wrote:
> I didn't read all of the article, but as usual there's more to this
> than first meets the eye.
>
> Firstly, this study was started 8 years ago and the variables they used
> were based on things we knew (or thought we knew) then... which have
> *changed.*
>
> The first things is that at that time, there wasn't much distinguishing
> between TYPES of fat. Now it's commonly felt that saturated fats
> (including trans fats) are the culprits,

Don't lump natural saturated fats in with artificially saturated trans
fats.

> and that monosaturated and
> polyunsaturated fats have a protective influence ...

Polyunsaturates are not the healthiest either. High monounsaturated
levels are the best.

> this study didn't
> discriminate between types of fat at all, so they could have been
> eating 100% saturated and trans fats, which is not considered to be
> heart healthy over time.
>
>
> Diane B.

--Bryan