a conscious effort to eat more lauric acid and less palmitic acid or stearic acid. If it was just a matter of saturated fat versus unsaturated fat, and they wanted to eat more saturated, they could have chosen the much cheaper palm oil or pork lard.

Even if the person chooses to eat minimal saturated fat, there are still great differences in the available dietary fats. Is it rich or poor in omega-3 and omega-6? Have any double bonds flipped from cis-bonds to trans-bonds? Are the fatty acids free or still attached to a glycerol? Does the eater have any genetic conditions that make a particular metabolic pathway slower, limited by the presence of some other nutrient, or absent entirely?

In general, we still don't know a lot about the specifics of fat metabolism. As long as there is an excess of carbohydrate in the body, lipids are generally used as building blocks of the body--like amino acids from protein--rather than for energy. They come in many shapes and sizes, like LEGO blocks, except unlike those hard plastic blocks and bits, the body can cut and bend and reshape its lipids within certain metabolic constraints.

If any particular building block is in excess, the body usually just makes more of whatever the default structure is for that piece. Too much stearic acid might get hooked together with a glycerol and dumped into the oil drop in a white adipose cell. Too much palmitic acid might get rolled into LDL cholesterol. Too much lauric acid could get put into HDL cholesterol. We don't really know for sure what the body does when the ratios are off, or what the perfect balance of ratios is.


Saturated fat alone is not bad at all, it's actually very healthy. However combining it with carbs it's a bomb. If you don't believe me, try to find any study with negative effects of saturated fat where the diet doesn't also include >30% of calories as carbs.


Basically any diet beyond little studied, highly specialized diets that are often done short term by athletic types (eg keto, paleo). You just won't find good data with such a small, highly self selected population that includes an high amount of exercise.


The keto community doesn't exercise that much. I know there are not many studies on ketogenic diets, but there are and the vast majority are positive.


Keto is often used as a sort of very effective diet to cut fat preferentially. For example people like body builders use it effectively after their bulking phase.

It has gained much wider adoption recently of you include things like Atkins, but true keto is still very much more often used by a very self selected group of fitness people and a limited time (although I could be wrong and don't know of any good serveys).

However keto is not a long term diet and I don't know if long term effects have rally been studied much. I know more people that do keto cycling than sustained keto anymore.


These diets have been around for millions of years. I try to explain some of this on my site:

google "food lies film"


Some more info on how the old line that "saturated fat is bad" might not be so simple.

https://examine.com/nutrition/is-saturated-fat-bad-for-me/

You can even find people who are into various forms "traditional foods" (not diet trends like paleo...though maybe that too?) go further than more cautious articles like this in affirming -benefits- of saturated fat. Catherine Shanahan for example argues in Deep Nutrition that saturated fat can be good.


The link clearly states multiple times that poly unsaturated fats are preferred to saturated fats when looking at various health factors. It just says that we dont know if it because saturated fats are bad for you or poly unsaturated fats are good food you.

Regardless, choosing to cook with coconut oil instead of olive or avocado oil clearly falls under that.

I have friends that now cook with coconut oil as one of their main oils replacing poly unsaturated oils. I think it is going to be like soy and in 20 years the nutrition community is going to do yet another 180 on it.


Avocado is King. I have it with everything I eat these days. They are a bit expensive (but 4 for $5 at whole foods isn't too bad) and they ripen quickly but they are an amazing source of fat and are very versatile.


Bacon grease, real butter and olive oil for certain foods. When you fry up some bacon, just put it into a jar then throw it in the fridge. When you need a tablespoon of olive oil or vegetable oil, use the bacon grease.


Heavy cream, whipped or otherwise. Or just plain butter or ghee; It's not culturally accepted, but it's tasty.


Saturated fat has a lot of downsides and usually comes along with extra cholesterol. Stick to unsaturated (i.e. vegetable) fats for the sake of your cardiovascular system.


The thinking on this has completely inverted in the past 5 years. The correlation between dietary consumption of cholesterol and serum (blood level) cholesterol is limited at best. Studies which showed a linear relationship were flawed.

Put simply, it is now thought that cholesterol is a plaster over the arterial inflammation caused by sugars. It is a symptom, not a cause of plaques.


"The thinking on this has completely inverted in the past 5 years."

Has it really?

I see a lot of new contradictory results, but I am not aware that the medical consensus has changed (yet). I have seen articles blame fat as the, blame carbs as the bad guy and even some blaming protein. Refined sugar does seem to be particularly bad, but I have yet to see anything conclusive about carbohydrates as a food group (I searched pubmed a few months back).

Personally I am more confused than ever.


This is a snow job by the meat, egg and dairy industries. Don’t believe it. Downvotes should at least try to address the facts in this video.

https://youtu.be/vBtfzd43t8o


Here you go: https://examine.com/nutrition/is-saturated-fat-bad-for-me/

Actual studies linked within.


The conclusion from the very first review cited in your article (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20351774):

These findings provide evidence that consuming PUFA in place of SFA reduces CHD events in RCTs.

i.e. replacing saturated fats with unsaturated fats reduces your risk of cardiovascular disease, which was my original claim.

From your article:

Saturated fats do increase cholesterol levels relative to polyunsaturated fats.

You need some fat in your diet, but the overwhelming evidence is that you're better off getting it from unsaturated (plant-based) sources.


And then again: http://time.com/4291505/when-vegetable-oil-isnt-as-healthy-a... , links e.g. to http://www.bmj.com/content/353/bmj.i1246 which has the conclusion quoted below, which is in line with what ggp claimed about whether cholesterol is the cause or just a symptom.

""" Available evidence from randomized controlled trials shows that replacement of saturated fat in the diet with linoleic acid effectively lowers serum cholesterol but does not support the hypothesis that this translates to a lower risk of death from coronary heart disease or all causes. Findings from the Minnesota Coronary Experiment add to growing evidence that incomplete publication has contributed to overestimation of the benefits of replacing saturated fat with vegetable oils rich in linoleic acid. """


Something being less bad than an alternative is not the same as being actively bad for you.

Going 20 mph is slower than going 30 mph but it is not going in reverse.


This is under debate. A lot of recent research seems to be leaning the other way on cholesterol.


Can you cite any of the research? Here is a decent overview, but I would love to learn more.

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/cholesterol/



The book cited in this article that so many claim exonerates fats has been thoroughly debunked.

https://thescienceofnutrition.wordpress.com/2014/08/10/the-b...


That's a good read, thanks.


The meat and dairy industries are doing their best to obscure the truth on this issue. Postprandial cholesterol blood levels are a direct function of dietary cholesterol.

For example: https://nutritionfacts.org/video/how-do-we-know-that-cholest...

People want to hear they can eat all the eggs and butter and bacon they want but it’s just not true.


If you aren't opposed to eating fish (or don't already eat a lot of fish), you could consider incorporating mackerel or sardines into your diet. It will vary by brand, but mackerel is 230 kcal, 19g fat, 15g protein per tin and sardines (bone-in skin-on) are 150 kcal, 9g fat and 18g protein per tin. Both have a good proportion of omega-3 fats. I find mackerel delicious right out of the tin, sardines need some condiments but still taste pretty good without much work.


Flax seeds. Buy them whole so they keep. Grind them in a coffee grinder just before consuming so you get the fat. Put them in a breakfast smoothie: 2 cups frozen fruit, 2 pitted dates (optional), 6 or 8 almonds or walnuts, 2TB ground flax seeds, 1 cup kale (or spinach or arugula), water.


You actually need healthy fats to gain muscle, I require 44g a day. Before I knew this I used to focus only on protein and carbs and wondered why I wasn’t gaining as much as I should be.

It is very easy to increase fat intake. I get it mostly from olive oil and peanut butter. A serving of each is 14g.


Makes sense. Cholesterol is a necessary component of testosterone, and cannot be synthesized without it.




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: