Saturated Fats: A Perspective from Lactation and Milk Composition

For recommendations of specific targets for the absolute amount of saturated fat intake, we need to know what dietary intake is most appropriate? Changing agricultural production and processing to lower the relative quantities of macronutrients requires years to accomplish. Changes can have unintended consequences on diets and the health of subsets of the population. Hence, what are the appropriate absolute amounts of saturated fat in our diets? Is the scientific evidence consistent with an optimal intake of zero? If not, is it also possible that a finite intake of saturated fats is beneficial to overall health, at least to a subset of the population? Conclusive evidence from prospective human trials is not available, hence other sources of information must be considered. One approach is to examine the evolution of lactation, and the composition of milks that developed through millennia of natural selective pressure and natural selection processes. Mammalian milks, including human milk, contain 50% of their total fatty acids as saturated fatty acids. The biochemical formation of a single double bond converting a saturated to a monounsaturated fatty acid is a pathway that exists in all eukaryotic organisms and is active within the mammary gland. In the face of selective pressure, mammary lipid synthesis in all mammals continues to release a significant content of saturated fatty acids into milk. Is it possible that evolution of the mammary gland reveals benefits to saturated fatty acids that current recommendations do not consider

The effects of low-calorie sweeteners on energy intake and body weight: a systematic review and meta-analyses of sustained intervention studies.

Previous meta-analyses of intervention studies have come to different conclusions about effects of consumption of low-calorie sweeteners (LCS) on body weight. The present review included 60 articles reporting 88 parallel-groups and cross-over studies ≥1 week in duration that reported either body weight (BW), BMI and/or energy intake (EI) outcomes. Studies were analysed according to whether they compared (1) LCS with sugar, (2) LCS with water or nothing, or (3) LCS capsules with placebo capsules. Results showed an effect in favour of LCS vs sugar for BW (29 parallel-groups studies, 2267 participants: BW change, -1.06 kg, 95% CI -1.50 to -0.62, I2 = 51%), BMI and EI. Effect on BW change increased with 'dose' of sugar replaced by LCS, whereas there were no differences in study outcome as a function of duration of the intervention or participant blinding. Overall, results showed no difference in effects of LCS vs water/nothing for BW (11 parallel-groups studies, 1068 participants: BW change, 0.10 kg, 95% CI -0.87 to 1.07, I2 = 82%), BMI and EI; and inconsistent effects for LCS consumed in capsules (BW change: -0.28 kg, 95% CI -0.80 to 0.25, I2 = 0%; BMI change: 0.20 kg/m2, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.36, I2 = 0%). Occurrence of adverse events was not affected by the consumption of LCS. The studies available did not permit robust analysis of effects by LCS type. In summary, outcomes were not clearly affected when the treatments differed in sweetness, nor when LCS were consumed in capsules without tasting; however, when treatments differed in energy value (LCS vs sugar), there were consistent effects in favour of LCS. The evidence from human intervention studies supports the use of LCS in weight management, constrained primarily by the amount of added sugar that LCS can displace in the diet