| 
		
		
		 The fat fight: Study fuels row over UK, 
		U.S. diet guidelines 
   Send a link to a friend 
		[February 10, 2015] 
		By Kate Kelland 
		Nutrition and health specialists criticised 
		a study on Monday which argued that dietary fat advice given in the 
		United States and Britain was based on flimsy evidence and should not 
		have been introduced. | 
        
            | 
			
			 The study, published in the Open Heart journal, said national advice 
			on fat consumption issued to millions of Britons and Americans in 
			1977 and 1983 with the aim of reducing heart disease "lacked any 
			solid trial evidence to back it up". 
 But in the latest chapter of a long-running row about whether fat is 
			the true culprit in the global obesity epidemic, independent experts 
			said the research was flawed and failed "to take into account the 
			totality of the evidence".
 
 Both the British and U.S. dietary guidelines recommended reducing 
			overall dietary fat consumption to 30 percent of total intake and 
			limiting saturated fat to around 10 percent -- advice that has 
			remained broadly the same since the 1970s and 1980s.
 
			 
			Zoe Harcombe of the University of the West of Scotland and James 
			DiNicolantonio of the Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute, who 
			co-led Monday's study in the Open Heart journal, said their research 
			-- a meta-analysis of the randomised controlled trials available at 
			the time -- suggested the guidelines were inconsistent with the 
			evidence.
 "The available [trials] did not support the introduction of dietary 
			fat recommendations in order to reduce [coronary heart disease] risk 
			or related mortality," they wrote, adding that it seemed 
			"incomprehensible" that dietary advice was given to millions of 
			Americans and Britons given the "contrary results".
 
 Health experts looking for clues to persistently rising obesity 
			rates around the world have recently begun to question whether fat 
			is the main, or only, villain, and many are turning a spotlight on 
			sugars and other carbohydrates instead.
 
 [to top of second column]
 | 
 
			Yet several independent experts asked to review Harcombe's and 
			DiNicolantonio's work criticised the study's approach and advised 
			extreme caution in concluding the guidelines were wrong.
 "The claim that guidelines on dietary fat introduced in the 1970s 
			and 80s were not based on good scientific evidence is misguided and 
			potentially dangerous," said Christine Williams, a professor of 
			human nutrition at Britain's Reading University.
 
 Nita Forouhi, a nutritional epidemiology specialist and public 
			health consultant at Britain's Cambridge University said the Open 
			Heart study's attempt to apply a "retroscope" to the trial-based 
			evidence of the time was "unhelpful for several reasons, including 
			methodological limitations and interpretation".
 
 "As such, the current dietary guidelines on fat intake should not be 
			influenced by this study," she said.
 
 (Editing by Robin Pomeroy)
 
			[© 2015 Thomson Reuters. All rights 
				reserved.] Copyright 2015 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, 
			broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. 
			
			 |