This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemistry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of chemistry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChemistryWikipedia:WikiProject ChemistryTemplate:WikiProject ChemistryChemistry
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink
Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this.
Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Molecular Biology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of molecular biology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Molecular BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject Molecular BiologyTemplate:WikiProject Molecular BiologyMolecular Biology
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism
The graphic use the red , blue and green color to differentiate each type of fatty acid.
My problem is the color used is likely biased here and can lead to thinking as one fatty acid is bad , here red , while the other is good , here green. Why ? Because red and green are commonly associated for danger and bad or safe and good , respectively.
It is still hotly debated which fatty acid is good while the other is bad and vice versa , especially with saturated acid now more understood as being crucial in health while polyinsaturated acid are prone to oxydation leading to dangerous transfatty acids.
If someone can change the colors to be more neutral and remove either bias , it would be great. Example : Yellow/blue/pink. 57.134.102.221 (talk) 19:50, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Saturated fat increases CVD risk, there is a strong consensus on this. The red is suitable for the graphic. On food labels in many countries the red means high and an unhealthy choice [1]Veg Historian (talk) 00:04, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, absolutely. If there is consistent and significant outcome data from long-term epidemiological studies and mendelian randomization, epidemiologists can infer causality. For example, we know that processed meat causes bowel cancer. The evidence comes from decades of consistent evidence from epidemiological research. Veg Historian (talk) 17:26, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
When it says associated on the article, this does not mean causal. Scientists do not draw causality from a single systematic review; you need many reviews and types of evidence to do that. On this Wikipedia article there are different systematic reviews listed, all of them show significant associations. Nobody has ever claimed that saturated fat causes heart disease itself or directly causes it, it raises ApoB and LDL-c which we know causes heart disease. Saturated fat is considered a risk factor for heart disease because it increases atherogenic lipoprotein particle concentrations. The American Heart Association have a good overview paper on this topic, "The scientific rationale for decreasing saturated fat in the diet has been and remains based on well-established effects of saturated fat to raise low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, a leading cause of atherosclerosis" [2]Veg Historian (talk) 20:37, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is no need for this type of clarification on the article. This is basic epidemiology. Look around on 1000s of Wikipedia articles where epidemiological studies on nutrition topics are cited. There is no need to bring up causality because it is obvious these are association studies. Example, look at the Sweetened beverage article etc. Veg Historian (talk) 21:44, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree, correlation and causation are quite often confused, and it's important to specify the degree to which it is or might be causal. Benjamin (talk) 03:57, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am not convinced you will find a WP:CONSENSUS to support your suggestion. But you could always ask at another board. Experienced medical users (most of which will have understanding of epidemiology) can offer advice at WikiProject Medicine. Veg Historian (talk)
Anyway, to what degree can saturated fat be said to cause negative health outcomes? If we were to add clarification, how would it be worded? Benjamin (talk) 22:50, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is clarified on the article: "The effect of saturated fat on heart disease has been extensively studied. Saturated fat intake increases low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) concentrations. The American Heart Association have stated that "the scientific rationale for decreasing saturated fat in the diet has been and remains based on well-established effects of saturated fat to raise low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, a leading cause of atherosclerosis".Veg Historian (talk) 23:11, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
