Eek! so all along it was 10gm TOTAL fat intake (not just sat fat)!! ... only joking.
Saw doc today, mentioned low fat intake, min sat. Of no interest, but I wonder if such diet seems borderline cranky to the establishment. I wasn't looking for encouragement or understanding, just interested to hear if she was interested. Seemed not, so best not to go there.
veg, many thanks (btw it is http://www.drmcdougall.com/res_swank.html
My take on that (Swank thread) is he's suggesting that we need the minimum fat in general, hence the WW2 starved etc having no MS. And any fat intake should be because we are burning it in exercise*. Somehow "white meat of turkey and chicken" don't seem so bad in the context (assuming that its super lean), though I'm not going there. I'd prefer to err on the side of belt and braces.
*Although Esselstyn is clear that exercise does not undo the harm from excess fat intake.
So maybe I'll continue my min total fat experiment into the warmer weather when I can crank up my exercise load. I'm keen to hear from others who are trying the same. We read that fats are needed for so many body functions and structures, yet having cut back from ~200 to <10gm on satfat, why not go the whole way with fat in general. Fat intake being only from what is integral to whole food veg & fruit. So I can binge like a gorilla and be a lean fighting machine.
Averting mind from cocoa junk crimes (we're immune) ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dhg_rjpvtME&feature=related