Interest in omega-3 fatty acids began in the 1950s, with several thousand papers in the scientific literature supporting their benefits. Little doubt remains that omega-3 fatty acids are important in human nutrition. As significant structural components of the cell membranes of tissues throughout the body, they are especially rich in the retina, brain, and sperm, in which docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) constitutes 36.4% of total fatty acids. Membrane fluidity is essential for proper functioning of these tissues. In the retina, where omega-3 fatty acids are especially important, deficiency can result in decreased vision and abnormal electroretinogram results. Several studies clearly illustrate the effects of omega-3 deficiency in both animals and humans.

For purposes of discussion, the most prominent forms of Omega-3 fatty acids include alpha-linolenic acid (ALA, 18:3), eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA, 20:5), and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA, 22:6). ALA is present in plant-based sources such as flaxseed oil; EPA and DHA are present in animal and marine sources, such as liver, krill, and fish.

Omega-3 Fatty acids are essential fatty acids, necessary from conception through pregnancy and infancy and throughout life: The ratio of omega-6 to omega-3 fatty acids has increased in industrialized societies because of reduced consumption of foods rich in omega-3 fatty acids and increased consumption of vegetable oils rich in omega-6 fatty acids, i.e., linoleic acid in the form of soy, corn, safflower, and canola oils. Another important feature of omega-3 fatty acids is their role in the prevention and modulation of certain diseases that are common in Western civilization. The following is a partial list of diseases that may be prevented or ameliorated with omega-3 fatty acids, in descending order of importance based on available scientific literature:

• Coronary heart disease and stroke,
• Essential fatty acid deficiency in infancy (retinal and brain development),
• Autoimmune disorders (e.g., lupus and nephropathy),
• Crohn’s disease,
• Cancers of the breast, colon, and prostate,
• Mild hypertension, and
• Rheumatoid arthritis.

Dietary ALA vs. dietary DHA: Within the health community, some debate the ability of individuals to convert dietary sources of ALA into the longer forms of EPA and DHA, which are used by the body for many metabolic functions. This question remains heavily debated despite studies that show the removal of dietary ALA promotes Omega-3 fatty acid deficiency, including DHA, and in spite of many experiments demonstrating dietary inclusion of ALA raises Omega-3 tissue fatty acid content, including DHA. Research shows that ALA is converted to DHA, EPA, and docosapentaenoic acid (DPA, 22:5), depending the body’s needs. Like many other fatty acids, the by-products of metabolizing ALA are reused for synthesizing cholesterol and other fatty acids. In addition, numerous in vitro and animal studies show ALA exerting identical metabolic effects as DHA, although longer treatments or higher concentrations of ALA were needed compared to consuming dietary DHA.

The differences between how the body uses dietary DHA compared to dietary ALA have led to the dogma that ALA is not a useful fatty acid for maintaining DHA levels in human tissues. On the contrary, numerous studies indicate that dietary ALA (found in abundance in flaxseed oil) is a crucial dietary source of Omega-3 fatty acids and including it in one’s diet is critical for maintaining EPA, DPA, and DHA levels in human tissue.

Cardiovascular Benefits of Omega-3 Fatty Acids: The strongest evidence of connecting omega-3 fatty acids and disease prevention is found in the inverse relationship between the amount of omega-3 fatty acids in the diet, blood, and tissues and the occurrence of coronary heart disease and its complications. Effects of omega-3 fatty acids on coronary heart disease have been shown in hundreds of experiments in animals, humans, tissue culture studies, and clinical trials. Omega-3 fatty acids have been shown to be protective of heart disease and, by a variety of mechanisms, prevent deaths from coronary disease, particularly cardiac arrest.

The unique properties of omega-3 fatty acids in coronary heart disease first became apparent while investigating the health of Greenland Eskimos who consumed diets very high in fat from seals, whales, and fish and yet had a low rate of coronary heart disease. Further studies clarified this paradox. The fat the Eskimos consumed contained large quantities of the very-long-chain and highly polyunsaturated fatty acids of EPA and DHA, which are abundant in fish, shellfish, and sea mammals and are scarce or absent in land animals and plants. EPA and DHA are synthesized by phytoplankton, which are the equivalent of oceanic plants that serve as the base of the food chain for marine life.

Dietary omega-3 fatty acids act to prevent heart disease through a variety of actions, including the following:

• Preventing arrhythmias (ventricular tachycardia and fibrillation),
• Acting as prostaglandin and leukotriene precursors,
• Having anti-inflammatory properties,
• Inhibiting synthesis of cytokines and mitogens,
• Stimulating endothelial-derived nitric oxide,
• Acting as an antithrombotic,
• Having hypolipidemic properties with effects on triglycerides and VLDLs, and
• Inhibiting atherosclerosis.

EPA and DHA have strong anti-arrhythmic action on the heart. In experimental animals and tissue culture systems, EPA and DHA prevent the development of ventricular tachycardia and fibrillation. Where omega-3 fatty acid intake was increased, total mortality has been improved in several studies. In one study, men who consumed salmon 1 time/wk had a 70% less likelihood of cardiac arrest. In another study overall mortality was decreased by 29% in men with overt cardiovascular disease who consumed omega-3 fatty acids from fish or fish oil, probably due to reducing cardiac arrests. According to a 1998 Physician’s Health Study in the United States, consumption of 1 fish meal/week was associated with a 52% lower risk of sudden cardiac death compared with consumption of <1 fish meal/month in 20,551 male physicians.

Omega-3 Fatty Acids Essential Components of Cell Membranes in Infancy: Two critical periods are worth noting for adequate consuming omega-3 fatty acids: during fetal development and after birth until the biochemical development in the brain and retina is completed. As already noted, the omega-3 fatty acid DHA is an important constituent of the cell membrane of these neural structures. Omega-3 fatty acid deficiency is manifested in both the blood and in tissue biochemistry. Of note is a strikingly low concentration of DHA, which may fall to as much as one-fifth of the normal amount, which the body attempts to replace with Omega-6 fatty acids. Omega-3–deficient diets fed to pregnant rhesus monkeys that continued after birth induced profound functional changes such as reduced vision, abnormal electroretinograms, impaired visual evoked potential, more stereotypic behavior (e.g., pacing), and disturbed cognitive ability.

Some of these findings have been replicated in infants fed formulas deficient in omega-3 fatty acids. Most studies of premature infants have shown visual impairment and abnormal electroretinograms. A recent study in full-term infants compared standard infant formula with human milk and formulas enriched with DHA, the results of which unequivocally demonstrated the considerable differences in cognitive ability.

All human studies substantiated the omega-3 fatty acid deficiency state in plasma, red blood cells, and occasionally in tissues from autopsied infants. The lower concentrations of DHA in plasma and erythrocytes are mirrored by lower concentrations in the brain and retina. Formula-fed infants have lower concentrations of brain DHA than do infants fed human milk. They also have lower intelligence quotients. During pregnancy, both the mother’s stores and dietary intake of omega-3 fatty acids are of critical importance in insuring that the baby has adequate amounts of omega-3 fatty acids at the time of birth.

All polyunsaturated fatty acids, including DHA, are transferred across the placenta into fetal blood. In addition, EPA and DHA in the mother’s adipose tissue can be mobilized as free fatty acids bound to albumin and be made available to the developing fetus via placenta transport. Several studies in monkeys have indicated that when the mother’s diet is deficient in omega-3 fatty acids, the infant at birth is also deficient with low DHA concentrations observed in their plasma and red blood cells. In humans, consuming fish oil or sardines to pregnant women led to higher DHA concentrations in both the mother’s plasma and red blood cells and in cord blood plasma and red blood cells at the time of birth. Once membrane phospholipids have adequate concentrations of DHA, the brain and retina retain these fatty acids, even though the diet may be deficient afterwards.

Barcelo-Coblijn G, Murphy EJ (2009) Alpha-linolenic acid and its conversion to longer chain n-3 fatty acids: Benefits for human health and a role in maintaining tissue n-3 fatty acid levels. Progress in Lipid Research 48:355-374.

Conner WE (2000) Importance of n-3 fatty acids in health and disease. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 71(suppl):171S-175S.

Written by mercola.com

In Europe genetically modified foods and ingredients have to be labeled.

In the United States, they do not.

But the truth is, if and when GM labeling is finally required in the United States, you’re going to see changes to the majority of food labels in your supermarket, as GM foods already widely appear in our food supply.

Most people are not aware that nearly EVERY processed food you encounter at your local supermarket that does not bear the “USDA Organic” label is filled with GM components.

This is due to the amount of GM crops now grown in the United States (over 90 percent of all corn is GM corn and over 95 percent all soy is GM soy).

As you might suspect, it’s in the interest of the industry to keep the prevalence of GM ingredients quiet and they won’t go down without a fight.

Biotech Industry Spends More Than Half a Billion to Influence Congress

In just over a decade, the food and agriculture biotechnology industry has spent more than $572 million in campaign contributions and lobbying expenditures, according to an analysis by Food & Water Watch.

Key among the goals of this intense lobbying effort is to prevent GM food labeling and keep Americans in the dark about the contents of their food.

The analysis states:

“The food and agriculture biotechnology industry has been flexing its financial political muscle to ease the regulatory oversight of genetically modified foods. Lobbying efforts for some of these firms and groups have included approval of cloned food and genetically engineered food, animals and livestock.

Companies are also fighting to eliminate or prevent labeling on genetically modified foods in the United States and preventing other countries from regulating genetically modified foods. These efforts have dovetailed with lobbying to tighten intellectual property law protections over patented seeds and animals in attempts to further benefit the biotech industry.”

Over 95 percent of Americans polled said they think GM foods should require a label, stating it’s an ethical issue and consumers should be able to make an informed choice. Like people in Europe, Americans are suspicious of GM foods, and a large part of why many continue to buy them is because they are unaware that they’re already in the food. A prominent GM food label would be a death sentence to U.S. GM crops, which are right now enjoying a free for all when it comes to entering the food market.

As Ronnie Cummins of the Organic Consumers Association stated:

“Why are there basically no genetically engineered foods or crops anywhere in Europe, while 75 percent of U.S. supermarket foods—including many so-called “natural” foods—are GE tainted?

The answer is simple. In Europe genetically modified foods and ingredients have to be labeled. In the U.S. they do not. Up until now, in North America, Monsanto and the Biotechnocrats have enjoyed free reign to secretly lace non-organic foods with gene-spliced viruses, bacteria, antibiotic-resistant marker genes, and foreign DNA—mutant “Frankenfoods” shown to severely damage the health of animals, plants, and other living organisms in numerous scientific studies.

Monsanto and their allies understand the threat that truth-in-labeling poses for GMOs.

As soon as genetically modified foods start to be labeled in the U.S., millions of consumers will start to read these labels and react.

They’ll complain to grocery store managers and companies, they’ll talk to their family and friends. They’ll start switching to foods that are organic or at least GMO-free. Once enough consumers start complaining about GM foods and food ingredients; stores will eventually stop selling them; and farmers will stop planting them.

Genetically engineered foods have absolutely no benefit for consumers or the environment, only hazards. This is why Monsanto and their friends in the Clinton, Bush, and Obama administrations have prevented consumer GMO truth-in-labeling laws from ever getting a public discussion, much less coming to a vote in Congress.”

Why the Approval of GM Alfalfa Could Mean the End of Organic

Industry lobbying is clearly working, as to date biotech companies have evaded mandatory labeling laws (although a new California initiative may change all of that). They also succeeded in getting GM alfalfa approved, which quite literally threatens the entire organic industry, including organic meat, as alfalfa is the fourth largest crop in the U.S., and is used to produce forage seed and hay to feed cows and other livestock.

Contamination would be disastrous for organic dairy- and cattle farmers as federal organic standards forbid them from using GM crops, and organic food manufacturers will reject a food ingredient if found to be contaminated with GM material — not to mention Monsanto’s history of suing both conventional and organic farmers for patent infringement should their crops be cross-contaminated.

Download Interview Transcript

Cummins noted in the above interview that any alfalfa growing within a five-mile radius of GM alfalfa will immediately become contaminated, and it’s clearly evident that GM crops of all kinds cannot be contained. They absolutely WILL contaminate their conventional and organic counterparts, which will mean ultimately the entire food supply will contain GMOs.

Some, like Dr. Philip Bereano, professor emeritus at the University of Washington and an engaged activist concerning GM foods, believe contamination is actually an intentional strategy by both the government and the industry to weaken the organic industry to simply allow GM animal feed in organics.

Indeed, while USDA chief Tom Vilsack acknowledged alfalfa contamination concerns in an “Open Letter to Stakeholders” on December 30, 2010, stating that the USDA’s environmental impact statement “acknowledges the potential of cross-fertilization to non-GE alfalfa from GE alfalfa,” adding that cross-fertilization is “a significant concern for farmers who produce for non-GE markets at home and abroad,” steps were not taken to address them.

Congress is the Puppet, Biotech is the Puppeteer

It takes only a flick of biotech’s wrist to move Congress’ regulatory arms, and the truth is the revolving door between the two is spinning so fast that the line between industry lobbyists and legislators is permanently blurred.

As the Food & Water Watch report noted:

“At least a baker’s dozen of former members of Congress represent food and agriculture biotechnology interests as lobbyists. Of the companies surveyed, seven spent over $8.5 million to hire the firms of at least 13 former senators and representatives to represent these biotechnology interests to their former colleagues in the Congress. Many of these former legislators-turned-lobbyists have formidable legislative pedigrees.

For example, Former House Agriculture Committee Ranking Member Charles Stenholm (D-TX) is currently a registered lobbyist for Syngenta, a seller of genetically modified plants in the United States and abroad.”

Biotech giant Monsanto is a prime example of how the industry has infiltrated U.S. regulatory agencies like the FDA and the USDA with their previous employees who are still very loyal to Monsanto. Cummins pointed out the following connections as a start:

• Clarence Thomas, who did not withdraw himself from a Supreme Court decision on genetically engineered alfalfa last year, used to be the general counsel for Monsanto.
• Michael Taylor, who was formerly the vice president of Monsanto, is now the Food and Drug Administration Deputy Commissioner for Foods.
• Roger Beachy, the former director of the Monsanto-funded Danforth Plant Science Center in Saint Louis, is now the director of the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture.
• Islam Siddiqui was vice president of Monsanto and Dupont’s funded pesticide-promotion group CropLife. He is now the agricultural negotiator for the U.S. Trade Representative. In other words, he is the enforcer for U.S. foreign policy that countries have to accept our genetically engineered exports.
• Rajiv Shah is the former Agricultural Development Director for the pro-biotech Gates Foundation, who are frequently partnering with Monsanto. He served as Obama’s USDA undersecretary for Research, Education and Economics.
• Elena Kagan has served as President Obama’s Solicitor General. She took Monsanto’s side against organic farmers on the roundup ready alfalfa case.
• Ramona Ramiro, corporate counsel to Dupont, another biotech bully, has been nominated by President Obama to serve as general counsel for the USDA.

This is not an issue of Republican versus Democrat. As Cummins noted, both parties are guilty:

“We must point that it’s not just the Obama Administration that has served as a revolving door for Monsanto. We saw the same situation under Bush Jr., Clinton and Bush Sr. We have a corporation Monsanto that is not only out of control, but that places its people in high positions; that donates large sums of money to members of congress; and that basically gets its way every time there is a policy decision made in Washington.”

It should not come as a surprise, then, that even the current secretary of the USDA, Tom Vilsack, is thoroughly entrenched in the industry. As the Organic Consumers Association (OCA) pointed out:

• Vilsack has been a strong supporter of genetically engineered crops, including bio-pharmaceutical corn.
• The biggest biotechnology industry group, the Biotechnology Industry Organization, named Vilsack Biotech Governor of the Year. He was also the founder and former chair of the Governor’s Biotechnology Partnership.
• When Vilsack created the Iowa Values Fund, his first poster child of economic development potential was Trans Ova and their pursuit of cloning dairy cows.
• The undemocratic and highly unpopular 2005 seed pre-emption bill was Vilsack’s brainchild. The law strips local government’s right to regulate genetically engineered seed (including where GE can be grown, maintaining GE-free buffers or banning GE corn locally).
• Vilsack is an ardent supporter of corn and soy-based biofuels, which use as much or more fossil fuel energy to produce them as they generate, while driving up world food prices and literally starving the poor.
• Overall, Vilsack’s record is one of aiding and abetting Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) and promoting animal cloning.

I think this makes it a lot easier to understand why GM crops have proliferated the American landscape and food supply, despite public outcry and organized opposition.

GM Crops Failing Miserably, Threatening Public Health

Virtually all of the claims of benefit of GM crops – increased yields, more food production, controlled pests and weeds, reductions in chemical use in agriculture, drought-tolerant seeds – have not materialized. The Global Citizens’ Report on the State of GMOs states:

• Contrary to the claim of feeding the world, genetic engineering has not increased the yield of a single crop.
• Herbicide tolerant (Roundup Ready) crops were supposed to control weeds and Bt crops were intended to control pests. Instead of controlling weeds and pests, GE crops have led to the emergence of super weeds and super pests … Herbicide resistant crops such as Roundup Ready cotton can create the risk of herbicide resistant “superweeds” by transferring the herbicide resistance to weeds.
• Despite claims that genetically modified organisms (GMOs) will lower the levels of chemicals (pesticides and herbicides) used, this has not been the case. This is of great concern both because of the negative impacts of these chemicals on ecosystems and humans, and because there is the danger that increased chemical use will cause pests and weeds to develop resistance, requiring even more chemicals in order to manage them.
• Monsanto has been claiming that through genetic engineering it can breed crops for drought tolerance and other climate-resilient traits. This is a false promise.
• Among the false claims made by Monsanto and the Biotechnology industry is that GE foods are safe. However, there are enough independent studies to show that GE foods can cause health damage.

At the same time, earlier this year, Cry1Ab, a specific type of Bt toxin from certain GM crops, has for the first time been detected in human and fetal blood samples. It appears the toxin is quite prevalent, as upon testing 69 pregnant and non-pregnant women who were eating a typical Canadian diet (which included foods such as GM soy, corn and potatoes), researchers found Bt toxin in:

• 93 percent of blood samples of pregnant women
• 80 percent of fetal blood samples
• 69 percent of non-pregnant women blood samples

There’s now plenty of evidence that the Bt toxin may trigger an inflammatory response, and as you may know, chronic inflammation is at the root of many increasingly common diseases, such as diabetes and heart disease. Food allergies are also skyrocketing, as isinfertility, which could also be a potential side effect of GM foods, based on results from animal studies. Monsanto insists that GM foods are no different from conventionally grown varieties, but the research does NOT support this claim. Here is just a sampling of the unsavory findings associated with GM foods:

The Time is Ripe to Fight Back

All is not lost on the GM food front, as we now have a practical plan to end this disaster. By educating the public about the risks of GM foods through a massive education campaign, and launching a ballot initiative in California for 2012, which will require mandatory labeling of genetically engineered foods and food ingredients, our plan is to generate a tipping point of consumer rejection to make GMOs a thing of the past.

Several organizations, including Mercola.com, the Organic Consumers Association, the Institute for Responsible Technology, and even the Environmental Working Group are getting actively involved. But we do need your help.

Here’s how you can get involved:

• If you live in California and are willing to attend a short training session and then start collecting petition signatures (you will be part of a team of 2-4 people) in early November for the California Ballot Initiative, sign up here. (For more information see: The California Ballot Initiative: Taking Down Monsanto.) Also remember to share this information with family and friends in California!
• Whether you live in California or not, please donate money to this historic effort
• Talk to organic producers and stores and ask them to actively support the California Ballot. It may be the only chance we have to have to label genetically engineered foods.
• Distribute WIDELY the Non-GMO Shopping Guide to help you identify and avoid foods with GMOs. Look for products (including organic products) that feature the Non-GMO Project Verified Seal to be sure that at-risk ingredients have been tested for GMO content. You can also download the free iPhone application that is available in the iTunes store. You can find it by searching for ShopNoGMO in the applications.
• For timely updates, please join the Organic Consumers Association on Facebook, or follow them on Twitter.
• You can also join the Non-GMO Project on Facebook, or Twitter

In the meantime, the simplest way to avoid GM foods is to buy whole, certified organic foods. By definition, foods that are certified organic must never intentionally use GM organisms, produced without artificial pesticides and fertilizers and from an animal reared without the routine use of antibiotics, growth promoters or other drugs. Additionally, grass-fed beef will not have been fed GM corn feed.

You can also look for foods that are “non-GMO verified” by the Non-GMO Project.

Adapted from mercola.com

Conventional medical authorities say that consumption of saturated animal fats is bad for you and causes heart disease. But a hundred years ago, fewer than than one in one hundred Americans were obese, and coronary heart disease was unknown. The Procter and Gamble started marketing Crisco as a new kind of food — the first commercially marketed trans fat. Crisco was originally used to make candles and soap, but with electrification causing a decline in candle sales, Procter and Gamble decided to promote the fat as a “healthier” all-vegetable-derived shortening.

According to LewRockwell.com: “Feeding high doses of fat and cholesterol to omnivores, like rats and dogs, does not produce atherosclerotic lesions in them … In fact, it turns out that people who have highest percentage of saturated fat in their diets have the lowest risk of heart disease … The last word on this subject should go to Julia Child … Enjoy eating saturated fats, they’re good for you!”

The demonization of saturated fat began in 1953, when Dr. Ancel Keys published a paper comparing saturated fat intake and heart disease mortality. His theory turned out to be flimsy, to say the least, but the misguided ousting of saturated fat has continued unabated ever since. Fortunately, the truth is finally starting to come out, as medical scientists have begun to seriously question Keys’ findings.

Time to Put Ancel Keys’ Theory to Rest

Keys based his theory on a study of six countries, in which higher saturated fat intake equated to higher rates of heart disease. However, he conveniently ignored data from 16 other countries that did not fit his theory. Had he chosen a different set of countries, the data would have shown that increasing the percent of calories from fat reduces the number of deaths from coronary heart disease.

And, as illustrated in the featured article, when you include all 22 countries for which data was available at the time of his study, you find that those who consume the highest percentage of saturated fat have the lowest risk of heart disease.

Furthermore, many have now realized that it’s the trans fat found in margarine, vegetable shortening, and partially hydrogenated vegetable oils that is the true villain, causing far more significant health problems than saturated fat ever could!

Still, despite the scientific evidence, the low-fat dogma remains a favorite among most government health authorities. Case in point: the most recent food chart issued by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) in December of last year, recommends reducing your saturated fat intake to a mere seven percent of caloric intake—down from its previously recommended 10 percent…

Newer Studies Debunk Keys’ Theory

The USDA’s lowered recommendation is illogical when you consider the evidence available today, which supports saturated fat as a necessary part of a heart healthy diet. For example, as discussed in the featured article, a number of indigenous tribes around the world are living proof that a high-saturated fat diet equates to low mortality from heart disease.

These include:

And then there’s human breast milk, which contains 54 percent saturated fat. Since breast milk is the most perfect diet in existence for developing infants, the presence of high amounts of saturated fat cannot easily be construed as a “mistake.”

Furthermore:

• A meta-analysis published last year, which pooled data from 21 studies and included nearly 348,000 adults, found no difference in the risks of heart disease and stroke between people with the lowest and highest intakes of saturated fat.
• In a 1992 editorial published in the Archives of Internal Medicine, Dr. William Castelli, a former director of the Framingham Heart study, stated:
  “In Framingham, Mass., the more saturated fat one ate, the more cholesterol one ate, the more calories one ate, the lower the person’s serum cholesterol. The opposite of what… Keys et al would predict…We found that the people who ate the most cholesterol, ate the most saturated fat, ate the most calories, weighed the least and were the most physically active.”
• Another 2010 study published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition found that a reduction in saturated fat intake must be evaluated in the context of replacement by other macronutrients, such as carbohydrates.
  When you replace saturated fat with a higher carbohydrate intake, particularly refined carbohydrate, you exacerbate insulin resistance and obesity, increase triglycerides and small LDL particles, and reduce beneficial HDL cholesterol. The authors state that dietary efforts to improve your cardiovascular disease risk should primarily emphasize the limitation of refined carbohydrate intake, and weight reduction.

The last point is very important and is likely a major key for explaining the rampant increase in obesity, heart disease and diabetes. And once you can pinpoint the problem, turning it all around becomes that much easier.

Carbohydrates, Not Fat, is the Root of Obesity and Heart Disease

Heart disease is so common today, it’s hard for people to remember that a mere 100 years ago, this disease was really uncommon.  As Dr. Donald Miller writes in the featured article:

“There were 500 cardiologists practicing in the U.S. in 1950. There are 30,000 of them now – a 60-fold increase for a population that has only doubled since 1950.”

Such an explosion of heart disease indicates that something has changed that is contributing to this epidemic.

What is that “something”?

Our diet!

Most likely, the studies that have linked the so-called “Western diet” to an increased heart disease risk simply confirm that sugar and refined carbohydrates are harmful to your heart health. Because although the Western diet is high in red and processed meats and saturated fats, it’s also alarmingly high in sugar and refined carbs like bread and pasta. And, as concluded in the last study listed above, when you reduce saturated fat and increase refined carbohydrates, you end up promoting obesity, heart disease and diabetes…

Gary Taubes has also done an excellent job of explaining the connection between carbs and obesity and its related health issues in his book Why We Get Fat: and what to do about it.

In a nutshell, eating fat and protein does not make you fat—carbohydrates do.I firmly believe the two primary keys for successful weight management and reducing your risk for diabetes, heart disease and other weight-related health problems are:

1. Severely restricting carbohydrates (sugars, fructose, and grains) in your diet, and
2. Increasing healthy fat consumption

According to last year’s Report of the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee on the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, the top 10 sources of calories in the American diet are:

1. Grain-based desserts (cakes, cookies, donuts, pies, crisps, cobblers, and granola bars) 139 calories a day
2. Yeast breads, 129 calories a day
3. Chicken and chicken-mixed dishes, 121 calories a day
4. Soda, energy drinks, and sports drinks, 114 calories a day
5. Pizza, 98 calories a day
6. Alcoholic beverages
7. Pasta and pasta dishes
8. Mexican mixed dishes
9. Beef and beef-mixed dishes
10. Dairy desserts

Looking at this list, it plain to see that CARBS—i.e. sugars (primarily fructose) and grains—are the primary sources of our weight- and health problems, not saturated fats.The updated NHANES survey above covers nutritional data from 2005-2006, placing grain-based foods in the top two slots. (While soda comes in at number four, many people, particularly teenagers, probably get a majority of their calories from fructose-rich drinks like soda.)

The Different Types of Fat

Fats can be confusing, but you can generally divide fats into four types:

1. Saturated fats, from animal fat and tropical oils
2. Monounsaturated fat, such as olive oil
3. Polyunsaturated fat, such as omega-3 and omega-6 fats
4. Trans fats, such as margarine

Sources of healthy fats include:

• Olives and Olive oil
• Coconuts and coconut oil
• Butter made from raw grass-fed organic milk
• Raw Nuts, such as, almonds or pecans
• Organic pastured egg yolks
• Avocados
• Grass fed meats
• Palm oil
• Unheated organic nut oils

Another healthful fat you want to be mindful of is animal-based omega-3. Deficiency in this essential fat can cause or contribute to very serious health problems, both mental and physical, and may be a significant underlying factor of up to 96,000 premature deaths each year.

Having the proper balance between omega-3 and omega-6 fats is also very important for optimal health. So in addition to increasing your omega-3 (which most people are sorely deficient in), you also want to decrease your consumption of omega-6, found primarily in:

• Corn oil
• Soy oil
• Canola oil
• Safflower oil
• Sunflower oil

The ideal ratio of omega-3 to omega-6 is 1:1, but the typical American diet is more like 1:20 in favor of omega-6. The overabundance of these oils in processed foods of all kinds explains our excess omega-6 levels.

The other fats you want to avoid are the trans fats. Trans fats are formed when hydrogen is added to vegetable oil during food processing in order to make it solidify. This process, known as hydrogenation, makes fats less likely to spoil, so foods stay fresh longer, have a longer shelf life and also have a less greasy feel. The end result of the hydrogenation process is a completely unnatural fat that causes dysfunction and chaos in your body on a cellular level.

Your Body NEEDS Saturated Fat for Optimal Function

Saturated fats from animal and vegetable sources provide a number of important health benefits. In fact, your body cannot function without saturated fats! Saturated fats are needed for the proper function of your:

• Cell membranes
• Heart
• Bones (to assimilate calcium)
• Liver
• Lungs
• Hormones
• Immune system
• Satiety (reducing hunger)
• Genetic regulation

Healthy Fat Tips to Live By

So please remember, you do need a certain amount of healthy fat, while at the same time you’ll want to avoid the unhealthy varieties. The easiest way to accomplish this is to simply eliminate processed foods, which are high in all things detrimental to your health: sugar, carbs, and dangerous types of fats.

After that, these tips can help ensure you’re eating the right fats for your health:

• Use organic butter made from raw grass-fed milk instead of margarines and vegetable oil spreads. Butter is a healthy whole food that has received an unwarranted bad rap.
• Use coconut oil for cooking. It is far superior to any other cooking oil and is loaded with health benefits. (Remember that olive oil should be used COLD, drizzled over salad or fish, for example, not to cook with.)
• To round out your healthy fat intake, be sure to eat raw fats, such as those from avocados, raw dairy products, and olive oil, and also take a high-quality source of animal-based omega-3 fat, such as krill oil.