Does anyone have access to the Journal of Nutrition to find out the details of this study? I smell a rat, a la T.C. Campbell!
In particular, the abstract doesn't indicate if the high-fat SFA and MUFA diets included carbs, and the type of SFA they used.
Here's the abstract:
Why the scepticism? We know that omega 3 reduces triglyceride and improves cholesterol profile. Comparing a high-SFA without omega balance diet to a high carb diet with proper omega balance is clearly no indictment of high-SFA.
Also it might just be lax reporting, but the news article cites the (allegedly superior to saturated fat) high mono-unsaturated fat diet in terms of "monounsaturated fats (such as fish and olive oil)." If the MUFA diet contained fish, then it would obviously gain the same benefits by dint of better omega balance.
Also worth noting the fact that is common to so many of these "high fat/low fat" studies: the highest "high fat" diet is 38% fat and the SFA diet is 16% SFA, the "low fat" diet is 28% fat. If there were more than a 10% of calorie intake difference between fat/carb intakes, then perhaps the low fat diets would have needed more than 1.2g fish oil to pull out in front!
Fish oil pills- other ingredients 4 Answers
What kind of fish oil? 4 Answers