Originally posted by Darth Jello
3.5 grams of cholesterol? I'd say there's no confusion about how bad that is.
Nah, I think the confusion here is that cholesterol intake in no way directly relates to blood cholesterol. I am not expert of course (though obviously neither are you), but as far as I know the body is unable to take in that amount of cholesterol at one time and you will probably just secrete most of it unused. I believe it has to do with cholesterol having to be broken down and being generally synthesized by the body anyways. So really, eating that should be no more harmful than eating two or three eggs, which of course can be harmful if done every three hours for the rest of your life. Perhaps one of our biologist members knows more about that though.
Correlation is not causation! The lipid hypothesis is only a theory! It's totally possible that shocking your system with cholesterol is the key to immortality!
FREE YOUR MINDS!
However, a controlled diet can reduce blood cholesterol pretty dramatically so diet clearly has an effect. Eating something with 3500mg of cholesterol seems like it would almost certainly give you all the cholesterol your body can handle, definitely not something you want to do if you levels are high already.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Correlation is not causation! The lipid hypothesis is only a theory! It's totally possible that shocking your system with cholesterol is the key to immortality!FREE YOUR MINDS!
However, a controlled diet can reduce blood cholesterol pretty dramatically so diet clearly has an effect. Eating something with 3500mg of cholesterol seems like it would almost certainly give you all the cholesterol your body can handle, definitely not something you want to do if you levels are high already.
Now, I haven't done studies myself, and did I intend to I'd lack the mental capacities to do so anyways, but I have read online and heard from multiple sources (which could be absolutely wrong) that the connection between cholesterol intake and blood cholesterol is somewhat weak, for two reasons, namely the cholesterol itself has less impact than other dietary intakes in specific saturated fat is usually named and that the body is not able to absorb such huge amounts of cholesterol in one day they usually say it is limited to about one large egg, while the rest is apparently discarded unused, so a one time cholesterol overkill isn't as bad as the number "10 times the suggested amount" would naively imply.
Now again, I am no scientist and the most I have actually dealt with nutrition was one afternoon that I was interested in the topic so that might be all off, but the arguments seemed plausible to me and repeated by multiple publications, while the counterargument still seems to be "dude, it has the same name" so I personally have decided to lean towards believing the former, but I am more than willing to give that notion up should there be a valid argument, best backed up by some form of study.
Originally posted by Bardock42
I didn't actually deny that diet has an affect. Mind you "cholesterol" is just a subset of "diet". And I think "well it has the same name" to be a particularly weak argument.Now, I haven't done studies myself, and did I intend to I'd lack the mental capacities to do so anyways, but I have read online and heard from multiple sources (which could be absolutely wrong) that the connection between cholesterol intake and blood cholesterol is somewhat weak, for two reasons, namely the cholesterol itself has less impact than other dietary intakes in specific saturated fat is usually named and that the body is not able to absorb such huge amounts of cholesterol in one day they usually say it is limited to about one large egg, while the rest is apparently discarded unused, so a one time cholesterol overkill isn't as bad as the number "10 times the suggested amount" would naively imply.
Now again, I am no scientist and the most I have actually dealt with nutrition was one afternoon that I was interested in the topic so that might be all off, but the arguments seemed plausible to me and repeated by multiple publications, while the counterargument still seems to be "dude, it has the same name" so I personally have decided to lean towards believing the former, but I am more than willing to give that notion up should there be a valid argument, best backed up by some form of study.
True, I don't know of any specific studies (but dude it [i]does[i/] have the same name!). It seems reasonable to think that other things would effect cholesterol levels because the body processes pretty much everything that it takes in. We also do produce a lot of waste products so clearly a we're not using plenty of what we eat.
The AHA has some interesting information, namely you need barely any cholesterol at all because the liver makes it for you. Also: "saturated fatty acids are the main culprit in raising blood cholesterol". They do still say that 300mg/day is the healthy level for cholesterol intake.
In any event 3500mg isn't good for you even if it's not ten times as bad as what you normally eat. (I did find a couple references that said past 500mg the amount absorbed drops to less than 50%)
Oh noes! With all this healthy food eaten up to now, this will definitively increase obesity in US and kill over 10 billion people in US alone.
Why isn't Obama protecting citizens against this? Personally, this calls for his impeachment. Unless Republicans allowed it in which case everyone can go about their business - until Republican is re-elected then impeach him too...for allowing haggis to be sold. Oh noes!
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Oh noes! With all this healthy food eaten up to now, this will definitively increase obesity in US and kill over 10 billion people in US alone.
Why isn't Obama protecting citizens against this? Personally, this calls for his impeachment. Unless Republicans allowed it in which case everyone can go about their business - until Republican is re-elected then impeach him too...for allowing haggis to be sold. Oh noes!
Um, there is on;y 300 million people in the US. 😄
Originally posted by lil bitchinessIt was originally banned cause of the BSE scare but now I guess they realized that eating entrails stuffed with assorted filth isn't so risky. Now if every grocery store had a licensed fugu chef, that would be just awesome.
Oh noes! With all this healthy food eaten up to now, this will definitively increase obesity in US and kill over 10 billion people in US alone.
Why isn't Obama protecting citizens against this? Personally, this calls for his impeachment. Unless Republicans allowed it in which case everyone can go about their business - until Republican is re-elected then impeach him too...for allowing haggis to be sold. Oh noes!