In defense of olive oil

[TomE]

Jeff,

Last year in Reader’s Digest Dean Ornish published a criticism of recommendations to regularly include olive oil in one's diet. This prompted a rebuttal that was published on an internet health site. It included alot of scientific references and appeared to be of a quality that deserved a response. I'll just link to it hear and await your response:

http://www.jonbarron.org/blog_published/2007/08/olive_oil_under_attack.html

The Dean Ornish article can be found here:

http://www.rd.com/columnists/dean-ornish/the-great-olive-oil-misconception-is-it-good-for-me/article43984.html

Thanks

[Chumly]

The first thing I would look at when reading these studies is: what are they comparing it to? Exchanging olive oil for saturated fat and transfat would certainly show a benefit, but compared to a whole foods plant based diet? You need to compare methodologies of the testing and a whole host of other factors. You can certainly improve your diet over SAD using a variety of different diets, but that is not the same as finding the best diet for health and longevity.

[Jaggu]

Speaking of this, are there any studies that gives the kind of thing that would put a rest to the talk we hear all the time like olive oil, nuts and seeds improves the cholesterol numbers?

If there was study that compared plant based diet Vs Mediterranean diet with olive oil and nuts and seeds, that would put a stop to the speculation and separate wheat from chaff. I assume this study would have been conducted by now. So we know the results on either side of the spectrum. SAD Vs Mediterranean; SAD Vs Plant based diet; Mediterranean Vs Plant based is what is needed to clear this confusion.

[Adrienne]

Here is a really good article about olive oil from the pritikin website

http://www.pritikin.com/eperspective/06 ... eOil.shtml

Jaggu:

As for comparing mediterranean and plant based diets, Essylstyn describes in Prevent and Reverse Heart Disease a converstation he had with China Study author Colin Campbell about the difference in heart disease between those on the mediterranean diet and the rural chinese who consume a similar plant-based diet but without oilve oil. Campbell said be believed the absence of olive oil in the rural chinese diet was the reason for their superior health.

[JeffN]

Thanks everyone.

You have pretty much covered the bases and the article I wrote on olive oil, that is linked above, covers it all.

1) The MED diets are not the healthiest. And, they are healthy "in spite" of the olive oil, not because of it.

2) The MED diet is healthier than they Standard American diet, but "big deal" as you can't get much worse than the Standard American diet. Yes heart disease rates are lower in the MED countries then in USA, but the lowest rates in the world are in SE Asia and Japan where they use no olive oil.

3) Right now, in Crete, the more olive oil they consume, the more heart disease they have.

4) While the nutritional analysis of olive oil may be slightly healthier than butter, it is not healthier than the the diet recommended here.

Last, but not least, and maybe the most important one of all, are a few simple questions I have for you (or anyone who agrees with you)

Look at this diet...

http://www.drmcdougall.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=6129

1) How will adding olive oil to it make it any better?

2) How will substituting olive oil for any component of the diet, make it any better?

3) What exactly is it in the olive oil that adding the olive oil will add to it, and how much, and why is that better?

In Health
Jeff

PS let me answer the questions

1) It can't

2) It can't

3) Nothing. It will add saturated fat, a trace of Vit E. In addition, it will add omega 6s, little if any omega 3s and the ratio will get worse. Lastly, the overall calorie density will go up and the overall nutrient density will go down.

[Jaggu]

Thanks everyone.

2) The MED diet is healthier than they Standard American diet, but "big deal" as you can't get much worse than the Standard American diet. Yes heart disease rates are lower in the MED countries then in USA, but the lowest rates in the world are in SE Asia and Japan where they use no olive oil.

In Health
Jeff

Jeff,

Can you list SE Asian countries or regions and also any other regions in the world where the heart diease rates are the lowest that you were referring to?

Anything Chiese or Japanese is fad these days and looked at positively because of their expanding economic prowess. I don't mean to say that's case here just want to eliminate this influencing factor.

Are there regions where people have been consuming plant based/vegetarian diet yet the heart diease rates are not lowest in the world, in that case we need to understand why.

I guess when we want to be certain that A is TRUE

We need to check it couple of different ways to be certain.

1) A is TRUE

2) A is NOT FALSE

3) A is NOT SOMETIMES TRUE AND SOMETIMES FALSE.

That's why Mediterranean Vs Plant based low fat diet study will put rest to all doubts.

[JeffN]

Can you list SE Asian countries or regions and also any other regions in the world where the heart diease rates are the lowest that you were referring to?.

The CVD rates in the world are still lowest in SE Asia including rural Japan, rural China and Okinawa. Whatever industrialization that is happening in SE Asia is also happening in MED countries. Greece and many other MED countries now have an obesity problem

Are there regions where people have been consuming plant based/vegetarian diet yet the heart diease rates are not lowest in the world, in that case we need to understand why.

Plant based doesnt equal health (nor does vegan). Optimal nutrition does (as part of a healthy lifestyle). There are places that have both (plant based and optimal health) and are the longest lived with the lowest rates of CVD. There are areas that have one with out the other and are not as long lived. Why is Okinawa disease rates so much lower than rural Japan?

The typical American vegan and/or vegetarian does not eat healthy. They are plant based, but not healthy. One does not equal the other.

However, when they looked at ALL the common denominators of all the long lived areas, a plant based diet was one of the keys. There were others, non diet/exercise related that also matter, which have been mentioned here.

I guess when we want to be certain that A is TRUE

In this area, you may never find what you are looking for.

The statistics are not only readily available, but have been quoted here often, mostly between you and me, in these same discussions. In science, dealing with humans, you will never find 100%.

However, statistically speaking, the longest lived healthiest people do not live in the MED countries. They do not have the lowest disease rates. The only have rates better than us, but we are often near the bottom.

Even if you could find the exception, like the Masai, or Inuit (though they are not long lived), why would we look to the exception to create what is best? Do you recommend children play as close to traffic as they can, or in an area that is safe 'away" from traffic? Or if you can find the one or two kids who play in traffic but don't get hurt, should we recommend that to all kids?

Philosophical discussions are great, but in the end, we have a national epidemic of lifestyle related deaths, and we know the solution. In addition, most of the time, there philosophical discussions are engaged in not to help refine the quest but to avoid the quest.

Public health measures and recommendations are not to find the one guy who smokes and doesnt get lung cancer, and then try and find ways to allow others to smoke and not get cancer, but to understand smoking causes cancer, and get the public to quit.

Sure, maybe you want to study those one or two who smoked and didnt get cancer, but in the meantime, get everyone else to quit.

That's why Mediterranean Vs Plant based low fat diet study will put rest to all doubts.

Perhaps one day it will be done. However, in the mean time, the Okinawan vs the MED country data is very compelling. Considering more people over the age of 100, per capita, live in Okinawa, makes it even more compelling.

Success leaves clues. We have lots of clues.

However.....

Jaggu, here is a simple experiment for you to do, so you can "prove" all of this to yourself.

Download the CRON-O-Meter as others have.

Enter everything you think will make a good diet. It has to meet these criteria

1) contain enough calories to maintain a health weight at a BMI of 18.5 to 22, without enormous amounts of exercise.

2) It has to meet the DRi/RDA for all known vitamins, minerals, nutrients, essential fats, etc. at that calorie level.

3) it has to also meet the all guidelines for salt, sugar, fiber, cholesterol, sat fat, etc etc as not to exceed any of these.

I would prefer you pick from whole natural foods, and if you do, will even allow you the inclusion of animal products (that occurred naturally). So, enter all the fruits, veggies, starchy veggies, intact whole grains, legumes, wild game, and see what you come up with. Keep tweaking it till you can do it. If you want to add in processed foods, thats OK, but remember, few long lived people include much processed foods. And, fortification (the addition of nutrients to foods) doesnt count in the analysis.

When you have done it, let me know. I have offered this challenge to 10s of 1000s of people, including RDs, MDs, PhDs, etc etc, many who specialize in this field and many who have taken the challenge up.

The answer is always enlightening and some say the best experiment they have ever done.

Keep working on it as see how "options" or ways you can achieve the goal. It may prove to be one of the most eye-opening experiments you have ever done, because in the end, this is what will matter most.

In Health
Jeff

[JeffN]

That's why Mediterranean Vs Plant based low fat diet study will put rest to all doubts.

I respectively disagree.

The major driving force of the MED diet is the food industry, who even sponsored the MED diet pyramid. I spoke at one of the early MED diet festivals and debated one of the MDs who wrote one of the books. Most all the vendors were selling olive oil and wine. None of them, even the MDs and the one I debated, had any clue to what really went on in this countries, their actual nutrient and food intakes, and contributed to their good health.

Take that away and the influence, the enormous promotion, and popularity leaves.

Success leaves clues, go with the clues.

If olive oil was so important, or wine, then we would have to see it in all long lived populations. And while those on Crete ate some olive oil (less than 3 TB a day), they drank little if any wine. And, while those in France, drank some wine (2 glasses a day) they consumed very little if any olive oil.

So, should we follow the real Crete diet or the real French diet, or just use each one as an excuse to keep indulging in our unhealthy habits or olive oil AND wine in amounts that neither one of these countries consumed?

In Health
Jeff

[Jaggu]

Jeff,

My argument was not only in defense of olive oil but in general Mediterranean diet which is somewhere between SAD and Plant based diet.

You gave smoking example and should we be playing close to busy intersection or in a safe areas.

Smoking can not be equated to low fat plant based diet. There is clear cut solid link between smoking and health issues whether or not few who smoke won't see any problem. All experts agree that smoking is Bad for the health no matter which way you look at, unlike on low fat plant based diet where all experts don't agree.

[JeffN]

This is from William James, who is from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, and the head of the International Obesity Task Force,

In a very recent article, The epidemiology of obesity: the size of the problem, Journal of Internal Medicine 263; 336–352

In relation to how they chose the recommended amount of fat in the USA, he says...

"They specified a 15–30% range in total fat intakes because the Chinese and Japanese, with negligible CHD, diabetes and obesity in the 1970s, were consuming on average 14% fat, but this was totally unrealistic for the US and Northern European populations where intakes were well over 40%. So to choose a 30% figure was radical and a response to the need to reduce saturated fat intakes by simply reducing total fat. "[/b]

So, in other words, the SE Asia level of 14% (or less) was closer to the optimal, but because we were over 40% (around 45%), they looked at picking a level that was a half way measure, and compromised at 30%. This was a compromise, not an ideal.

Also, from the same article..

"Ancel Keys’ Seven Country Study observations that fat might be related to the BMIs of his samples but not to CHD because the Greeks, on a high olive oil diet, had a low saturated fat intake at that time. The subjects also happened to be incredibly physically active: the selected shepherds in Crete were walking and climbing mountains all day long so this is hardly a realistic basis for suggesting that fat intakes do not matter."

They do matter. And, the "high" olive oil, was under 3 TB a day.

Using the MED country diet as an example is "hardly a realistic basis for suggesting fat doesn't matter"

There was a famous debate in the NEJM on this topic and one of the leading researchers on MED diets even admitted, that they were an exception, and that a MED style diet would not be applicable for populations that are not highly active and not at their ideal weight.

Oh well, that eliminates most all Americans.

In Health
Jeff

[JeffN]

Jeff,

My argument was not only in defense of olive oil but in general Mediterranean diet which is somewhere between SAD and Plant based diet.

You gave smoking example and should we be playing close to busy intersection or in a safe areas.

Smoking can not be equated to low fat plant based diet. There is clear cut solid link between smoking and health issues whether or not few who smoke won't see any problem. All experts agree that smoking is Bad for the health no matter which way you look at, unlike on low fat plant based diet where all experts don't agree.

Actually, not all experts agree that smoking is harmful and as acknowledged in a post here, smoking (and nicotine) has some beneficial pharmacological effects. Search Pubmed and you will see.

But, for your own sake, which you will benefit from

1) Taking the above challenge using the CRON-O-Meter, because if we are talking from a health perspective, its these numbers that will matter most.

2) Answer the above question, which I will repeat (and again, the numbers, tell the story)..

Look at this diet...

http://www.drmcdougall.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=6129

1) How will adding olive oil to it make it any healthier?

2) How will substituting olive oil for any component of the diet, make it any healthier?

3) What exactly is it in the olive oil that adding the olive oil will add to it, and how much, and why is that healthier?

Otherwise, you are just in the "philosophical" debate and not the "science" one.

In Health
Jeff

[xetaprime]

I'd like to add that I have read a lot over the last two years and contradictions abound and sometimes my brain bleeds!

What I do get, even though I am still using OO, is that it is a processed oil. That eating an olive, sun dried olive, might be a better approach.

The Okinawan story has me a bit confused because I've read that their chief fat is lard. Maybe health risks don't come into play with a 10-14% of the diet. But they do eat pork too. Just an example:

http://www.bento.com/okimenu.html

Pork is a very important ingredient, and every part of the pig is used, from pig's feet and pig's ears to pork tripe. Other ingredients include local seafood and native tropical vegetables and fruits.

I understand that people want to hear good news about their bad foods, but I have no interest in pork or lard. I may have some other leanings, but we all do.

If there is no example of a meatless society to follow, as far as longest lived cultures go, then aren't we all in very new territory? That Dr. McDougall, yourself and others are essentially breaking new ground. And it's exciting to follow something new. Relatively new with regards to Man's history on the planet. I love the idea of returning to the Garden.

But if we are mentioning Okinawans and the Hunza then are we not also bringing cheese, milk, meat, fish and lard to the table. And if we aren't shouldn't this be mentioned? Should we be saying, yes the Okinawans eat very well, but not as well as they could be eating?

Sincerely and quite often confused,
Xeta

[Quiet Heather]

If there is no example of a meatless society to follow, as far as longest lived cultures go, then aren't we all in very new territory? That Dr. McDougall, yourself and others are essentially breaking new ground. And it's exciting to follow something new. Relatively new with regards to Man's history on the planet. I love the idea of returning to the Garden.

But if we are mentioning Okinawans and the Hunza then are we not also bringing cheese, milk, meat, fish and lard to the table. And if we aren't shouldn't this be mentioned? Should we be saying, yes the Okinawans eat very well, but not as well as they could be eating?

I've been thinking about how much in the way of animal products traditional cultures have eaten, too. I've read so many different things - some sources seem to like to play up the pork Okinawans ate or the dairy other cultures ate, and I think it might be because modern day Westerners like their pork , dairy, olive oil, etc. and like to hear about how these foods are central to these idealized cultures' diets. I happen to think these accounts are exaggerated, though. Most people throughout history did not have the wealth to eat rich animal products in great amounts. Maybe what we're idealizing is the diet the wealthier, more powerful people ate, kwim?

Another thing that I've thought is that we've evolved (or were created with) the ability to store enough B12 to last us years. That indicates to me that animal products were a rare occurrence in most people's diets.

[Chumly]

As Jeff has said many times, what is most important is the 90-95% of the diet. I don't know what the Hunzas and Okinawans eat as far as animal products, but if it's less than 10%, it probably won't make much difference to their health. The fact that they eat some animal products or that the Crete's eat olive oil is probably relatively insignificant next to the fruit, vegetables, beans and other healthy components of their diet.

[Quiet Heather]

As Jeff has said many times, what is most important is the 90-95% of the diet. I don't know what the Hunzas and Okinawans eat as far as animal products, but if it's less than 10%, it probably won't make much difference to their health. The fact that they eat some animal products or that the Crete's eat olive oil is probably relatively insignificant next to the fruit, vegetables, beans and other healthy components of their diet.

Absolutely.