By Julie Upton, RD
A fascinating study published earlier this month in the Archives of Internal Medicine came to some surprising conclusions about some of the foods we normally consider to be heart-healthy (or unhealthy). It wasn’t a single clinical trial but rather a review article that looked at the results of more than 140 randomized and controlled human clinical trials—the research gold-standard—published between 1950 and 2007.
Based on the evidence provided by these studies, researchers from McMaster University in Ontario divided dietary interventions (or nutrients) into three categories: strong, moderate, or weak causal relationships between consumption and decreased—or increased—risk of developing heart disease.
The researchers concluded that only a few foods or dietary patterns have a significant impact on your risk for heart disease, whereas the vast majority of things that we dietitians typically recommend have only weak associations—or may even lack sufficient evidence to say that these foods impact heart disease at all.
For example, I've always recommended that individuals use fats and oils rich in polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fats in place of saturated fats to reduce risk of heart disease, but this study suggests that only monos have been sufficiently studied and reduce risk and at this time there's not enough evidence around polys.
Another example is eggs, long thought to have a negative impact on our heart health due to high cholesterol levels. This analysis found insufficient evidence to suggest that.
heart-food-200.jpg foods or high glycemic load diets
- Moderate heart healers
- Seafood and marine omega-3 fatty acids
- Whole grains
- Diet rich in folate, beta-carotene, and vitamins E and C
- Insufficient evidence of either helping or hurting
- Vitamin E and C supplements
- Total fat
- Saturated fat
- Polyunsaturated fat