I normally prefer to just read forums rather than participate, but I'll make an exception this time.

There are very few unbiased opinions out there. Someday I hope that there is unbiased research that can accurately determine the impact of things like coconut oil and various supplements... but then I hope for world peace too... Research costs money and generally the people paying for the research like to have the results go their way... it sucks, but that is how the world seems to work right now.

Right now we're stuck with companies trying to sell stuff and organizations that may or may not have an unbiased opinion. Granted, organizations like the American Heart Association and the Food and Drug Administration sound big and important... but how unbiased are they really? If you look at the American Heart Assoication's annual report (which is pretty big), you'll see under the list of donations over $1 million a bunch of drug companies who would probably hate to find out natural products are far better than their drugs. Now that doesn't automatically make them biased, but it should make you consider questioning their opinions a little bit. The FDA considers anything that is advertised as having some effect a drug, which is I'm sure why Dr. Mercola got those letters (not because they discovered his claims were completely false)... Technically if I sold water and said it prevents dehydration, makes your digestive system work properly, and cures thirst... the FDA probably could send me a letter too... Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying his claims are true... I'm just saying that just because the FDA isn't happy, doesn't mean they can't possibly be true...

That being said, I've got no proof that coconut oil is good or bad for you. All I can do is read things from both sides, listen to people that have actually used the stuff (like Eyecandy and some others who have posted here), and make your own decision. Personally, I'm thinking about giving it a try myself...

But who knows for sure... maybe the answer is different for everyone... For all I know, some ethnic groups metabolize coconut oil differently... Maybe in some cases it could improve skin health, in some cases it could just improve the outward appearance, and other cases it might not do anything at all...

Anyway, good luck vaca... I hope you find the answer that is right for you...

Not to be redundant, but...

I don't think ignoring a source, be it the FDA, the AMA or your friendly neighborhood herbalist, is ever a good idea. You don't have to agree with everyone (indeed, you can't), but getting all the sides is important. I think it's interesting that people who rely on alternative sources are as likely as people who rely on mainstream sources to be "my way is the only way." While I had hoped, upon moving to a more "alternative/boho" area that people would be more open-minded, I found that neither group is better than the other when it comes to open-mindedness. (I still love my boho neighborhood, I just have learned that people are people everywhere.)

Also, I think it is important to note that causal relationships are more complex than "my grandfather ate x,y and z his whole life and he died at age q." The human body is incredibly complex and nutrition is one of the most difficult things to study and quantify. Although group studies aren't perfect, a controlled study with 1. a significant number of participants 2. controlled variables is more reliable than a theory.

I wish the AMA, CDC, Johns Hopkins, the Mayo Clinic, etc. would study more herbal and alternative nutrition sources. It's incredibly expensive to do an adequate study on nutrition and no alternate institutions have the funds to do it. And I do believe that in general, researchers are scientists first who won't skew results for the funders. How unfortunate that we have to rely so often on private (potentially biased) money for research? We could all benefit from solid evidence on more alternative food sources...

As to vaccinations... the risks of the vaccination, if any, are generally significantly lower than the risks associated with contracting the disease the vaccination is for. The chicken pox vaccination I'll probably skip for my kids, but MMR, polio, menengitis (sp?), no way. Especially because as greater numbers of people skip the vaccination, the higher the risk for the entire community that the disease comes back and kills children.

Adnama wonders why respected medical and health institutions don't study more alternative methods.
The National Institutes of Health does in fact have a division specifically created to look at alternative and complementary medicine. More here. And good research is being turned out all the time on alternative methods and supplements, including those with nutritional implications (vitamin E being just one example).

Money is necessary to support all of the people and technology that are necessary for research, and there's a limited amount of it out there. So most of it is used to investigate the most promising and logically based drugs and therapies.

As I've said before, I would like to see the multibillion dollar supplement industry and other trade groups that tout unproven remedies devote a reasonable percentage of their profits to research. I would not automatically dismiss such research on the grounds that it has to be biased because of the source of funding, nor should mainstream drug or nutrition research be discounted because of a funding source. We do need to be aware of the background and quality of research, and in particular that startling and unprecedented results need to be confirmed by others before they are generally accepted.

I am unable to download the linked American Heart Association report (it seems to take forever on my computer) to see its financial statement and list of individual and corporate donors. Since the primary subject of this discussion was nutritional and health aspects of coconut oil and alternatives, I'm not sure of the relevance of any pharmaceutical company contributions.

It's a very common thing in this forum for people to seek out advice on a particular supplement or therapy "from someone who's actually tried it". It's hard to convince them that positive (or negative) testimonials are a poor substitute for careful study, preferably in a controlled research setting.
Of the testimonials that appear in this forum (assuming they come from actual users and not sellers making them up), many are from people who genuinely think a product improved their life. Coincidence (for example, a condition like arthritis or MS that cyclically gets better or worse) accounts for many of these reports, as does placebo effect. Other recommendations that we've seen in the forum come from people involved in multilevel marketing enterprises, who may also strongly believe in the products being sold but are under other pressures as well. From the National Council Against Health Fraud:

"Multilevel companies that sell nutritional products systematically turn their customers into salespeople. 'When you share our products,' says the sales manual of one such company, 'you're not just selling. You're passing on news about products you believe in to people you care about. Make a list of people you know; you'll be surprised how long it will be. This list is your first source of potential customers.' A sales leader...

Interesting, Eric.

Another thing I've noticed is a tendency for people to want to say "This food is bad" or "This food is good." From what I've read, too much or too little of any one thing can kill you. Even vitamins and water. So it's probably not a matter of whether something is "good" or "bad," but HOW MUCH. How much coconut oil is benign, how much is beneficial, how much is harmful? Plus what type, what process, incorporating it into what kind of diet, etc. etc....

Sorry Eric,
I could not resist to ask you about the National Council Against Health Fraud. I see that the webmaster is Stephen Barrett, MD. He also operates Quackwatch.com.
I remember him telling how to know if a site was a "Quack." In one of his points he said you could tell it was a quack if it recommended using herbs.

Currrently his site says this,

"The best way to avoid being quacked is to reject quackery's promoters. Each item listed below signifies that a Web site is not a trustworthy information source. The hyperlinks will take you to articles on Quackwatch that explain why.

General Characteristics

Any site used to market herbs or dietary supplements. Although some are useful, I do not believe it is possible to sell them profitably without deception, which typically includes: (a) lack of full disclosure of relevant facts, (b) promotion or sale of products that lack a rational use, and/or (c) failure to provide advice indicating who should not use the products. During more than 30 years of watching the health marketplace, I have never encountered a seller who did not do at least one of these three things."

Now he is correct, of course. Don't you agree? I mean if he says it, it must be true.

But what is the scientific basis for this assertion? He does not quote any peer-reviewed journals. So how can someone so tied to evidence as you are send us to read what he wrote? Maybe just a slip?

As I confessed in a previous place on this web, I am a nefarious snake oil salesman. But I find it hard to believe that I am guilty of these three things.

1) Lack of full disclosure
2) Irrational recommendations
3) Lack of appropriate warnings

But, if Dr. Barrett says it, it must be true. After all, you would consult a psychiatrist about your herbs, would you not?

Richard

I find it hard to believe you're serious.

1) Lack of full disclosure.
You posted repeatedly in this forum on the supposed wonders of paw paw extracts over a period of months without disclosing that you run a supplement company and have invested in a firm that sells paw paw product(s). It took repeated questions asking you to clarify your status before you made this revelation. To this point you haven't disclosed whether your company sells or has plans to sell paw paw-related drugs. You run a website devoted to proclaiming the medicinal wonders of paw paw. Nowhere on this website do you reveal your commercial connections, which would let visitors know of a potential conflict of interest.

2) Irrational recommendations and 3) Lack of appropriate warnings.
You have been enthusiastically promoting paw paw extracts for anti-cancer therapy in the absence of any published human trials demonstrating that they are effective and sufficiently safe to use. Even though you're quoted elsewhere as saying that you're not a doctor and not qualified to give medical advice, you have stated here that paw paw is fine to take with other chemotherapy agents. This despite lack of evidence demonstrating that paw paw drugs won't interfere with these drugs.

Dr. Barrett's cautions appear to be right on the money.

If you want to start a discussion on the trustworthiness of supplement sellers, or your feelings about quackwatch.org, I suggest you begin a separate thread so this one can continue to be for the discussion of coconut oil.

Eric
Why dont you just answer Richards questions instead of attacking him personaly as a smoke screen for your lack of answers to what he just posted about a site you constantly recommend?

And since when does he have to answer to you about what you think is appropriate for this forum.
Maybe if you didnt act like the forum conscience,he would have opened up about who he was earlier.

You are also welcome to start a discussion on the subject of detecting health fraud.

Other possible discussions might center on the ethics of disclosure in publishing research and promoting health products.

Another useful one would be on whether legitimate debate should involve questioning claims and tactics, as opposed to posters' hurling personal insults in order to create a distraction and conceal the absence of ideas.

Did you have anything to add about coconut oil?

Eric,
Just answer his questions.
The absence of any proves Richard is right in what he says.

"as opposed to posters' hurling personal insults in order to create a distraction and conceal the absence of ideas"

Another smoke screen for having no answers.
This topic and your replies to people reveals your attitude to people and proves my claims,so its not without reason I say them.

Also I have tried Richards snake oil and its as good as coconut oil for the skin !

As Kevin is eager to hear answers to all of Richard's questions, I've started another thread that addresses them.

tisk tisk tisk
someone here really has no life of his own, he must check this forum on a daily basis to see if anyone disagrees with him and if they do, he will trash everything anyone says to boost his fragile ego. Truly ignorant of the truth.
And if any posting here has hurt his FEELINGS, he will go report them to GW and the post gets deleted. YES FREE SPEECH MY ***
Its so funny to see this guy get completely worked up over other people's opinions.

Eric's other thread actually has some interesting links (thanks)... In fact, the Berkley Wellness Letter had some interesting things to say in its featured article for May 2005 called The End of the Line for Trans Fats. In case anyone has trouble finding it, here's the section that applies to this thread:

Tropical oilsÂthe comeback kids

Tropical oilsÂthe very oils that hydrogenated oils replaced two decades ago because of health concernsÂare re-emerging as well, because they have the same desirable qualities as hydrogenated fats, and theyÂre cheap. These oils, including palm (sometimes called palm fruit oil, from the pulp of the fruit), palm kernel (from the fruitÂs nut), and coconut, were shunned starting in the late 1980s because they are high in saturated fat. But they may not all be as bad as once thought. Palm oil contains a significant proportion of heart-healthy monounsaturated fats, vitamin E, and other antioxidant compounds, and research now indicates that it behaves like an unsaturated fat in the bodyÂthat is, it may help reduce blood cholesterol levels. In other studies palm oilÂs main fatty acid, palmitic acid, has had no effect on blood cholesterol. Coconut oil may also have a neutral cholesterol effect in most people, and its main fatty acid, lauric acid, may even have some health benefits. This doesnÂt mean these oils get a green light. Their health effects are still debated, and how theyÂre processed may make a difference.

Even less is known about palm kernel oil, which is more saturated than palm oil and contains little monounsaturated fat. Moreover, this oil is often further processed ("fractionated") to remove the liquid portion, leaving behind even more saturated solids. You may have noticed "fractionated palm kernel oil" as an ingredient in several energy bars, where it makes the coatings less likely to melt, and in other reformulated products. It isnÂt known if this processed oil is any better for you than hydrogenated fats.

It looks like there was another article on the subject in their January 2003 letter too. I'm surprised you only brought up the information from the American Heart Association, when you knew about these other sites. BTW, here are the list of sponsors that I mentioned only because you have to wonder (well at least I wonder) how unbiased their research is when they are getting more than a million dollars from a lot of drug companies. Here's the full list of $1,000,000 and above donors:

AHC Food Company
Archer Daniels Midland Company
AstraZeneca
Averitt Express Chariies
Bayer Corporation
BlueCross of California
Bristol-Myers Squibb Company
Henrietta B. And FrederickH. Bugher Foundation
Clarkson Potter/Publishers, a division of Random House, Inc.
Federated Department Stores (Macy's)
Genentech, Inc.
GlaxoSmithKline
Guidant Foundation
Harriett and Robert Heilbrunn
J.Willard and Alice S. Mariott Foundation
Merck & Company, Inc.
Novartis Pharmaceuticals...

Dear Mr KNOW IT ALL ERIC
please tell me what is your experience of using coconut oil? I've used it for over a year now, with no adverse effects on my skin. My dad's a dermatologist and he didn't find anything wrong with what I am using. Are you gonna tell me I am not allowed to recommend something I've used, to other people? I like sharing good products if it has helped me, I'm not even asking vaca to CONSUME coconut oil, I gave ideas on how to use coconut oil on skin.

Have you done any extensive research of your own? If you did you'd be able to answer EVERYONES' questions rather than reading reports from organizations supported by drug companies with biased answers. And what now? You're gonna tell me how wonderful these big drug corporations are? How they LOOK OUT FOR ALL OF US and not their profits?!?! Like the Vioxx drug they produced to help arthritis sufferers become heart attack victims. Geez they really love us don't they?

And remember this?
"Cosmetics ("organic virgin" or synthetic) generally have no positive impact on skin health; instead they may improve the appearance of the outer layer of skin"

Skin isn't a barrier, its an ORGAN, living breathing organ. It can absorb molecules small enough to penetrate the outer layer, why do you think Nicotine patches are used on SKIN? So what if its not a cosmetic!? I'm trying to prove a point because you think that organic or synthetic stuff has no positive (which also means no negative) impact on skin HEALTH, but certain substances CAN because they are so small, like nanotechnology has created a range of skin care that can penetrate the deeper layers, even into your blood stream. What you put on your skin can affect your skin and or your health (Nicotine patches). Even people that work for cosmetic labs that make shampoo must wear protective clothing and gloves because some synthetic ingredients can cause irritation upon contact with skin.

If someone has eczema and find the commercial products are too harsh to use, and use virgin coconut oil (preservative free) instead and find it IMPROVING the appearance of the outer layer of skin and keeps it moisturized, what's wrong with that? Is that SO BAD? If you had one speck of common sense left in you, coconut oil (if people use the organic and virgin ones) is not the worse thing on earth to use on skin. And I have used it, and it DID make my skin smooth and silky, and I have the right to say that because I've used it for a long period and its called a TESTIMONIAL, it doesn't give you any right to criticize my experience as rubbish when you've never used it on your skin.

Hey Eyecandy,
I agree with you that some like free speach unless its used to disagree with them.
So what if we use something and then we find out later its not everything we hoped.
As long as it hasnt hurt us and we have researched to make sure it wouldnt,then we havnt lost anything.
We have learnt to explore,and thats a life leason Im glad to learn.

But thankfully not all are dependant on "science" for their self approval,and can look at lots of peoples views and learn something.
Imagine if mainstream medicine had its way with regards to herbs etc.
They would be banned(as they have tried in Australia with "supplements"),and all the wonderful knowledge about these herbs would be lost forever.
The trouble with people like eric is that everything they have in life is because they have accepted that"western medicine" is the only way,and everything they have is because of their blind allegience to it.

Their career,their house,their retirement fund,their view of themselves (which is a lot for them to then "betray")all stems from a narrow band of knoweledge that does have a place,but on its own is narrow,and those that soley follow it are just as narrow.

To darth: The Berkeley Wellness article you linked to has the following bottom line recommendation regarding tropical oils (see Trans Tips):

" Limit foods made with tropical oils. Their effects on blood cholesterol are still debatable."

And that just relates to effects on blood lipids. Such oils are also high-calorie, promote obesity and are more expensive than readily available and better characterized alternatives that lower trans-fat exposure.

"...some like free speach unless its used to disagree with them."

True.

"Its so funny to see this (poster) get completely worked up over other people's opinions."

Yes.

I'm afraid I skipped almost all the posts answering this query. I just couldnt resist adding my own 2 bits and quite possibly stirring things up even more.
I used to live in Kerala , a tiny little state at the southern tip of India. 'Kerala' literally means 'the land of coconuts' and that is exactly what you see everywhere.
We cook almost all our dishes with generous helpings of coconut ( freshly scraped or slivers or fried) .And everything is traditionally cooked in coconut oil.
All our traditional ayurvedic medicines , especially those used for therapeutic and cosmetic massages , use coconut oil as a base. People in Kerala liberally use coconut oil on their hair before shampooing and the girls in Kerala are famous for their great skin and hair.
As for health effects, the people of Kerala traditionally did not have much heart problems . However of late, with changing lifestyles and the introduction of new products, people switched to the so called 'healthier oils' like safflower, groundnut, sunflower, etc.and stopped using coconut oil for cooking For whatever reason, the number of heart ailments has increased now. Confusing? You bet!
Obesity was not an issue because the average Keralite is slim-built.
Many leading cardiologists here who have been involved in a major research programme funded by the Coconut Board here feel that the use of fresh coconut is not harmful. Fried coconut is as to be expected of any fried food, not as healthy as your doctor would like.

"Obesity was not an issue because the average Keralite is slim-built."

This is likely to be important.

If caloric intake is low to begin with, using a high-calorie, high saturated oil like coconut oil will not be as detrimental as if it is used in an obese population that consumes other unhealthy foods (as in the U.S.). I suspect that the "changing lifestyles" Sunita describes are the contributors to heart disease, not the replacement cooking oils.

I'm sure coconut plantations and farms like the one Sunita is associated with will benefit from publicity about coconut oil, but Western consumers need solid science, not hype (maybe the Coconut Board could help fund a study here).

Here's an interesting editorial that recently appeared in the N.Y. Times (free registration may be required to see it). It seems that in looking for alternatives to oils with trans fats, some companies are turning to unhealthy tropical oils (in this case palm oil). The Times mentions a number of healthier alternatives. Coconut oil is not on the list.

Eric, I am NOT associated with any big coconut plantation or coconut farm which could possibly benefit from stray bit of publicity such as this. Ours is a very, very small farm (almost miniscule) and we only sell to the local market. And when I say local, I mean within a 15 - 20 mile radius.
And most of our buyers are pretty conservative, old-fashioned people who have probably never touched a computer in their lives ( I know this may sound amazing to you, but there are places in the world where the computer is not such an integral part of everyday life : ) So I think you owe me an apology about trying to get publicity for my farm.

And please dont put down the observations of leading cardiologists here by just categorising it as 'hype'. Many of them are highly respected in their field not only here in India but also internationally.There are very sincere and conscientious professionals here too,you know.

Or could it be the reference to Ayurvedic medicine that made you think that this was not 'Scientific'. Ayurveda is our traditional form of medicine and is almost 5000 years old. It is extremely effective and gentle on the body. And before you think I'm opposed to the Western form of medicine... I grew up in a family filled with doctors who practised the Allopathic or Western form of medicine ( my grand dad was a Surgeon-General and my father was a paediatric surgeon with an FRCS from Glassgow and Edinborough).However,everyone here has always had an unshakeable respect for Ayurveda.It is not mumbo-jumbo and hocus-pocus you know.
And one more thing, its not just Western consumers who need scientific evidence as you stated. It was that very need that prompted the Coconut Board to initiate this research. After all the other side has to be heard too , right? And who better to ask than the people who have been using coconut oil regularly for so many centuries? And who better to do the asking than the very professionals who take care of their health?

Sunita,
Dont think you have to justify yourself because of one arrogent persons comments.
Not everyone on this forum is rude to people with differant opinions.
I found what you said interesting... and 1000's of years of observation from your country MUST account for something more important than some peoples version of "science".
Hope to hear from you again.

Hello Sunita
I too welcome your meaningful comments about coconuts, coconut oil, and the whole tradition of Ayurvedic Medicine. In the US, our education about the systems of others is obviously limited. But we do need sincere folks like you to share with us. Hearing a person who lived an experience is always interesting to me. Some others, unfortunately, find the only stories they find credible in selected publications and peer-reviewed journals, unless, of course, something is said that they find unacceptable.

At times, Dr. Eric seems to be in the attack mode. He accurately reflects his opinion and that of a limited number of Eastern Establishment Americans. (Yes, I am biased.) I worked in the Network News field as an artist for a couple years and found the views to be quite provincial. It seemed that the only real research could be done on the Upper West Side of Manhattan or in Boston or Cambridge, MA.

There is a great desire on the parts of some members to make sure that no good information goes unchallenged it seems. But please be aware that many of us are eager to hear you and others. Sometimes we might even dignify the discussion with questions. It is not necessary to answer Dr. Eric when he is naughty. I try to keep him satisfied with my unpopular views. Sometimes he even picks on someone else. Sorry.

Richard

I refer Richard the supplement dealer (do you also have a interest in marketing coconut oil?) to statements made earlier about the risks and lack of proven benefits to consuming coconut oil, and encourage him to post links to any clinical studies in humans that he thinks demonstrate benefits.

Dr. Eric

Do medium chain fatty acids have any value to us in our diets?

Richard, snake oil salesman, not coconut oil salesman

Oh My..... YES I am new here, first time posting etc.

I found this site/forum quite by accident while searching for information about Coconut Oil..... and I have to tell ya that some here would scare people away, whilst others seem friendly and welcoming.

There are always two sides (at least) to every discussion and I have found it best to keep an open mind when the final decision has still not been made.

I have found the work of the Weston A Price Foundation to be extremely reliable - and on the issue of Coconut oil and Palm oil I am biased towards believing their research.
I am also a watcher of Prof Uffe Ravnskov )Cholesterol Skeptics etc) and I find his work and writings very credible.

I say 'G'Day' to you all.... and look forward to perhaps learning from you, discovering with you and sharing any insights etc.....

Cheer's TassieMc

I think the Maker's Diet supports coconut oil. any comments on this?

According to the National Council Against Health Fraud, the author of this book (Jordan Rubin) is founder of a company that was ordered by the FDA to stop making unsupported claims for "Virgin Coconut Oil".

From the NCAHF site:

"Rubin's credentials have no legitimate academic or professional standing:

His NMD (naturopathic medical doctor) is from the Peoples University of the Americas School of Natural Medicine, a nonaccredited school with no campus.
His Ph.D. is from the Academy of Natural Therapies, a nonaccredited correspondence school that the State of Hawaii ordered to close last year.
His CNC (Certified Nutritional Consultant) comes from the American Association of Nutritional Consultants, whose only requirement for "professional member" status has been payment of a $50 or $60 fee. The CNC requires passage of a test based mainly on the contents of books that promote nutrition quackery."

It might be well to take all this into account when deciding on the value of the book's advice regarding coconut oil.

Wow, these posts are so interesting. I normally am in tomatoes and container gardening but decided to read about planting herbs, then I checked this "medicinal" area. I read Mary Enig's book years ago, used coconut oil for awhile before it became such a big deal. Sometimes I check out these alternative methods in so and so's book....for awhile they sound so informed. But I find that somewhere near the end of these "authoritative" book reccomendations, comes some expensive "must-have-you-can't-get-it-anywhere-else" food or product. In Enig's case, one thing she was insistent on was salt. But not any old salt, not health food store sea-salt, but when I called to inquire of this superior salt, it's price was exhorbitant! Somewhere along the line, common sense should prevail....Are we really ALL deficient because we need to access this special salt that can be obtained from a certain side of certain salt lake? On and on it goes...whether it be a certain coconut oil, sea salt, calcium, you name it, we're always being pushed to believe there is some shangra-la perfect food, perfect supplement, you name it, costing umteen dollars somewhere. Nothing wrong with trying to improve our lives, nothin' wrong with trying to make a few bucks either. Yet, there is too much exaggerating in so many claims...to me, it's a matter of researching and researching and not accepting the first claim as fact when it comes along.

So, I would tend to be in agreement with you, Eric, on so many of your points, I think you're doing a fine job putting forth sound arguments and discouraging a natural human inclination to "jump on the bandwagon."
Best of health to all,
Cheflara

this forum is either very informative or veery confusing.i am an ordinary guy with no medical background and neither selling or promoting coconut who have the fortune of living here in the philippines a tropical country. you talked about coconut and seafoods and its health benefits and from what i read, scientifically, if it is to be trusted. here in my country, we eat alot of coconut products,oil or otherwise and seafoods in a daily basis hundreds of years without worrying about health complications until we are exposed to western diets such as burgers,colas,pizzas and chips to name a few. and if you are talking about life longevity, i can say that people living tropical countries live longer than in say not tropical countries, why? because all the things you people said about a healthy diet is here. we eat lots of vegetables,coconut and seafoods.and i can say in a daily basis. most of my countrymen die in famine,drought,violence and drugs.and i might add western style of diet.

id like to reemphasize and clarify my point, if coconut oil is hazardous to health, since we use coconut oil everyday there would be no filipino left in this country.

p.s.

by the way, when i was a child in the 80's i have met only few obese children since we don't have Mcdonalds and fastfoods at that time.

p.p.s

i'm talking about coconut oil as a cooking oil not as a cure all.

The average life expectancy in the Philippines is about 8 years less than in the United States. Life expectancies in a number of other nations with tropical climates are lower still. I have not seen any direct comparisons between such countries and the U.S. with regard to heart disease.

Deaths in the U.S. due to cardiovascular disease dropped by 56% between 1950 and the late 1990s, according to the CDC. Among the factors they cite for this decline are reductions in the fat content of the American diet:

Data based on surveys of food supply suggest that consumption of saturated fat and cholesterol has decreased since 1909 (15). Data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination surveys suggest that decreases in the percentage of calories from dietary fat and the levels of dietary cholesterol coincide with decreases in blood cholesterol levels."

It would not be surprising if people in some nations with lower total consumption of calories and greater intake of fruits and vegetables had less cardiovascular disease compared to the average U.S. resident, even if they used a cooking oil higher in fat (other factors including exercise and genetics might play a role as well). This does not mean that it would be a good idea for sedentary Americans who often eat too much to start using coconut oil in cooking. In fact, it sounds like a recipe for helping to halt the progress we have made in counteracting cardiovascular disease.

we have been using coconut may it be in a form of oil, cream, dessicated or fresh for hundreds if not thousands of years. i know it is very hard for you to grasp and i can say to you mr. eric that we have been consuming it rather EXCESSIVELY .

almost all our recipe contains a coconut product. it is a staple to us. for me it is evident enough that the coconut have been beneficial to our bodies ,otherwise as i have said before, we all die of heart attack.

FYI most common factors that causes heart attack here in my country are the following:

smoking
excessive eating of animal fat
drugs
excessive drinking
genetics

"we have been using coconut may it be in a form of oil, cream, dessicated or fresh for hundreds if not thousands of years. i know it is very hard for you to grasp and i can say to you mr. eric that we have been consuming it rather EXCESSIVELY."

People also have been consuming alcohol for thousands of years, often excessively. But it would be wrong to take that fact out of context and credit alcohol for increasing our life span. Ditto for coconut oil

If there is any positive impact of coconut products on cardiovascular health (or in preventing kidney stones, as you suggest in another discussion here), it would be nice to see it documented in clinical studies.

NO RANDOMIZED TIGHTLY CONTROLLED CLINCIAL TRIAL HAS EVER SHOWN ANY REDUCTION IN CVD MORTALITY FROM SATURATED FAT RESTRICTION

www.theomnivore.com/The_Great_Cholesterol_Con.html

www.theomnivore.com/Malmo_Study_2005.html

www.theomnivore.com/WHI_Feb_2006.html

www.ravnskov.nu/cholesterol.htm

www.THINCS.org

AHA LIED ABOUT THE FRAMINGHAM RESEARCH TO FIT THEIR OWN ANTI- SATURATE UNFOUNDED

NONSESNE PROPAGANDA

HERE ARE THE REAL RESULTS "11 OVERALL AND 14 % CVD DEATH RATE INCREASE PER 1 MG DROP IN CHOLESTEROL"-www.ravnskov.nu/myth8.htm

THE CHOLESTEROL THEORY IS A COMPLETELY UNFOUNDED CROC

What I've never been able to understand is why the vast majority of physicians, researchers and health groups would want to conceal the "truth" and deprive not only the public at large, but themselves, loved ones and friends of the supposed benefits of slurping down coconut oil and other foods high in saturated fat.

There's a lot of this conspiracy theorizing going on in miaminottropics' links, notably by Anthony Colpo at theomnivore.com ("they don't WANT you to know!" etc.), a site apparently dedicated to Mr. Colpo's various bizarre health ideas (water fluoridation is terrible, vaccines are bad and so on) and promoting his book sales. He identifies himself as "an independent researcher", but strangely, a search of his name in the PubMed scientific literature database turns up zero articles.

Links to research including American Heart Association studies showing connections between high blood lipid levels and cardiovascular disease.

Well I thought I might get some really good threads
by people who have used Coconut Oil in thier diets and the results positive or negative.
While there was alot of information, most which I have already read on other sites, there was far to much bickering
back and forth by several individuals. It appears some people have way to much Ego and inflated opinions of themselves. I think a couple of you need to get a life.

I've never understood why zombie threads are resurrected when there is no new information being offered - just scolding in the apparent hope of provoking more mudslinging.

I'd welcome any solid information on whether coconut oil has any role in diet.

Here's a study on PubMed about coconut oils. There are a few other related studies on the PubMed site. Some of the studies do seem to confirm the relation of the medium-chain aspect of coconut oil and its lack of contributing to Coronary Heart Disease.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?itool=abstractplus&db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=abstractplus&list_uids=15563444

What that small Indonesian study seems to be saying is that saturated fats (including coconut oil) weren't found to be a predictor of coronary heart disease in a particular native population. They did not conclude that coconut oil had any protective effect.

Large-scale studies in Western populations have found that saturated fat consumption is linked to development of CHD:

"The development of coronary heart disease (CHD) is an example of a common source epidemic due to increased consumption of saturated fat and cholesterol, low intakes of polyunsaturated fat, and increasing obesity."

Coconut oil's high content of saturated fats explains why the American Heart Association and similar organizations encourage a diet low in saturated fats.

"The fact that coronary atherosclerosis get worse JUST AS FAST OR FASTER when cholesterol goes DOWN as when it goes up shoul dhave led scientists to question the whole Lipid Hypothesis"

-Dr. Uffe Ravnskov

This fact ALONE DISproves the Lipid Hypothesis.

Think LDL lowering is founded people

See here

http://www.lowcarbmuscle.com/forums/showthread.php?t=162

Ravnskov is in a tiny minority of scientists who question whether excess dietary fats promote heart disease (despite the many studies establishing this link).

I haven't seen anything about him promoting coconut oil.

Eric:

You need to realize that just because something is categorized as a fat, a calorie, or a carb means nothing and is only the tip of the iceberg.

Have you read this study?:
http://www.coconutresearchcenter.org/article10132.htm

I do agree with you that saturated fats should be limited in the diet along with the removal of trans fats but CCO does not have the same saturated fats as say animal fat or vegetable oil fats.

Lastly your belief that Americans are living longer due to saturated fats being cut out of the diet is bogus. The reason why Americans live longer is because our medical advances over the years.

Wow, a blast from the coconut oil past. :)

The article you cite is not a scientific study, but a collection of opinions from a naturopath. The article's references don't even support the idea that coconut oil reduces heart disease risk.

There've been reports of increased cardiovascular disease and type II diabetes in India in recent years, but this seems to be due to overall dietary changes rather than what's used for cooking oil.

The fact that Americans are suffering less from coronary artery disease due to lower saturated fat intake is not my "belief" - it's a well-established medical finding backed by solid research (see my link from a few posts ago).

The enthusiasm in some alt-med circles for coconut oil seems to be part of the general conviction that "primitive/non-Western/less developed cultures know/knew something we don't" - leading to promotion of coconut oil, "Paleolithic" diets and obscure fruits and herbs as cure-alls. What's ignored are other lifestyle, diet and genetic factors, as well as the inconvenient truth that the people in these cultures have almost always had considerably shorter lifespans than people in the decadent U.S. of A.

Coconut oil, especially the "virgin" coconut oil promoted as the righteous stuff, costs a ton, is full of saturated fat and doesn't have proven health benefits, despite what the coconut oil lobby says.
I saw a research paper the other day that suggested that people in India might be able to cut their heart disease risk by eating more vegetables and using mustard oil for cooking.

Where's all the popular enthusiasm for vegetables and mustard oil?

hello everyone,

i think i would understand eric because of his background but coming from a tropical country, honeslty if you go to the south who uses coconut in their everyday living, that is what "excessively" meant with another filipino who posted risk no danger coz in bicol, a native bicolano wont die of any heart attack, maybe oversex yes, coz people there love coconuts, chili and sex, sometimes eric knowing too much drives you nuts, hehe, joke, or let me rephrase, explaining everything on the dot does no good coz that is also excessive, take a risk every once in while, chill out, coconut oil is better than margarine and butter or mcdonalds or double cheeseburget with fries and rootbeer, dont get me wrong, i sometimes crave that but take it easy, you have to be open minded, dont put your everything on studies and crap, sometimes you have to know the locals and see things on a different perspective. e.g, westerners are very scientific in everything, but easterners believe in the spirits and stuff, i am blest to have been educated and i know alot about western stuff from school but traveling around the world opened my mind and my belief dat in this world we live in sometimes we fall for the "MATRIX" of make believe, nothing beats experiencing different cultures because it is more than books, you have to balance yourself, some things just cant be explained or before you can explain it its too late my friend. i am not saying you are wrong but people get irrated of you maybe because you disregard their testimonies or their expeiences and counter them with what you "read or knew" tsk tsk tsk. cant wait for the day when you'd really start appreciating coconut oil, or the world of the spirits because it real, Ha ha ha (ghost laugh) its just a matter of time before the yellow eyed spirit get you, where did supernatural get all thise stuff, from the eastern countries, coconut oil is good, i use my friends VCO coz they use enzymatic process, not cold or hot. Theres not much of the odor and the shelf life is far longer with all the vitamins and nutrients in tact and because we are enjoying its benefits already. come over here eric and enjoy the tropical island of the Philippines.
but are you afraid of ghost?
hehe. peace!!
jayjay

The yellow-eyed spirit sounds dicey - but if you protect your liver from booze and drugs it probably won't get you. ;)

After the AHA told me for so many years that trans fats were healthier than saturated fats, I refuse to eat any poison they peddle. At least based on their advise.

I started taking cod liver oil and eating a lot of coconut oil four months ago. I have not made any changes to my diet other than that, except that for some reason I've been eating a lot of ice cream, like several times a week. For three months nothing happened with my weight. Then the fourth month I've lost ten pounds. I have continued eating junky food, except that I've almost totally cut out trans fats.

I used to have excema, but it's disappeared. Every summer my heels used to crack a LOT, despite all the expensive creams and exfoliants I'd use on them. This summer, they look fantastic, with no cracking, and I only exfoliated once during the summer. I am really skeptical of quack-sounding cure-alls, and I don't think coconut oil is the cure for everything, but I have suffered with dry skin for almost my whole life, and to suddenly have my skin feel comfortable and soft without having to slop on moisturizer constantly is a blessing.

I don't "take" coconut oil like the books say to do. I cook with it or butter. I eat a lot of Thai or Indian curries that have coconut milk as an ingredient. I eat a lot of fruit smoothies that have coconut milk as an ingredient.

The other weird thing that's happened since taking both the oils and generally upping my fat intake is that I've lost all desire to eat sugary stuff. Ice cream was the only sugary thing I wanted to eat, but even my desire for that is fading. Four months ago if you'd offered me cake or a donut I would have gobbled it down. Now, I look at it and it holds no pull for me.

I don't know if it's the coconut oil or the cod liver oil, or both together, but something's working.

Eric_OH,

I clicked on that link you provided, and it clearly states that HYDROGENATED coconut oil was used. The process of hydrogenating can make any oil more toxic.

In the 1960s, a common belief was that all cholesterol and fat was considered toxic. Now, most researchers have come around to a more nuanced view (at least on cholesterol). Saturated fat and cholesterol are bad. Except for 'good cholesterol' and 'good saturated fat' (they are not all identical in their form or effect).

Coconut oil is different from animal-derrived saturated fats in that it contains a high percentage of medium chain triglycerides. These are metabolized differently than stearic acid or other animal fats. MCTs do not undergo the same degradation and re-esterfication that other saturated fats do (and which is linked to their negative effects on blood vessel health). MCTs can pass directly into mitochondria (independent of carrier proteins) and adding coconut oil to the diet can be beneficial for metabolism.

Here's a link to a study Sunita might appreciate. Seems that doctors in South Asia have a different perspective on coconut oil than most in the west.

Here is a link that might be useful: Pubmed Study on Coconut Oil

Southeast Asians doctors may have a different perspective in part because their patients have genetic profiles and overall diets that differ from people living in Europe and North America.

I suspect that the average Sri Lankan consumes fewer casualties and saturated fat overall, compared to a Western counterpart. So speculating that tropical oils would be safe as part of a typical Western diet is risky.

Until large scale studies have been done on coconut or other tropical oils in the American diet (and until major health groups like the American Heart Association clear these oils for widespread use in cooking), it's best to be on the safe side and steer clear of using them as commonplace cooking oils.

I agree with you on the overall diet issue, not so sure about the genetics - that could be a factor, but people everywhere develop problems when the overall diet is bad. We don't have to be Greek peasants to benefit from a Mediterranean diet, or Dravidian to 'resist' the alleged cholesterol-raising effects of coconut or palm oil.

Also, Eric, have you seen this article from the University of Wisconsin?

Some interesting quotes:

"Dietary fats containing saturated fatty acids at the beta-position tend to raise plasma total and LDL-cholesterol, which, of course, contribute to atherosclerosis and coronary heart disease."

"The failure of palm oil to elevate blood cholesterol as predicted by the regression equations developed by Keys et al. and Hegsted et al. might be due to the dominant alpha-position location of its constituent saturated fatty acid." (ie, not all saturated fats are equal)

"The saturated fatty acid-rich tropical oils, coconut oil, hydrogenated coconut oil, and palm kernel oil, raise cholesterol levels; studies demonstrating this effect are often confounded by a developing essential fatty acid deficiency." (Its the overall diet/experimental design that may be causing the rise in cholesterol that some have reported)

"Dietary palm oil does not raise plasma cholesterol."

"Anomalously, palm oil differs from other of the more saturated fats in tending to decrease thrombus formation." (A good thing when it comes to stroke and heart disease.)

There is adequate good science out there to conclude that the idea that ~all saturated fats are bad~ is as outdated as the notion that ~all serum cholesterol is bad~.

You are welcome to abstain from these oils if you like. But I agree with the cheese-head conclusion: "This review does not support claims that foods containing palm oil have no place in a prudent diet." And I hold the same is true for coconut oil.

Here is a link that might be useful: Uni-Wisconsin Article on Tropical Oils

I tried reading this thread throughly, but just couldn't do it....
Call me stupid, but nothing made sense to me. I am in no way a scientist, and doubt anyone in here is. There MAY not be enough research to prove coconut oil is better than any other oil, but there are thousands of testimonials of people who made the switch from vegetable oils to coconut oils and are just astounded at how much healthier they are. No this does not mean that you can go ahead and eat a double double cheeseburger or a couple slices of all meat pizza and then take a tbsp. of coconut oil and it will make it all better for you.

I want to share how coconut oil has helped ME. I started cooking at home more and cut out almost all eating-out (only eat out when it's a really kick back weekend and I don't feel like cooking). I was still using vegetable oil at first but in moderate amounts, I wasn't gaining any weight but I wasn't loosing either (and yes I was counting calories, cut out most of the sugars and most carbs), but I felt a bit better. THEN I found coconut oil, I cannot rave enough about all the good things it has done for me. I don't count calories anymore, but I do follow portion control and have my snacks in between.

Two of my sisters (the thinner and "healthiest" ones in the family) had their cholesterol checked and found out it was a bit high, I on the other hand am overweight compared to them and enjoy a healthy life, since I made the switch I've been loosing pounds little by little (something that wasn't happening when I was counting calories, only 1200-1500) maybe because I had candida and didn't even know it until I started coconut oil and started experiencing yeast die-off. Not only for cooking but for dry skin, dry damaged hair, acne, and I don't have a list but I know there are many other benefits. My son didn't like to eat, I had to literally force him to eat, now he actually tells me to cook him something because he's hungry!! I am more active, with lots of energy that I actually feel like starting the p90x.

I just want to say "God, thank you for putting coconuts on earth. And whoever started making oil out of this, thank you for coming up with this great idea. Its been a miracle food for me and my family.

P.S. I told my sisters about coconut oil, they switched, and I'm glad to say that their cholsterol levels have actually lowered since then. (What's up with all the media misinformation? The big guys with the big bucks actually pay and threaten them with lawsuits if this kind of good information leaks out)

Another golden oldie of a thread, now with They Don't Want You To Know conspiracy-mongering.

There are "thousands" of testimonials for what seems like thousands of "superfoods" and "miracle" supplements promoted over the Internet (sometimes in the form of dramatic "exposes" that are intended to steer you to a particular product). Acai juice, goji berries, resveratrol, buckwheat, green tea, apple cider vinegar - these things are supposed to make it possible for you to dramatically turn around your health, lose weight without really trying etc.

Some of them would be fine in a balanced, low-calorie diet accompanied by exercise (the elements really responsible for long-term weight loss). Coconut oil as mentioned previously is very high in saturated fats and calories, and not recommended by those knowledgeable about heart health.

That's the reliable advice, not what we're told by unknown providers of testimonials on the Internet.

Usually people suggest olive oil, because its easy to digest. I don't know about coconut oil.