Huge Diet Study: More Butter, More Problems

Survival benefit was tied to plant-based oils, including affordable alternatives to olive oil

A large-scale longevity study suggested that more butter is bad, more plant oils are good -- and substituting plant-based oils for butter translated into better survival over several decades.

After 33 years of follow-up, deaths were disproportionately more likely among people in the highest quartile versus the lowest quartile of butter consumption (HR 1.15, 95% CI 1.08-1.22). The opposite was true for the relationship between mortality and plant-based oil consumption as the latter appeared more protective (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.79-0.90), even when olive oil was excluded from this category (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.86-0.98).

Substituting 10 g of butter intake per day with an equivalent amount of total plant-based oils was associated with a survival benefit (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.79-0.86). This applied to prevention of cancer deaths in particular (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.76-0.90), whereas cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality was not affected by the switch (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.86-1.03), reported Dong Wang, MD, ScD, of Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School in Boston, and colleagues in JAMA Internal Medicineopens in a new tab or window.

"The present findings are closely aligned with the dietary recommendations of the American Heart Associationopens in a new tab or window and the Dietary Guidelines for Americansopens in a new tab or window, which advocate for reducing saturated fat intake and replacing it with polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fats to lower the risk of chronic disease," Wang's group wrote. "The present results indicate that replacing three small pats of butter (approximately 15 g) with 1 tablespoon of plant-based oil (approximately 15 g) in the daily diet could contribute to lowering the risk of premature mortality."

There has been a longstanding debate about the health effects of butter. Studies have traditionally linked it to adverse health outcomes, but the evidence has been inconsistent and separate from the plant oil literatureopens in a new tab or window. In the present study, the investigators made it a point to explicitly compare butter with alternative oils.

Yong-Moon Mark Park, MD, PhD, and Yikyung Park, ScD, both of the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences in Little Rock, emphasized that not all plant-based oils are equally healthy based on the latest results.

In the study, the risk of mortality was significantly reduced with every 5-g increase in daily intake of canola oil (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.78-0.92), soybean oil (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.91-0.96), and olive oil (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.91-0.94).

"While olive, soybean, and canola oils are associated with reduced mortality risk, this was not observed for corn and safflower oils," Park and Park wrote in an invited commentaryopens in a new tab or window. "However, this association may not be robust due to the relatively low consumption of these oils compared with other plant oils in the study population. Additionally, there are other plant-based oils, such as palm oil and coconut oil, that were not examined in the study but have been linked to adverse health outcomes in other studies," the duo cautioned.

Park and Park nevertheless cited various mechanisms that could explain the study's general findings favoring plant-based oils. "Butter's high saturated fat and cholesterol content, alongside its lower levels of beneficial nutrients, make it less suitable for long-term health. In contrast, plant-based oils, enriched with unsaturated fatty acids (including omega-3 fatty acids) and bioactive compounds, provide antioxidative and anti-inflammatory properties that protect against chronic diseases and premature mortality."

"Therefore, substituting these oils for butter may promote longevity and reduce cancer-related deaths. Dietary guidelines should emphasize the use of plant-based oils while minimizing saturated fats, like butter, for optimal health outcomes," the editorialists concluded.

For their prospective population-based cohort study, Wang's group included over 220,000 adults who were free of cancer, CVD, diabetes, or neurodegenerative disease at baseline from three large datasets: the Nurses' Health Study (all women, mean age of 56.1), the Nurses' Health Study II (all women, mean age of 36.1), and the Health Professionals Follow-up Study (all men, mean age of 56.3).

Eating habits logged in these studies were linked to U.S. mortality data taken from nationwide records and assigned causes based on death certificates and medical records. There were 50,932 deaths identified for the study, including 12,241 from cancer and 11,240 from CVD.

Study participants had answered semiquantitative food frequency questionnaires every 4 years, reporting the frequency and quantity of specific foods, types of fats and oils, and the brands or types of oils used for cooking and added at the table over the preceding year.

People in the highest quartile by butter intake self-reported eating just under three small pats of butter per day. Those in the highest quartile by plant oil consumption ate about 1.5 tablespoons of it daily.

The study's main findings were generally supported when survival analyses were conducted considering butter and oil consumption in incremental increases instead of quartiles.

Total mortality correlated with every 5-g daily consumption of butter added to food or bread (HR 1.04 per 5-g/d increase, 95% CI 1.02-1.05). Every 10 g of more butter per day was associated with higher cancer mortality (HR 1.12, 95% CI 1.04-1.20), while every 10-g daily increase in plant-based oils intake was associated with significantly less cancer mortality (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.85-0.94) and less CVD mortality (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.89-0.99).

The 10-g incremental butter showed no association with CVD mortality. There was no total mortality signal from incremental increases in butter from baking or frying, either (HR 1.00 per 5-g/d increase, 95% CI 0.94-1.07).

Wang and colleagues acknowledged the smaller quantities of butter used for baking and frying may have limited their ability to detect the health effects of this practice.

They urged further investigation of the molecular mechanisms underlying the metabolic effects of butter and plant-based oils.

"One notable limitation is a lack of consideration for the role of individual socioeconomic status (SES). Although the cohort's homogeneous SES may reduce SES-related confounding, variations within this study population could still affect dietary choices and health outcomes. Even among individuals with higher SES, food costs may influence dietary choices and contribute to health disparities," noted Park and Park.

"In this context, it is important to consider the affordability of various healthy fats," the editorialists stressed. "This suggests that more affordable options, such as canola and soybean oils, may serve as accessible alternatives to olive oil, which tends to be more expensive." Nicole Lou is a reporter for MedPage Today, where she covers cardiology news and other developments in medicine. Follow

At this stage in my life, and who knows how,long I have, I will eat and drink everything I want to. I find more pleasure in those little things than being miserable in the gym and living on salad. I will die. I have made my peace with that. In the meantime, I plan to live and enjoy each day God gives me.

The problem is, the “big food” and “big oil” lobby runs or drives the studies, going back decades. Ancel Keys was an early proponent of seed oils and the “Lipid Hypothesis” demonizing animal fats, eggs, meat etc.

In hindsight it is also curious to say the least that when the first bout of high monetary inflation hit the USA and butter, dairy, and meat became unaffordable all the experts said the Food Pyramid was the healthy choice. Margarine was said to be healthier, Eggs and cholesterol were contributing to heart disease.

Precisely the opposite to what was notable with what I would consider to be unbiased studies. As always, we can’t trust our authorities any longer. It is a fact that heart disease was virtually unknown until seed oils replaced animal fats, largely a wartime expedient and again the result of monetary lunacy. Wars always destroy sound economics.

I doubt it. I haven’t bought margarine in over 40 years. Over the last several months, I’ve been using peanut oil for frying. We love fried foods. It’s twice the price of vegetable oil, and it stings every time I buy butter or oil, but both are healthier than the alternatives, IMHO.

This message brought to you by seed oil manufacturers.

I tried it myself, dropped seed oils in favor of butter and feel 20 years younger. Turned the food pyramid upside down. Went from a visit to the doctor every couple of months to a visit every few years.

I found that I can’t digest the hydrogenated stuff very well. Never could, but it really becomes apparent as we get older. Just tears up my gut and downstream. Inflammation is what they call it.

Wasn’t there a study not to
long ago about touting the use
of butter vs any seed oils?
PS...do olives not have seeds?
My grandparents lived well
into their 90’s. I doubt
margerine or olive oil ever
crossed their lips.
They made their own butter and
used it exclusively.
I also remember reading a study
claiming margerine was one
molecule shy of being a plastic.
These studies are like a tennis
match.
I’m going on 70. Blood tests are
A-ok, with anticipation for some
hot buttered biscuits w/my bacon
& eggs for breakfast.

https://www.westonaprice.org/oiling-of-america-in-new-york/#gsc.tab=0

It looks more like the large industrial food product manufacturers have “regulatory capture”, and drive the “science”. You get the studies you pay for, and they paid for “seed oils are healthy”.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.