2006•Preventive CardiologyRequires access

The Low‐Fat Diet That “Wasn't”

Ezra A. Amsterdam, Chulani T. Kappagoda

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

The subject of this column, of which all are aware, is the recent report from the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) that a “low”-fat diet does not reduce cardiovascular and other diseases.1 The study, which may be viewed as a problem of method rather than concept, confirms that “less is less” in regard to the benefits of a low-fat diet. Although the intent was to study a diet in which fat consumption comprised 20 percent of calories, actual fat intake during the study was 29 percent of calories, only a modest reduction from the average American diet (consumed by the control group) that is associated with the continuing epidemic of coronary heart disease. The impact of diet on LDL cholesterol is directly related to the reduction of calories supplied in the form of fat. The following relationships have been demonstrated for the influence of percent dietary fat and reduction of LDL cholesterol2: NCEP Step I diet (<30% total fat, <10% saturated fat), −9%; NCEP Step II diet (<30% total fat, <7% saturated fat), −15%; low fat diet (15% fat), −24%; very low fat (<10%), −35%. Reduction of saturated fat, the food element most related to heart disease, was not a component of the study, nor was a decrease in trans fats. That the participants did not lose weight indicates that any reduction in calories from decreased fat intake was likely replaced by sources such as carbohydrates. The detrimental effects of excess simple carbohydrates are well known. It is acknowledged that these issues were not as clear at the inception of the WHI as they are at present, but to meaningfully assess the effects of low fat consumption in a large, long-term trial, these factors must be addressed. The benefits of major restriction of saturated fat on blood lipids and coronary heart disease have been well documented in epidemiologic studies and smaller clinical trials. As it stands, the WHI studies may be viewed as “the low-fat diet that wasn't.” A more detailed analysis of the WHI studies will be presented in the Summer issue of Preventive Cardiology.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The subject of this column, of which all are aware, is the recent report from the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) that a “low”-fat diet does not reduce cardiovascular and other diseases.1 The study, which may be viewed as a problem of method rather than concept, confirms that “less is less” in regard to the benefits of a low-fat diet. Although the intent was to study a diet in which fat consumption comprised 20 percent of calories, actual fat intake during the study was 29 percent of calories, only a modest reduction from the average American diet (consumed by the control group) that is associated with the continuing epidemic of coronary heart disease. The impact of diet on LDL cholesterol is directly related to the reduction of calories supplied in the form of fat. The following relationships have been demonstrated for the influence of percent dietary fat and reduction of LDL cholesterol2: NCEP Step I diet (<30% total fat, <10% saturated fat), −9%; NCEP Step II diet (<30% total fat, <7% saturated fat), −15%; low fat diet (15% fat), −24%; very low fat (<10%), −35%. Reduction of saturated fat, the food element most related to heart disease, was not a component of the study, nor was a decrease in trans fats. That the participants did not lose weight indicates that any reduction in calories from decreased fat intake was likely replaced by sources such as carbohydrates. The detrimental effects of excess simple carbohydrates are well known. It is acknowledged that these issues were not as clear at the inception of the WHI as they are at present, but to meaningfully assess the effects of low fat consumption in a large, long-term trial, these factors must be addressed. The benefits of major restriction of saturated fat on blood lipids and coronary heart disease have been well documented in epidemiologic studies and smaller clinical trials. As it stands, the WHI studies may be viewed as “the low-fat diet that wasn't.” A more detailed analysis of the WHI studies will be presented in the Summer issue of Preventive Cardiology.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The subject of this column, of which all are aware, is the recent report from the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) that a “low”-fat diet does not reduce cardiovascular and other diseases.1 The study, which may be viewed as a problem of method rather than concept, confirms that “less is less” in regard to the benefits of a low-fat diet. Although the intent was to study a diet in which fat consumption comprised 20 percent of calories, actual fat intake during the study was 29 percent of calories, only a modest reduction from the average American diet (consumed by the control group) that is associated with the continuing epidemic of coronary heart disease. The impact of diet on LDL cholesterol is directly related to the reduction of calories supplied in the form of fat. The following relationships have been demonstrated for the influence of percent dietary fat and reduction of LDL cholesterol2: NCEP Step I diet (<30% total fat, <10% saturated fat), −9%; NCEP Step II diet (<30% total fat, <7% saturated fat), −15%; low fat diet (15% fat), −24%; very low fat (<10%), −35%. Reduction of saturated fat, the food element most related to heart disease, was not a component of the study, nor was a decrease in trans fats. That the participants did not lose weight indicates that any reduction in calories from decreased fat intake was likely replaced by sources such as carbohydrates. The detrimental effects of excess simple carbohydrates are well known. It is acknowledged that these issues were not as clear at the inception of the WHI as they are at present, but to meaningfully assess the effects of low fat consumption in a large, long-term trial, these factors must be addressed. The benefits of major restriction of saturated fat on blood lipids and coronary heart disease have been well documented in epidemiologic studies and smaller clinical trials. As it stands, the WHI studies may be viewed as “the low-fat diet that wasn't.” A more detailed analysis of the WHI studies will be presented in the Summer issue of Preventive Cardiology.

Key concepts: Calorie, Saturated fat, Medicine, Coronary heart disease, Obesity, Cholesterol, Dietary fat, Total fat

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The Low‐Fat Diet That “Wasn't” — Research Paper | ScholarLens