Mark Bittman just published a column hailing that saturated fat study that I’ve been criticizing:
Butter Is Back, New York Times, 25 March 2014
“Butter is back, and when you’re looking for a few chunks of pork for a stew, you can resume searching for the best pieces — the ones with the most fat.
The days of skinless chicken breasts and tubs of I Can’t Believe It’s Not Butter may finally be drawing to a close.
You can go back to eating butter, if you haven’t already.”
For crying out loud.
I feel gutted. He has such reach.
The study accomplished its purpose by selling the public on saturated fat. No matter how bad the study or no matter how much it is condemned by educated professionals the public perception is now tainted. People don’t read studies they get their info from poorly written and poorly researched articles in the popular press. Bittman is just another hack for the masses.
You said that well. My thoughts exactly.
The comments attached to his article and, from what I can tell, the comments all over Twitter are absolutely giddy with this study, and with his “Butter Is Back” message. It feels like a done deal. I’m working on a post right now about how dietary fat speeds muscle loss in women as they age. A brand new study! I mean, studies on the risks of consuming saturated fat … butter, pork fat … they just keep on coming.
Hawken, you and Dr. Katz drew similar conclusions:
“But speaking of hearts, his conclusion that butter has now been exonerated of all harms formerly alleged is, in a word, wrong.”
And Woody Allen’s movie “Sleeper” is now considered a documentary. American media: Dumb news for dumb people.
Well, I finally got this reference, with a little help. So, we’ll all wake up one day and find McDonalds is good for us!
Speaking of which … I saw a tweet from God (@TheTweetOfGod) the other day. CNN has really lost its way.
Pingback: Dietary Fat Contributes To Inflammation | Fanatic Cook