The Lipid Hypothesis...

Long accepted as gospel, many questions remain about the lipid hypothesis and the so called dangers of high fat food.

We Recommend There are a number of books mentioned in this section on the lipid hypothesis. We strongly urge you to read some or all of them to better equip yourself with the knowledge you need to make informed decisions.

A caveat.

The simple truth is, there is no simple truth! What you will find is plenty of controversy about the lipid hypothesis: low fat diets, low carb-high protein diets, the government approved food pyramid, and just about everything else that we might consider "conventional thinking" when it comes to food and nutrition.

While we cannot attempt to be all-inclusive (there is just too much published material out there to attempt that!), we will present some of the results of our recent reading... things that seem to make sense to us.

We urge you NOT to take this information about the lipid hypothesis at face value, but rather to use it as a springboard to delve into this complex area in greater detail on your own.

And just as important, as stated elsewhere on this site, do not make medical decisions or changes (i.e., in your meds or diet) without consulting your professional care givers.

Our intention is to give you some insights about the situation, point you in the direction of some of our sources, and let you do some of your own research to come to your own conclusions about the lipid hypothesis and what it means to you.

So, fasten your seat belt and be prepared for a bit of a wild ride... you may or may not like what you are about to read. You may or may not choose to believe some or all of what follows... but we urge you to review this material with an open mind.

Pursue it with the same intent that it is presented... as a means to expand your thinking and understanding on the carbohydrate/lipid controversy.

Start at the beginning

The beginning in this case could be Paleolithic man and the diet he ate or we presume he ate (based on considerable research). Or the beginning could be the advent of agriculture about 10,000 years ago, particularly the rise in popularity of grain crops.

The beginning could be January 14, 1977, the first publication date of Senator George McGovern’s Dietary Goals for the United States.

Or the beginning could be the time in the 1980s when a sudden and dramatic increase in the amount of sugar became a regular part of our western diet.

Another beginning point could be the recent significant subsidies given to corn growers and the spread of that crop as a monoculture to the detriment of many others, that led to corn being fed to millions of cows in feed lots, and chickens in overcrowded pens, even though cows were never intended by nature to consume this particular nutrient and chickens should eat a much broader diet.

All of these points are interesting and relevant markers. And there are others.

But let's look at some fascinating bits of information that help us understand how we got to where we are today in terms of official government policy on diet, the food pyramid, grains, carbohydrates, dietary fats, the rise in the metabolic syndrome that leads to obesity, heart disease and diabetes, and a host of other problems.

What is a hypothesis?

But it is unproven. A hypothesis must always be followed by experiments or trials that will objectively show whether or not the hypothesis holds true under the scrutiny of the science.

In some instances a hypothesis is presented with the full intent of conducting the science to prove or disprove its validity. Indeed, that is the proper scientific method. The reality is bias often becomes part of the equation... either inadvertently or purposefully.

What is the lipid hypothesis controversy?

However, Ancel Keys and his "lipid hypothesis" is a perfect example of strong bias affecting research results. Keys was, in fact, determined to "prove" his lipid hypothesis by pretty much any means, even if that included selecting only data that supported it.

This is precisely what happened with the lipid hypothesis.

Ancel Keys had put forth that a high fat diet, particularly a diet high in saturated fat, was a major contributor to high cholesterol which in turn leads to heart disease in the form of arteriosclerosis (arterial plaque build-up).

Subsequent and independent analysis of the data that were available to Keys shows that he "cherry picked" only those countries with numbers that supported his hypothesis and omitted a significant amount of data that showed there was actually no correlation between dietary fat, cholesterol, and arteriosclerosis. But this information has been largely ignored.

Part of this can be explained by powerful industry groups with a vested interest in having his theory accepted as fact. Part of it can also be attributed to Keys’ strong and persuasive personality.

The upshot is that today, some 50 years later, a lipid hypothesis based on faulty data is accepted as true by governments, health organizations, the media, and industry, and we, the general population are left eating a recommended diet that just might be causing more harm than good.

Too bizarre to be true?

You may be thinking, as we were, that this situation is too strange to be true... that true science would rule the day and show the errors in the original and accepted hypothesis.

That, of course, is what should have happened. But politics and big business have had starring roles in this real life drama.

As revealed in Gary Taubes fascinating, and meticulously researched book, Good Calories, Bad Calories: Fats, Carbs, and the Controversial Science of Diet and Health, when the government made it official policy to tell Americans what they should and should not be eating through Senator George McGovern's 1977 Dietary Goals for the United States, we were being led by biased research, bad science, naïve and biased writers, and the powerful influence of various factions of the food industry.

Biased research

As mentioned previously, Ancel Keys data were inconclusive as to the true impact of fat and cholesterol.

That didn’t stop Keys from using only data from seven countries that supported his lipid hypothesis. When subsequent researchers reviewed the entire data that were available to Keys, they were astonished to learn that there was no correlation in the data to support Keys hypothesis.

Indeed when analyzing data from all countries from which data were available (data that Keys had access to) there was no correlation in the data.

In spite of this, that initial report has been used over and over to prove that fat, particularly saturated fat, is a major contributing factor in arteriosclerosis, and that a low fat diet is important to control cholesterol and prevent heart disease.

Other data used by researchers at that time were notoriously bad. Taubes says "The USDA statistics... were based on guesses, not reliable evidence. These statistics, known as 'food disappearance data' and published yearly, estimate how much we consume each year of any particular food by calculating how much is produced nationwide, adding imports, deducting exports, and adjusting or estimating for waste. The resulting numbers for per-capita consumption are acknowledged to be, at best, rough estimates."

Although the USDA began compiling these statistics in the early 1920s, data were used dating back to 1909. Additionally, although the reports remained sporadic and limited to specific food groups until 1940, they were still used to paint a picture of food consumption during this period.

Taubes goes into great detail in his book about the studies, the personalities involved, about the relationships between individuals as well as their association with industry groups.

He shows very clearly the impact that certain individuals with clear biases had on crafting official government dietary policy... the policy that became the backbone of the food pyramid as well as the diets expounded by the American Heart Association, American Diabetes Association, National Institute for Health (NIH) and many others.

If you're not inclined to read Taubes entire book, although I highly recommend it, he wrote an article that appeared in the New York Times in 2002 that outlines many of his ideas that became "Good Calories, Bad Calories". The article, entitled What if It's All Been a Big Fat Lie? is a great place to start in educating yourself about this entire controversy.

Why isn't it working?

Since the early 1980’s the consumption of red meat, butter, and other sources of the "evil" saturated fats are down, while consumption of carbohydrates and polyunsaturated fats are way up... just as we've been told to do. We, as a society, have dutifully followed the experts' "advice".

But look at the current state of affairs. Obesity is at epidemic proportions, the rates of diabetes have increased dramatically. This should, at the very least, raise some major red flags about the dietary advice we're getting.

But the official response to this is seems to be a deafening silence.

Why? Could it possibly be because it would mean an admission that they were wrong?

See also Carbohydrates, Low Carb Diet, Dietary Fat: Good or Evil?, Heart Healthy Eating, Was Atkins Right?, and A Doctor Speaks Out.

Return from Lipid Hypothesis to Home Page