this post was submitted on 30 Aug 2023
69 points (85.6% liked)

science

14786 readers
67 users here now

A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.

rule #1: be kind

<--- rules currently under construction, see current pinned post.

2024-11-11

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Lafuma300@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

An industry-financed epidemiological study; we're shaking in our boots I tell ya.

[–] VeganSchnitzel@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Where is it written that it is financed by industry? That's not in the article or in the part of the original study I can access.

[–] Astroturfed@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Unfortunately almost all these studies are financed by some lobbying group or food industry group. There's a disturbing amount of misinformation and studies out there. What's "healthy" seems to change every 5-10 years. Low fat foods just had more sugar, which all the studies show is bad for you.

The obvious answer is always that anything you know isn't healthy, fat, sugar, simple starches, dairy should all be consumed in moderation as part of a balanced diet and people need to eat an appropriate amount of calories. Eat more vegetables and healthy fruits. Less processed food. Ignore anything that's weird trendy bullshit.

[–] Pipoca@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

From the article:

However, this study shows that low-carbohydrate and low-fat diets may not be the healthiest strategy for promoting longevity, as their short-term benefits could potentially be outweighed by long-term risk.

If you read the study, the lowest mortality is around 50% of calories from carbohydrates. There's a u-shaped curve, although low carb seems more dangerous than high carb.

That seems to suggest something like the Mediterranean diet or a traditional Japanese diet, not very low fat diets.