No, its still better to use butter/lard/etc than Crisco/canola/soybean oil.
And if you also reduce fructose/sugar/processed foods you are likely going back to the health status pre-1920 - which is much better than today.
Optimal? Nope. But still much healthier. Remember, saturated fat raises HDL, which is associated with less cardiovascular risk.
Wheat, however, is pretty nasty stuff. See if you can't push to non-wheat/non-gluten pastas/breads and such. Even rice and potatoes are better than wheat (far better).
On the topic of whether saturated fat is healthy in the presence of inflammation - the only one who said that it might be bad (that I know of) is Dr. Art Ayers of Cooling Inflammation. But in a recent exchange of comments...
Hi Dr. Ayers,
You mention that saturated fats are ok in the absence of imflammation, but what happen when there IS some sort of inflammatory disease? in that case, What kind of diet is the most recommended?
Great blog BTW!
Dr. Art Ayers said...
I wrote this article almost exactly two years ago. My views on saturated fats have changed substantially. The biomedical data show that saturated fats are safer to eat than vegetable oils (O6s). This goes along with the studies that show that low serum lipids are more associated with disease than high serum cholesterol, and that statins and lowering serum lipid had no beneficial impact on heart disease.
I learned a lot in two years and all of it reinforced the idea that getting most calories from saturated fats rather than grain carbs is the foundation for health.
Thanks for the question.
September 4, 2010 6:52 PM