Did we get dietary saturated fats all wrong? The #HADLmodel provides a new understanding and an opportunity to get it right. THREAD👇👇👇
@simondankel @kariannesve

Increased dietary saturated fatty acids lead to increased cholesterol in lipoproteins, but we don’t know why. Enter the #HADLmodel, which explains changes in lipoprotein cholesterol as adaptive homeostatic adjustments that ensure optimal cell membrane fluidity and cell function.
We propose that circulating lipoproteins enable appropriate redistribution of cholesterol molecules between specific cells and tissues, to accomodate changes in dietary fatty acid supply, due to our omnivore nature and variable intake of fatty acids. #HADLmodel
Our #HADLmodel implies that circulating levels of LDL change for protective, not for pathological reasons; an SFA-induced raise in LDL cholesterol in healthy individuals is a normal response, while a lack of this needed response may reflect a deeper pathology in lipid handling.
Circulating lipoproteins may change for pathological reasons, when regulatory mechanisms become disrupted by pathogenic processes related e.g. to inflammatory processes. Diverging lipoprotein responses in healthy versus metabolically unhealthy individuals support this view.
Low grade inflammation can interfere with several fine-tuned signaling pathways necessary for homeostasis, including proper lipid handling. Altered circulating cholesterol levels may here reflect underlying pathogenic processes, unrelated to saturated fat intake. #HADLmodel
Dietary factors causing chronic low-grade inflammation, driven by diet-microbiome interactions, should receive more attention. The role of saturated fats in pathogenesis may be misconceived and greatly exaggerated. #HADLmodel
Is the #HADLmodel impossible? Is there more evidence to support the model? What else do we need to test in high-quality studies? Keep the discussion going - fair and factual. We need to improve the conversation on dietary fats. #publichealth #dietaryguidelines
@zoeharcombe @bigfatsurprise @DrAseemMalhotra @LDLSkeptic @ufferavnskov @malcolmken @LeventalLab @fedonlindberg @drmarkhyman @LorenCordain @chriskresser @ChrisMasterjohn @garytaubes @ProfTimNoakes @PeterAttiaMD @marionnestle @whsource @RobertLustigMD

More from Science

Ever since @JesseJenkins and colleagues work on a zero carbon US and this work by @DrChrisClack and colleagues on incorporating DER, I've been having the following set of thoughts about how to reduce the risk of failure in a US clean energy buildout. Bottom line is much more DER.


Typically, when we see zero-carbon electricity coupled to electrification of transport and buildings, implicitly standing behind that is totally unprecedented buildout of the transmission system. The team from Princeton's modeling work has this in spades for example.

But that, more even than the new generation required, runs straight into a thicket/woodchipper of environmental laws and public objections that currently (and for the last 50y) limit new transmission in the US. We built most transmission prior to the advent of environmental law.

So what these studies are really (implicitly) saying is that NEPA, CEQA, ESA, §404 permitting, eminent domain law, etc, - and the public and democratic objections that drive them - will have to change in order to accommodate the necessary transmission buildout.

I live in a D supermajority state that has, for at least the last 20 years, been in the midst of a housing crisis that creates punishing impacts for people's lives in the here-and-now and is arguably mostly caused by the same issues that create the transmission bottlenecks.

You May Also Like