Jump to content

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, TomBAvoider said:

but if you're a very healthy individual, perhaps it might even be destructive. 

Tomb,  Mike didn't say adding a little high-polyphenol EVOO  to a healthy person's  healthy diet "might even be destructive".   He claimed-- without providing  evidence-- that it would definitely be harmful  because it would "reduce flow mediated dilation."    The studies I posted  were intended to cast doubt on that specific claim

Quote

... more studies of things like EVOO in subjects who don't have CVD vulnerabilities

Sure, why not.  Still, many of the studies cited above (not to mention a plethora of other studies cited by Michael Rae et al earlier in this  thread)  did NOT deal exclusively with specific populations suffering  "CVD vulnerabilities and the like".

And even if they  did,  it would be highly unlikely that EVOO would  improve endothelial function in challenged populations,  yet harm endothelial function in healthy populations in the absence of compelling evidence for  the latter.

To be honest,  speculation with no basis  at all that EVOO somehow just "might even be destructive" to healthy individuals seems like really lazy thinking.  But perhaps  you have something specific in mind.

Besides,    you yourself have marked "CVD vulnerabilities", or at least claim to,   having felt compelled to take statins  because your LDL levels consistently remained "through the roof". So I wouldn't  think even those  studies you've summarily dismissed as inapplicable would  be completely irrelevant to your  situation.

Edited by Sibiriak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right. But I wasn't just thinking of myself wrt. EVOO - but as a principle, that substances should be evaluated for the populations they target. If somthing f.ex. helps CVD health, but you need no help in that department, taking it might even be destructive. The example of statins is exactly right - I take a statin, because it shows CVD benefits, but someone who has zero CVD vulnerabilities might be hurt by statins perhaps musculature - for me the tradeoff makes sense, for someone with no CVD vulnerabilities it would not. So too with everything else, including EVOO. That is why I advocated for more studies of EVOO in various populations. This is the same dilemma with some things like perhaps alcohol which f.ex. are supposed to show benefits for one thing - say CVD - but might be a danger for something else, say cancer. Someone who has CVD issues might think that's a fair trade off. But someone who has zero CVD vulnerabilities might want to avoid alcohol, particularly if they have cancer vulnerabilities.

Bottom line, when seeing that something "shows benefits in X" one should ask oneself "but do I need it if I don't suffer from X". 

Given that a lot of interventions are double-edge swords - good for one thing, bad for another - it's tempting to just look at the overall effect in "all cause mortality". But even that is questionable. Example: a raft of studies showed that taking a small dose (81mg) of aspirin cut down on all-cause mortality. But when they dug into the data, they noticed that the fall in all cause mortality was due mostly to a drastic cut in colon cancer, which overwhelmed a small increase in deaths due to gastric bleeding. You might think - well, that's still fine. Except digging even deeper, it showed that aspirin was effective in cutting colon cancer only in people with a specific genetic vulnerability - it did nothing for those who didn't have that SNP variant. Instead, in those who didn't, aspirin was a net negative in increasing deaths due to gastric bleeding, but it all got lost in the big cohort numbers that included many years saved in colon cancer deaths due to faulty SNP variants. But based on the big cohort the headlines for many years were "aspirin helps with all cause mortality" - and you'd think, well, I should be on it! And you might be very wrong to do it and expose yourself to gastric bleeding with no benefit of colon cancer prevention.

That's my issue with such studies in general (not just talking about EVOO). We are all individuals. I think at this point we've graduated in sophistication to the point where it's time for individualized medicine based on your unique profile. Such large epidemiological studies still have value in pointing to some general directions for possible benefits to subgroups of people under certain circumstances, and so it might very well be the case that f.ex. EVOO might be beneficial to large numbers of people. But make sure you are not someone who might not experience benefits from a given intervention - or indeed might experience harm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TomBAvoider said:

but it all got lost in the big cohort numbers

I think this likely applies to most pharmaceutical research in addition to aspirin and nutritional studies.  For example, the CVD benefits of statin lowered cholesterol are actually quite modest in totality with just a small percentage of patients in large cohorts experiencing reductions in events or severity often with little to no gain in all cause mortality.   There are undoubtedly factors which predispose to a wide range of responses from great to poor but there isn't much incentive for drug manufacturers to identify subsets of the cohort with little to no benefit as that would reduce the potential market of customers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/24/2020 at 10:49 AM, Saul said:

Pretty much my thoughts too.  Non-essential fats -- including monoglycerides such as OO -- IMO are empty calories.

  --  Saul

I am with Saul.

Wow, this is an old thread and I learned to incorporate olive leaf powder into my diet from it :)

IMO, olive oil might be good as a replacement for more harmful fats, such as animal or processed vegetable oils.  But otherwise, why do it, other than to indulge occasionally?

Why You Should Opt out of Olive Oil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/24/2020 at 7:29 PM, Mike41 said:

As far as the polyphenols, these are easily obtained from Whole Foods like nuts and seeds that while fatty have numerous polys and nutrients unlike EVOO.

This was addressed in previous threads. The peculiarity of EVOO is that it contains a specific variety of polyphenols, the Secoiridoids , which are not common in other foods.

Also, it has been debated that we may ingest secoiridoids in olive leaves powder and in other extracts, so including the benefits of EVOO and excluding the high calories. But then it's not so easy to calibrate the hormetic effects, since in EVOO we ingest just a few milligrams per serving. In addition, in EVOO we have a mixture of secoiridoids in determinate average proportions, plus there might be a sinergy with the specific fatty acids and other components.

There is also a neurological aspect to the use of EVOO, at least good, spicy EVOO (polys > 350 mg/kG), in that it enhances appetite and improves digestion, in moderate amounts (anecdotal, but undeniable aspect).

 

image.png.c7a39cda774a99627c99a0f851ada2d5.png

Edited by mccoy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Ron Put said:

I am with Saul.

Wow, this is an old thread and I learned to incorporate olive leaf powder into my diet from it 🙂

IMO, olive oil might be good as a replacement for more harmful fats, such as animal or processed vegetable oils.  But otherwise, why do it, other than to indulge occasionally?

Why You Should Opt out of Olive Oil

From the article cited by Ron. Totally contradicts Sibiriaks studies. IAC the stuff has zero nutrients so what the hell why chance it. Stick with what Michael Pollan says. Whole Foods, mostly plants and not too much. 

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17174226/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, mccoy said:

This was addressed in previous threads. The peculiarity of EVOO is that it contains a specific variety of polyphenols, the Secoiridoidswhich are not common in other foods.

Also, it has been debated that we may ingest secoiridoids in olive leaves powder and in other extracts, so including the benefits of EVOO and excluding the high calories. But then it's not so easy to calibrate the hormetic effects, since in EVOO we ingest just a few milligrams per serving. In addition, in EVOO we have a mixture of secoiridoids in determinate average proportions, plus there might be a sinergy with the specific fatty acids and other components.

There is also a neurological aspect to the use of EVOO, at least good, spicy EVOO (polys > 350 mg/kG), in that it enhances appetite and improves digestion, in moderate amounts (anecdotal, but undeniable aspect). ...

mccoy, I like good olive oil, but then I also like the signature Lady M cake :)  Occasionally, either is fine, but as a staple, probably not.

As to secoiridoids, I believe that there is more in olive leaf powder generally than in olive oil.

Also, take a look at this:


Secoiridoids delivered as olive leaf extract induce acute improvements in human vascular function and reduction of an inflammatory cytokine: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over trial

The leaves of the olive plant (Olea europaea) are rich in polyphenols, of which oleuropein and hydroxytyrosol (HT) are most characteristic. Such polyphenols have been demonstrated to favourably modify a variety of cardiovascular risk factors. The aim of the present intervention was to investigate the influence of olive leaf extract (OLE) on vascular function and inflammation in a postprandial setting and to link physiological outcomes with absorbed phenolics. A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over, acute intervention trial was conducted with eighteen healthy volunteers (nine male, nine female), who consumed either OLE (51 mg oleuropein; 10 mg HT), or a matched control (separated by a 4-week wash out) on a single occasion. Vascular function was measured by digital volume pulse (DVP), while blood collected at baseline, 1, 3 and 6 h was cultured for 24 h in the presence of lipopolysaccharide in order to investigate effects on cytokine production. Urine was analysed for phenolic metabolites by HPLC. DVP-stiffness index and ex vivo IL-8 production were significantly reduced (P< 0·05) after consumption of OLE compared to the control. These effects were accompanied by the excretion of several phenolic metabolites, namely HT and oleuropein derivatives, which peaked in urine after 8–24 h. The present study provides the first evidence that OLE positively modulates vascular function and IL-8 production in vivo, adding to growing evidence that olive phenolics could be beneficial for health.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Ron Put said:

mccoy, I like good olive oil, but then I also like the signature Lady M cake 🙂

Heck, Ron, that's like comparing a nice walk in the woods with balsamic essences with a stroll in Downton NY city, rush hour... Aside from the fanatic vegan doctors, I never heard anyone include good, hi-polyphenols EVOO into the junk foods class, but hey, there are people who still insist that the earth is flat out there!

5 hours ago, Ron Put said:

As to secoiridoids, I believe that there is more in olive leaf powder generally than in olive oil.

Aside from the fact that more is not necessarily better and we don't know the synergies, if you have an aversion to EVOO or to its inherent calories, of course leaf powder extract is a very viable alternative, Dean uses it and I'm not against it, it is used in herbal medicine, although its taste is told to be revolting. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, mccoy said:

Heck, Ron, that's like comparing a nice walk in the woods with balsamic essences with a stroll in Downton NY city, rush hour... Aside from the fanatic vegan doctors, I never heard anyone include good, hi-polyphenols EVOO into the junk foods class, but hey, there are people who still insist that the earth is flat out there!

Aside from the fact that more is not necessarily better and we don't know the synergies, if you have an aversion to EVOO or to its inherent calories, of course leaf powder extract is a very viable alternative, Dean uses it and I'm not against it, it is used in herbal medicine, although its taste is told to be revolting. 

Haha, this tells me that you have not tried Lady M's original cake :)

Olive oil is just oil. Yes, better for you than bacon fat, presumably, but still oil.  I know that every Italian or Greek has a 90 year old uncle who smokes and drinks with abandon, and swears that olive oil keeps him healthy, but don't kid yourself:


"A 1999 study measuring FMD after the ingestion of high-fat meals reported a “3-hour decline in FMD after subjects ingested a traditional meal of a hamburger and fries or cheesecake. Olive oil was found to have the same impairment to endothelial function as the rest of these high-fat meals.”

And a 2007 study showed a similar detrimental effect on endothelial function after the intake of olive, soybean and palm oils."

As to "more is not necessarily better," I have not read any studies which show a dosage-dependent benefit or harm, and the same applies to olive leaf powder.  So we don't know. 

But what we know is that "Olive oil was found to have the same impairment to endothelial function as the rest of these high-fat meals.”   Which should at least give one a pause before making olive oil an integral part of a "healthy" diet.

I'll stick to olive leaf powder, since it does seem to at least claim a benefit without the fat.  In fact, while I type, I am eating a mess of a meal which includes chickpeas, Colavita no-salt crushed tomatoes (from your neck of the woods), cauliflower, portobello mushroom and a bunch of spices, including olive leaf and Triphala (which makes the olive leaf powder taste like a Lady M cake :)

Edited by Ron Put

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/27/2020 at 5:21 AM, mccoy said:

Heck, Ron, that's like comparing a nice walk in the woods with balsamic essences with a stroll in Downton NY city, rush hour... Aside from the fanatic vegan doctors, I never heard anyone include good, hi-polyphenols EVOO into the junk foods class, but hey, there are people who still insist that the earth is flat out there

Well now you have McCoy and you can add me to that list! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"People living around the Mediterranean Sea are well-versed in the daily use of olive oil.
Residents of the United States? Not so much. They mostly choose to cook with butter, margarine and soybean or canola oil.
Now a new study of Americans shows that replacing a mere five grams of margarine, butter or mayonnaise with the same amount of olive oil was associated with up to a 7% lower risk of coronary artery disease.
To put that into context, five grams is about a half pat of butter or margarine and one teaspoon of mayonnaise or fatty dairy products.
Even better, people who used even higher olive oil intake -- more than seven grams, or 1/2 tablespoon a day -- had a 15% lower risk of any kind of cardiovascular disease and a 21% lower risk of coronary artery disease. It didn't appear to have an impact on stroke risk, however.
The preliminary research was presented Wednesday at the American Heart Association's Prevention, Lifestyle and Cardiometabolic Health Scientific Sessions 2020.

Replace, don't add

"Don't just add olive oil to your regular diet. Substitution is what's important here," said study author Dr. Frank Hu, who chairs the department of nutrition at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.
 
"The main thing is to replace unhealthy fats with olive oil and that can improve cholesterol, reduce inflammatory biomarkers and improve cardiovascular health," he said."

https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/05/health/olive-oil-heart-health-wellness/index.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, most of all those studies cite 'olive oil', which includes a wide number of possible products, whose names I don't even know in English. On the shelves of a regular supermarket in Italy you can find at least 5 or 6 different commercial denominations of olive oils.

But, even if we specify cold-pressed extra-virgin olive oil, that means a products which stays within certain boundaries of acidity, peroxides and so on. It says nothing about the secoiridoids, and the tocopherols, the protective compounds of EVOO. OK, oleic acid has an effect, but the processing of olives implies so many variables that the end product, even if legally an EVOO, can be hugely different. A while ago we commented in this forum an Italian article which analyzed the polyphenols in EVOOs found on teh shelves of Italian supermarkets. The results were very bad, most of those EVOOs were imported from North Africa or Spain, or were mixtures of EVOOs, the average quantity of polyphenols being relatively low.

My region has a long-time tradition of EVOO production, but traditionally the farmers did not like the pungent and spicy taste, so they used processes that minimized the content of polyphenols. I was able to taste a really good, hi-polyphenols EVOO only after some research, suggestions from a member of this forum and buying from another region. Even though I'm surrounded by olive groves around here...

 

The bottom line, 'Olive oil' means little. Those studies are not scientific at all. Before even thinking to discuss the results, the variety of Olive Oil must be specified, the product must be analyzed and the results of the analysis reported in tables in the article. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mccoy said:

most of all those studies cite 'olive oil', which includes a wide number of possible products

That's exactly right.  Take a look at the 2005 study from Colombia (with 10 participants )cherry-picked by Mike and Ron.  The full text includes some important details and observations.

 

Quote

Introduction

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) constitutes an important health problem in Colombia today because of its high incidence rate. Currently, CVD is the  principal cause of mortality among the adult population. Although the increased frequency of traditional cardiovascular risk factors (CRF) could explain the high rate of CVD in the population [1],the presence of inadequate sanitary conditions and inappropriate dietary habits may also act ast riggers of this phenomenon [2,3].

Currently, the global availability of cheap vegetable oils is increasing the fat consumption in this population and this in turn exerts an influence on nutritional habits [4]. About 32.5% of the daily energy intake in Colombia comes from vegetable oil consumption, and over 94% of this oil is used for frying.These factors converge in fatty hypercaloric meals, which are poor in fiber and micronutrients[5].

High-fat meals, which are strongly associated with traditional CRF such as obesity and dyslipidemia [6], have also been linked to the induction of oxidative stress [7] through different processes such as the production of superoxide and the subsequent deactivation of nitric oxide (NO) [8], theproduction of peroxynitrite, and insulin release

Those introductory comments make it clear that the researchers' main interest is on the effects of  cheap vegetable oil/ high fat meals.  Among the three "cheap vegetable oils" studied is "olive oil". 

Now,  I've spent a good deal of time in Central and South America, including Colombia, and I can personally attest to the fact that the common "olive oil" found in markets and used typically for cooking (as discussed in the article) are most certainly not high-quality EVOO, and very likely not even   VOO, but low quality, cheap ROO (refined olive oil).

Investigating the effects of cheap vegetable oils in high fat meals,  can't possibly  tell us anything about  the modest intake of EVOO in a healthy PB diet.  (This study itself is a cherry-picked outlier among a large number of studies of "olive oil" --many specifying  EVOO-- that have found positive effects on endothelial function.)

The authors of the 2005 Colombian study go on to say:
 

Quote

Vogel et al. [27] showed that the ingestion of fresh olive oil (but not canola oil or salmon fat) acutely impairs endothelial  function. Nevertheless, other studies conducted in healthy subjects reported that the ingestion of thermally oxidized safflower and olive oils do not acutely affect FMD [28].

More recently, West et al. [29] reported that a meal containing 50 g of either plant or marine derived fatty acids improves endothelial function.

These contradictory results could be due to differences in the methodological design of the studies, the age, gender,ethnic background and metabolic status of the subjects, or to differences in the biochemical composition of the oils used in the high-fat meal.

 

Bingo!   Studies that specify high-polyphenol EVOO almost invariably find it has positive effects on endothelial function;  studies that investigate unspecified "olive oil" have mixed results, most positive, a few negative.

It should be no surprise that polyphenol content would explain the different results ( still overwhelmingly positive, as the meta-analysis cited above of thirty studies enrolling 3106 participants found.)

Look at nuts.  Walnuts, for example.  Full of oil.   Yet proven to be healthy for endothelial function.  The mechanism?  Polyphenols,  as shown in  multiple studies.  

 

Different actions of olive oil phenolic compounds

image.png.5010a27f1acd6bb72de6bf9a47ab3fc1.png

 

 

Edited by Sibiriak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/27/2020 at 4:54 AM, Mike41 said:

Stick with what Michael Pollan says. Whole Foods, mostly plants and not too much. 

That's great advice!   So you're going to give up your beloved red wine, which you've touted in multiple posts?

Red wine is hardly a "whole food",  is it?  And yet we know that red wine (in moderation) is good for endothelial health, and we know that's  largely because of its polyphenol content.

Quote

Polyphenols from red wine increase endothelial NO production leading to endothelium-dependent relaxation in conditions such as hypertension, stroke or the metabolic syndrome. Numerous molecules contained in fruits and vegetables can activate sirtuins to increase lifespan and silence metabolic and physiological disturbances associated with endothelial NO dysfunction.

Although intracellular pathways involved in the endothelial effects of polyphenols are partially described, the molecular targets of these polyphenols are not completely elucidated. We review the novel aspects of polyphenols on several targets that could trigger the health benefits of polyphenols in conditions such as metabolic and cardiovascular disturbances.

We know that you can't just lump high-polyphenol  red wine in with all kinds of other alcoholic beverages.    And we know that a study about alcoholic  beverages in general,  or even about  "wine" in general,  is not going to tell us anything reliable about red wine in particular.

And yet you have no qualms about lumping high-polyphenol EVOO with other kinds of oils and other "olive oils".  

"All oils are bad, therefore EVOO is bad, even if better than lard."   That's not science.  That's dogma.

And back to "whole foods".    We shouldn't be totally dogmatic about that either, should we?.   It would be absurd to argue that we should eat  absolutely ONLY whole foods, period.  No coffee, no green tea, no red wine,  no cacao powder,  no EVOO?   Why not?   

"You should eat whole foods, therefore avoid EVOO"  is not an scientific, evidence-based argument.  It's dogma.   Nothing more.

Edited by Sibiriak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sibiriak said:

That's great advice!   So you're going to give up your beloved red wine, which you've touted in multiple posts?

Red wine is hardly a "whole food",  is it?  And yet we know that red wine (in moderation) is good for endothelial health, and we know that's  largely because of its polyphenol content.

We know that you can't just lump high-polyphenol  red wine in with all kinds of other alcoholic beverages.    And we know that a study about alcoholic  beverages in general,  or even about  "wine" in general,  is not going to tell us anything reliable about red wine in particular.

And yet you have no qualms about lumping high-polyphenol EVOO with other kinds of oils and other "olive oils".  

"All oils are bad, therefore EVOO is bad, even if better than lard."   That's not science.  That's dogma.

And back to "whole foods".    We shouldn't be totally dogmatic about that either, should we?.   It would be absurd to argue that we should eat  absolutely ONLY whole foods, period.  No coffee, no green tea, no red wine,  no cacao powder,  no EVOO?   Why not?   

"You should eat whole foods, therefore avoid EVOO"  is not an scientific, evidence-based argument.  It's dogma.   Nothing more.

as far as wine is concerned it has alcohol and that has been incontrovertibly linked to better heart health. The high polyphenol content makes it all the better choice. Moderation of course! Red wine even trumps statins in lowering cardio risk and mortality. Michael Rae I’m sure will agree with that!

seriously! U compare olive oil at 120 calories per TB to coffee and tea. No way!! They each have zero calories. Drink up! 

https://www.pritikin.com/your-health/healthy-living/eating-right/1033-the-truth-about-olive-oil.html
From the article:

“The human body has no essential need to consume monounsaturated fat,” states Pritikin Director of Nutrition Jeffrey Novick. “The only fat our body has an essential need to consume is omega 6 and omega 3 fat. People worry about getting enough omega 3s. Olive oil is a poor source of omega 3s.”

You’d have to drink seven ounces of olive oil to get sufficient omega 3s. Seven ounces of olive oil is 1,800 calories and 30 grams of saturated fat (yes, a percentage of the fat that makes up olive oil is saturated.)

Interestingly, the American Heart Association recently lowered the recommended intake of saturated fat to no more than 7% of total calories eaten each day.  Olive oil is 14% saturated fat. So if you’re using a lot of olive oil on your food, it’d be hard to have a diet that’s less than 14% saturated fat, which means your arteries are being subjected to doublethe sat-fat-limit that the AHA recommends

see above. The case against olive oil. A ten minute read

Edited by Mike41

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mike41 said:

far as wine is concerned it has alcohol and that has been incontrovertibly linked to better heart health. The high polyphenol content makes it all the better choice. Moderation of course! Red wine even trumps statins in lowering cardio risk and mortality. Michael Rae I’m sure will agree with that!

seriously! U compare olive oil at 120 calories per TB to coffee and tea. No way!! They each have zero calories. Drink up! 

https://www.pritikin.com/your-health/healthy-living/eating-right/1033-the-truth-about-olive-oil.html
From the article:

“The human body has no essential need to consume monounsaturated fat,” states Pritikin Director of Nutrition Jeffrey Novick. “The only fat our body has an essential need to consume is omega 6 and omega 3 fat. People worry about getting enough omega 3s. Olive oil is a poor source of omega 3s.”

You’d have to drink seven ounces of olive oil to get sufficient omega 3s. Seven ounces of olive oil is 1,800 calories and 30 grams of saturated fat (yes, a percentage of the fat that makes up olive oil is saturated.)

Interestingly, the American Heart Association recently lowered the recommended intake of saturated fat to no more than 7% of total calories eaten each day.  Olive oil is 14% saturated fat. So if you’re using a lot of olive oil on your food, it’d be hard to have a diet that’s less than 14% saturated fat, which means your arteries are being subjected to doublethe sat-fat-limit that the AHA recommends

see above. The case against olive oil. A ten minute read

Edited 2 hours ago by Mike4

I agree with Mike.

  --  Saul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Mike41 said:

[Greger] ...goes thumbs down wrt olive oil.

I also go thumbs down to "olive oil".

At least we agree on that point.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Mike41 said:

 

Btw,  your evidence is utter crap.  Did you even check the references in that article?

Quote

In a cohort study  [no link provided] designed to measure the effects of a Mediterranean diet as the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease, extra virgin olive oil (EVOO) was shown to be better than regular olive oil, but neither significantly reduced heart attack rates.

 Evidence of harm by  EVOO?  Are you kidding?     A "Mediterranean diet"?   Even you can see the problem  with that statement,  can't you?

BUT WORSE!

Quote

Other studies report similar findings, showing that EVOO damages endothelial function just like its ‘regular’ olive oil counterpart.

Did you click on that link?  It takes you not  to "studies",  but to one single irrelevant study... yes...you guessed it.... the same 2005 Colombian study  that investigated NOT EVOO,  but "cheap vegetable oils" in "high fat meals".  

So, that statement is an outright FALSEHOOD.   

That's the level of intellectual dishonesty/delusion  we find in the anti-EVOO dogmatist crowd.  Insane levels of confirmation bias to leading to literal blindness or blatant mendacity.

That 2005 Colombian study, and another 2000 study by Vogel,  constitute virtually the entire body of "evidence" that EVOO is in any way harmful. 

Those two studies are cited over and over and over in agenda-driven websites, and yet NEITHER tests EVOO and both deal  only with the acute  effects of very high fat meals on a single parameter.   Not a speck of evidence of long term  harm,   while  massive evidence of long term benefits is simply ignored.  That isn't science.  It's dogma

And the benefits of  EVOO are not just for endothelial function, not just for cardiovascular disease,  but also for cancer,  cognitive decline,  chronic inflammation,  and so on and so forth. .

 

Anticancer effects of olive oil polyphenols

image.png.3aaae2a6d52b220fa82786f1d97b769e.png

 

Mechanisms of anticancer activity of olive oil polyphenols

image.png.f62cb0b22be18b9089cc80f1f14581c8.png

 

 

Clinical trials-derived evidence regarding biophenol-rich olive oils’ benefits and mechanisms

image.png.38823ca91780f42c306b4394929ff96d.png

 

 

EVOO ≠ "Olive Oil"

Quote

" Refined olive oil is devoid of vitamins, polyphenols, phytosterols, and other low molecular natural ingredients [15]. Extra virgin olive oil by its low yield is more expensive than other types of olive oil, but it contains the highest level of polyphenols [16].

Due to the removal of free fatty acids, extra virgin olive oil has a delicate flavor, aroma, and light color [14,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24]. Another interesting feature affecting virgin olive oil properties is filtration. Unfiltered olive oil preserves additional polyphenols of higher polarity that are typically lost with small amounts of water that are removed upon filtration. "

image.png.05a75958908186ae73c0e6143d078d9c.png

 

Look,  I understand that you've had cardiovascular health issues  and are therefore naturally drawn to well-intentioned but narrow-minded folks like Esselstyn ,  Pritikin  et al.  That's fine.  I understand that's the source of your extreme bias.   No one's asking  you to consume polyphenol-rich EVOO,  let alone "olive oil".

Certainly no one's asking you  to eat  high-caloric, high fat meals drenched in cheap refined oils like those tested in the 2005 Colombian study you repeatedly cite.   

Of  course more high-quality human trials of EVOO are needed to further substantiate many  health benefit claims being made.  No dispute on that.

In any case,  carry on!   Enjoy life. 

 

Edited by Sibiriak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Sibiriak said:

ook,  I understand that you've had cardiovascular health issues  and are therefore naturally drawn to well-intentioned but narrow-minded folks like Esselstyn ,  Pritikin  et al.  That's fine.  I understand that's the source of your extreme bias.   No one's asking  you to consume polyphenol-rich EVOO,  let alone "olive oil".

Certainly no one's asking you  to eat  high-caloric, high fat meals drenched in cheap refined oils like those tested in the 2005 Colombian study you repeatedly cite.   

Of  course more high-quality human trials of EVOO are needed to further substantiate many  health benefit claims being made.  No dispute on that.

In any case,  carry on!   Enjoy life

Well yes, I had bypass surgery 3 years Ago 70% occlusion and when I was 3  I had rheumatic fever which damaged my aortic valve. It lasted 60 years and when it went I knew it. So they had to replace the valve and so They figured while they had me open they might as well repair the arteries. In My youth I was obese, had high blood pressure, ate a SAD diet and smoked heavILY. I didn’t start taking statins until I was in my mid thirties. I found out my cholesterol was 370 and I had familial hypercholsterolemia. My father, uncle and grandfather all died in their forties from heart attacks. Several cousins have had heart attacks, but are still around thanks to medical science. I have never had a heart attack and I attribute it to Statins, red wine and lots of high polyphenol plant foods and of course no smoking and lots of exercise from my mid thirties onward.  better late than never!

IAC, I HAVE to be careful. There are numerous high quality foods out there and I just don’t think committing to olive oil is a good strategy. 
 

Sibiriak 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Methinks with all the studies (many industry-sponsored, which is not necessarily a bad thing, but can sometimes skew the message) and articles, some are missing the point that EVOO, and to a lesser extent plain OO, can look good or bad, depending on what you compare them to. Again, if you compare people who eat large amounts of lard or margarine to people who consume EVOO, or even regular olive oil, instead, there is generally a benefit.  But all of these studies, including the one I posted above, are comparing substitution, not addition. Thus the note I had highlighted: 

On 6/9/2020 at 5:19 PM, Ron Put said:
"Don't just add olive oil to your regular diet. Substitution is what's important here," said study author Dr. Frank Hu, who chairs the department of nutrition at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.
 
"The main thing is to replace unhealthy fats with olive oil and that can improve cholesterol, reduce inflammatory biomarkers and improve cardiovascular health," he said."

I am not sure if this has been posted before:

The long-term ingestion of a diet high in extra virgin olive oil produces obesity and insulin resistance but protects endothelial function in rats: a preliminary study
 

Methods

To examine the chronic effects of monounsaturated (e.g., extra virgin olive oil (EVOO)) or saturated (e.g., margarine (M)) fatty acid-rich diets on the development of insulin resistance and endothelial dysfunction in rats, three groups of rats were fed control, high-EVOO or high-M diets for 20 weeks. Body weight, energy consumption, insulin resistance, lipid peroxidation and in vitro vascular reactivity with and without metformin were assessed during the study period.

Results

Both high-fat diets produced obesity and insulin resistance. EVOO-fed rats showed smaller increases in total cholesterol and arterial lipid peroxidation when compared with M-fed rats. Vascular reactivity to phenylephrine and sodium nitroprusside was not modified, but the vasodilating effect of carbachol was especially reduced in the M-fed rats compared with the EVOO-fed or control groups. Metformin addition to the incubation media decreased the vascular response to phenylephrine; decrease that was lower in rats fed with both high fat diets, and increased the carbachol and nitroprusside effects, but the metformin-enhanced response to carbachol was lower in the M group.

Conclusions

Our results suggest that feeding rats with high quantities of EVOO, despite producing obesity and insulin resistance, produces low levels of circulating cholesterol and arterial lipoperoxidation compared to M fed rats and shows a preserved endothelial response to carbachol, effect that is significantly enhanced by metformin only in rats fed with control and EVOO diets.

Edited by Ron Put

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Mike41 said:

olive oil  is Comparable to sugar! Processed poison.

 

Mike,  don't put a spoon of polyphenol rich, endothelial-protective EVOO on your salad.   It might give you a heart attack.

Seriously,  don't do it!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×