*blocks your arteries*
*blocks your arteries*
Other urls found in this thread:
health.usnews.com
therussells.crossfit.com
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
hsph.harvard.edu
youtube.com
twitter.com
Lubricates arteries allowing blood to flow better
Sadly the more accurate way to look at it. They're both wrong, but this is at least wrong in the right direction.
Butter is great for you if you don't go overboard with it.
just like smoking
my grandma is 91 and she eats butter all the time
she had a stroke last week and survived too
however shes not a pig like 90% of fit
*Acidifies your organism*
man all fucking food in excess will just kill you.
who cares anymore
eat what you want as long as it's not too much so you don't get fat
eat what you can to get gains
fuck you fags
*shrinks your balls*
That's not how estrogen affects your body.
No it's not
i can't believe it's 2017 and you fat morons still think consuming fat correlates to fat on your body or in your arteries. clogged arteries are caused by too much sugar. i'll bet you dipshits think eating cholesterol is bad too
>that guy who gets his nutrition knowledge from magazine headlines
from the 60s no less
health.usnews.com
>The very science most often invoked to argue the case for more saturated fat actually shows it to be almost exactly on par with sugar.
>he's a SNEAKY sugar shill because he tells us NOT to eat sugar
by comparing sugar to sat fat, it implies sugar isn't nearly as bad as it is
It's just milk and salt.
He doesn't do that, the articles people cite to say saturated fats aren't bad do that.
???
he just did that you moron
also why would I compare saturated fats with sugar? i'm a saturated fat shill, sugarpleb
Vegans get most things on nutrition right. If everyone went on a nutrient-complete high-carb low-fat vegan diet for a few months it would teach them so much that they could incorporate into a regular animal product containing diet.
You can biopsy your body fat and find the dietary source it originated from. What the fuck does that tell you. Honestly. Anyone with half a brain should be able to figure out what the fuck it means.
Nigger they can analyse your bones and tell you where your food was grown
>*blocks your arteries*
>"heh... nothin personnel kid"
>*teleports inside you*
All he does in that article is point out what studies say, particularly the studies that have been used to say saturated fats aren't harmful.
This study from Harvard look at that directly
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
>PUFAs, and/or high-quality carbohydrates can be used to replace saturated fats to reduce CHD risk.
>Replacing saturated fats with carbohydrates from refined starches/added sugars was not significantly associated with CHD risk
This was also said by one of the authors of the 2010 saturated fat meta-analysis that jump-started the pro-fat fad
>“Our research does not exonerate saturated fat,” said Hu. “In terms of heart disease risk, saturated fat and refined carbohydrates appear to be similarly unhealthful.”
Pro-fat isn't a fad.
This state of saturated fat denial we're in is a fad. I mean I hope it is-- imagine these people holding science back for another 10, 20+ years.
Pro-fat =/= saturated fat denial
When I say pro-fat, I don't mean anyone who isn't strictly against all dietary fat. I mean the current high-fat, low carb diet movement where one of the main principles is that saturated fats aren't unhealthy. The kind of person who would come into a thread like this and start defending butter, with their argument being "sugar is bad, therefore everything else isn't"
Oh jeez. I'm not a high-fat low-carb moron. I'm just vehemently anti-sugar.
reasonable amount of sugar from fruits a day is alright though, like a couple of oranges or a kiwi, especially around times of protein synthesis. Helps prevent blood aminos from being metabolized into glucose and lets the protein do it's thing.
"No!"
>2017
>still falling for sugar, grain and industrial seed oil propaganda
Redpill yourself already
Wish I knew how to read those charts.