Tracy,

Anybody can use stats to push a barrow. The evidence is not that "total fat" is associated with Coronary Heart Disease but that specific fat types are associated with CHD. That's why institutions like the FDA were established to undertake the expensive reviews necessary to wade through huge conflicting data and come up with public benefit conclusions. They've been convinced since 1993 that there is an association between some fat types and CHD and have spent over 100 million testing and confirming that position. I'm sure the electronics engineer at your website is a smart fellow, and he certainly may be correct in many points since the FDA cannot possibly respond to new evidence as quickly as he can, but over eight years of rigorous investigation the FDA continues to strengthen its position and require additions of label warnings relating to Transfats. Seen as a whole, the evidence supports this stance.

I do agree with your link on one point. Food did use to be something we ate and enjoyed. Now there is an obsession with food content and safety that seems to make eating a hazardous activity; meanwhile everybody can quote old Uncle Jack who smoked like a chimney, drank 2 bottles of bourbon a day, ate fried food every day and was still able to hold his end in a brawl into his 80's.

My approach: some things are obvious. The fat lining a coronary blood vessel is visible at autopsy. Red wine reduces it. A raised blood HDL and reduced blood LDL have an association with less of it. Olive oil has an association with that. So we drink red wine like a french family, with meals and in moderation, and cook with olive oil. While we are not fanatical we try to avoid saturated fats, though there are always french fries and crisps at parties.

Understanding of disease grows all the time. One of my friends is a breast physician; she is very sure that consumption of alcohol (presumably those sweetened spirit-based concoctions) contributes to breast cancer in western women. I suppose she could create a website and dredge up research that seems to support her cause, but instead she initiates and participates in international research to test her hypothesis. That, in my opinion, is one of the hallmarks of a credible expert. Whether she ends up wrong or right, she remains credible IMHO.

Regards

j.R