Blog

6

1

I know the whole low-fat thing was bogus to begin with, but besides needing fat to absord fat soluble vitamins, like A and D, can someone give me a list of why it's not only ok to eat fat, but necessary? Thanks!

flag
1 
 Excellent question. Fat soluble vitamins are very important. read a lot of WAP stuff for good info there. However, above and beyond that taking in large amounts of fat, while not unhealthy, is simply unnecessary. Especially since the other two options, protein and carbohydrate, have acute roles in the body that can be felt and seen. Eat all the fat you want but at some point you have to choose where to spend your calories: I think for active athletic people the sensible choice is going to be protein and carbohydrate. The fat that comes along with those is usually sufficient. – ben61820 Aug 1 at 13:19
1 
 You should not be spending your protein on energy. – RaiseFitness Aug 1 at 13:27

6 Answers

6

Because your body evolved to use fat as its principal and prefered energy supply?

Your body has a limited capacity to utilize and store carbohydrate (as glycogen), if you exceed that one of the disposal pathways is to convert excess glucose into fat (de-novo-lipogenesis). It's much better to eat fat, than eating lots of carbohydrates to turn into fat.

You can feed your body from your fat stores for weeks, or even months, but ultimately you'll exhaust them.

link|flag
1 
 If energy has to come from somewhere, excess glucose and glycogen will lead to excess glycation. That is not a good thing. – RaiseFitness Aug 1 at 13:26
2 
 "It's much better to eat fat, than eating lots of carbohydrates to turn into fat." why? – Korion Aug 1 at 14:32
1 
 No. Your body is a digestive opportunist. Fat CAN be your principal food supply, but it's not MEANT to be anything. Also de novo lipogenesis is not the normal pathway to fat. The fat you eat is normally the fat you store. – thhq Aug 1 at 15:08
1 
 @RaiseFitness, I'm not convinced that transient glucose spikes (as experienced in a normal person with a normal metabolism are harmful. At normal blood glucose levels, glycation is minimal, excess glycation becomes a problem only when blood glucose levels are chronically elevated. – Matt Aug 1 at 15:21
2 
 Very true, thhq. There's the notion out there in paleo-land that fat you eat isn't stored. Goes back go the whole Taubes insulin theory. – Matt Aug 1 at 15:22
show 8 more comments
3

There are certain fatty acids that our bodies cannot make and are required for life. In other words if you do not eat them you will eventually get sick and die. The low fat people sometimes call these "good fats." In addition fats provide energy and aid in the absorption of some minerals and micro-nutrients.

link|flag
2 
 To add to the energy side of things, fat is the cleanest burning fuel of the macros also. – RaiseFitness Aug 1 at 12:56
The amount of EFAs one needs is incredibly small. It is. Jerusalem impossible to not get that amount even eating a so-called low fat diet. – ben61820 Aug 1 at 13:21
2 
 At raise, what does cleanest burning fuel mean? That sounds very "fat burning beast," very sisson. These are wholly made up, unquantifiable ideas. Cleanest burning? By what measure? – ben61820 Aug 1 at 19:45
2 
 I'm going to start saying 'Jerusalem-impossible" to describe anything extremely difficult to accomplish – Matthius Aug 1 at 22:00
2 
 Does read kinda cool don't it? Yo that shit is straigh Jerusalem impossible. – ben61820 Aug 1 at 23:57
show 4 more comments
2

Normal resting metabolism energy spent is about 2/3 beta oxidation of fatty acids and 1/3 oxidation of glucose. Your body requires a fair amount of fat for energy. And your body requires fat for structure such as the bi-lipid layer of your cell membranes. So fat is required. Do you need to eat it? If you are lean, I think the answer is yes. If you are obese, you probably need to eat some (for vitamins and such), but you could probably eat much less and supply the requirement from your fat cells.

link|flag
1

Bile is stored in the gallbladder and is released when a meal with a decent amount of fat in it is eaten. If you don't eat any fat for a long time the bile will stagnate and form gallstones which can block the gallbladder and cause other problems.

http://www.dietdoctor.com/gallstones-and-low-carb

link|flag
Too black nd white. Eating lower amounts of fat is entirely unrelated to eatin no fat. Bile problems are wholly avoidable as long as one takes in the fat that is attached to all but he leanest chicken, vegetables like avocado, cooking media, etc. – ben61820 Aug 1 at 13:23
1 
 Still increases the risk with low-fat. I know many people who got gallstones on a normal low-fat diet. – DePaw Aug 1 at 14:29
They're simply eating too little fat. That is still not a reason to think one should eat fat in amounts that many LC and paleo folk recommend, %ages like 50, 60, up to 90 percent of daily cals! It's OK if that's what you want, my point is simply that it is unnecessary. – ben61820 Aug 1 at 14:56
1 
 @ben61820...I agree that people don't need to eat super high fat and super low carb, but for most people, it is easier to control cravings by lowering their carb intake. For people whose goal is weightloss, it can be beneficial, but they still have to watch their fat intake also. I personally do 150g or so carbs, which is high for this board, but I am extremely active. – RaiseFitness Aug 1 at 18:44
I'm with you on that, raise. Most people need far fewer carbs than the SAD would provide. I don't think there are many americans not getting enough fat, though. All the fast food, desserts etc that make up such a huge part of the diet - they're all high in carbs AND fat. It's too much of everything. Less calories would help, that would lessen both the carbs and the fat. – ben61820 Aug 1 at 19:14
show 1 more comment
1

If you have enough fat to provide energy to run your optimal body AND absorb the necessary nutrients, you don't need more. The problem is that most people seem to be deficient.

While I love the taste of fat, I think some of the ultra high fat protocols are over the top unless there is a specific medical condition being addressed with it.

link|flag
How do you come up with "most people seem deficient." I'd say most people are eating plenty of fat in the US – ben61820 Aug 1 at 19:43
I'm referring to the "low-fat" dieters or the people who consume their fats in forms such as vegetable oils or processed foods. The latter tend to be the ones who have metabolic and/or weight issues because they likely combine their fat with sugar or starch consistently. – KA24 Aug 1 at 22:54
1

bottom line, fat is used to create hormones in the body. you can be "low-fat" and still be healthy, as long as the fat you are getting is saturated and enough to manufacture the hormones. you don't need to be ketogenic or eat gobs of fat to fuel yourself. just figure out how much fat you specifically need to create your hormones, have good skin and collagen, and be satiated with meals. no need to overdo fat for some paleo mythology.

link|flag
Sensible answer. As percentage of daily cals what do you think the minimum range would be? I'd say under maybe 5% of cals and you're getting into unwise territory (unless it's for a short period of time). I think maybe 10-30% of daily cals leaves a wide variety of eating styles available and provides plenty for hormones etc. – ben61820 Aug 1 at 19:42
sounds good, i couldnt really say on %'s because so many people are really individual, but those seem like good ranges. im just not a fan of the whole paleo-means-50% or more of fat thing for many reasons. i'd say as a 180lb 6foot male, i eat at least 100g of sat fat a day, any less and i feel unsatisfied, but that just may be a behavioral thing. – dsohei Aug 2 at 6:44

Your Answer

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.