On Tue, 25 Nov 1997 Steve Meyers <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Perhaps this view is supported by the point made by
> Enig and Fallon that the amount of SF in the American
> diet remained the same between 1935 and 1974, a period of great
> increase in heart disease.  I don't have the data at my disposal,
> but my sense is that the level of CHD was fairly low in the pre-1935
> period, despite a high (relative to the current recommendations)
> intake of SF.

But this is not necessarily a significant observation against a link
between SF and CHD.  CHD is to a large extent a disease of the 50+ age
group, and I would be surpised if the proportion of them in the population
did not increase significantly in this period.  There is also a danger in
using average dietary SF in a population: there may be a level above which
SF is a risk factor, so if the average remains the same but the range of
SF values increases, then there may be more people at risk.  Wasn't this a
period of increasingly sedentary lifestyles?  Just look at the increase in
car use.

The data quoted show that SF may not be the only risk factor, but they do
not show that it is not a risk factor.

Andrew

 =========================================================================
 Dr. Andrew Millard                              [log in to unmask]
 Department of Archaeology, University of Durham,   Tel: +44 191 374 4757
 South Road, Durham. DH1 3LE. United Kingdom.       Fax: +44 191 374 3619
                      http://www.dur.ac.uk/~drk0arm/
 =========================================================================