Member log in

Revived study restores butter

US scientists are questioning conventional wisdom and asking whether margarine might have been more harmful than butter all along.

Cutting down on saturated animal fat lowers cholesterol and reduces the risk of heart attack.

However, a new analysis of a study conducted in the late 1960s and early 1970s in Sydney reveals that people who followed the standard advice, and substituted margarine in place of butter, died sooner than those who did not change their diet.

Researchers at the US National Institute of Health say their findings could have “important implications for worldwide dietary recommendations”. 

They decided to reinvestigate the Sydney study because it was the only randomised controlled study to examine the impact of increasing consumption of omega 6 polyunsaturated fatty acid, also known as linoleic acid.

It was conducted among 458 men aged 30-59 who had recently had a heart attack, half of whom were advised to cut their animal fat consumption and replace it with safflower oil and safflower oil margarine.

The results, published in the British Medical Journal, showed those who ate more safflower oil had a higher risk of death from all causes, including from heart disease.

However, dietitians and other experts have challenged the NIH findings.

For example, Catherine Collins, principal dietitian at St George’s Hospital, London, says understanding of the link between diet and heart disease has become “much more sophisticated” in the 40 years since the study was conducted.

Comments and questions
8

Take that Claire Turnbull!

Butter = milk and salt.

Margarine = one chemical compound from petrochemical / plastics.

You decide which is healthier?

The link between diet and heart disease has become “much more sophisticated in the last 40 years" would seem to indicate that perhaps the US study is more correct than the 'experts' at St George’s Hospital would want you to believe. Perhaps it puts their expertise to question?

And dairy is generally bad for you, in spite of all that you are brought up to believe.

So perhaps, comparatively, margarine is worse than butter. But how would 'nothing' compare with butter? How would hummus compare with butter?

There is compelling evidence that any amount of aminal products in the diet reduces life expectancy in populations. And there is a negative correlation between the amount of animal products in the diet and life expectancy.

Well documented in The China Study by Colin Campbell.

What a load of codswallop.........
Dairy products are good for you.......... like everything else... don't overindulge.. everything in moderation.

Somewhere in Auckland there is an elderly natural health guru who claimed a few years ago that because NZ cows were fed on natural grass (as opposed to supplementary winter feed as in Europe) that NZ cream, full milk and butter was better for you than any fat related side effects due to it containing some substance lacking in European or North American dairy and stripped out of all the local 'skinny' milks. He claimed that we should be ladling NZ cream on everything we ingest for our good health sake.

The farmer in my past upbringing, on a farm, likes the sound of this tune. It makes sense.

Grass feed beef (and I assume milk as well) has a much better ratio of good fat to bad fat (Omega 3 to Omega 6 from memory).

Eatting natural products always has to be better than processed products.