Posted on 02/21/2022 9:28:05 AM PST by ConservativeMind
A sufficient intake of vegetables is important for maintaining a balanced diet and avoiding a wide range of diseases. But might a diet rich in vegetables also lower the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD)? Unfortunately, researchers found no evidence for this.
Now, new results from a powerful, large-scale new study shows that a higher consumption of cooked or uncooked vegetables is unlikely to affect the risk of CVD. They also explain how confounding factors might have explained previous spurious, positive findings.
The researchers used the responses at enrollment of 399,586 participants (of whom 4.5% went on to develop CVD) to questions about their daily average consumption of uncooked versus cooked vegetables. They analyzed the association with the risk of hospitalization or death from myocardial infarction, stroke, or major CVD. They controlled for a wide range of possible confounding factors, including socio-economic status, physical activity, and other dietary factors.
The mean daily intake of total vegetables, raw vegetables, and cooked vegetables was 5.0, 2.3, and 2.8 heaped tablespoons per person. The risk of dying from CVD was about 15% lower for those with the highest intake compared to the lowest vegetable intake. However, this apparent effect was substantially weakened when possible socio-economic, nutritional, and health- and medicine-related confounding factors were taken into account. Controlling for these factors reduced the predictive statistical power of vegetable intake on CVD by over 80%, suggesting that more precise measures of these confounders would have completed explained any residual effect of vegetable intake.
Feng et al. suggest that future studies should further assess whether particular types of vegetables or their method of preparation might affect the risk of CVD.
(Excerpt) Read more at medicalxpress.com ...
It's easy and yummo.
The biggest benefit to me is that after cooking supper, I don't have to clean a single pot, pan or dish. Wifey insists. We call it IC-YC...I Cook-You Clean.
Along with the definition of vegetables; does that include potatoes and other starchy items as compared to greens?
that is correct...
veggies are the pre-cursors to bacon, pork chops, ham, etc.
pigs are food processors
then there are cattle, poultry and other critters
I eat veggies. Twice a year whether I need them or not. Haven’t seen any signs it is harming me. The stuff I eat eats the veggies for me.
The only way I can stomach that broccoli and cauliflower stuff is in those capsules — tasteless.
Any and all kale should be disposed of by tossing it into
incinerators by the bushel-full. Same with lima beans.
But all broccoli, romaine, carrots, sweet red bell peppers -
should be sent to me. I will dispose of them with the aid of Caesar dressing.
Or Bleu cheese, depending on the day of the week.
Veggies are what food eats.😁
Hi.
I like and eat fruits and vegetables.
But I can also harvest my protein.
5.56mm
“Study finds...” is just another way of saying we’re taking a scientific wild ass guess. Studies have found that coffee or eggs or whatever will kill you. Studies have also found that coffee or eggs or whatever will make you live longer.
Back to chicken wings and beer."
I agree, why would I want wings and beer when I could be eating fresh organic vegetables and drink artesian water?
The government wants us on a high sugar, high carb, processed food diet. That’s what they have been pushing for decades. Look at stats on obesity, diabetes, and other health problems over the past 50 years or so.
Why would anyone listen to the government or their “think tank” white papers on an proper diet for a healthy body?
My mother is almost 90 and her mom lived to be 96. Their advice has always been a balanced diet with low sugar, low carb, meat proteins, and plenty of fresh veggies and fruits. And, stay away from the fast foods. I’ll stick with that.
A couple of years ago, the same news site, within six months, posted two articles. One was of the harm of eating eggs, the next was about how eggs were good for you and should be a part of your daily diet. Both articles were based on “studies”. Which one to believe, which one to believe?
It’s easy, just follow the science. (caution: whiplash possible)
Here are a few that are low in omega-6:
Coconut oil.
Butter oil.
Olive oil.
Fish oil.
- - - - - - -
Also tallow, lard, high oleic sunflower oil, high oleic peanut oil.
Fish oil is not a cooking oil. I doubt consuming fish oil is better than consuming fish.
Thank you for the constructive input.
What’s your view of high oleic safflower oil?
The ultimate study conclusion: more studies needed!
What’s your view of high oleic safflower oil?
- - - - - - -
I think any high oleic oil has less omega 6 fats than normal soybean and canada oil. Reducing omega 6 fats is beneficial so the high oleic oils are better.
If we consume high oleic oils, we don’t consume a lot of omega 6 fats. I think it might be possible to have excess omega 9 fats in one’s body. If that is so, limiting oils high in oleic acid and cooking the rest of the foods with coconut oil might be beneficial.
Seriously it is probably better for you than most of what is touted as “health food”. The preservatives in bacon aren’t great for you, but the fat and protein is healthier than the grains and low-fat, carb heavy stuff the market under the “heart healthy” label.
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.