As It Turns Out, Butter Is Better For You Than Scientists Originally Thought

Senior Contributor
06.30.16 7 Comments

Shutterstock

Butter isn’t just a food, it’s an artistic medium, an inspiration for screenplays and more. But to a lot of people, health-wise, butter is the devil. But it turns out that butter isn’t bad for you, at least, not if you don’t eat too much of it.

Butter’s bad reputation comes from saturated fats. Back in 1970, the first multicountry epidemiological study, the Seven Countries Study, analyzed heart attack and stroke in across the world, and concluded that, among other things, saturated fats were killing us off with coronary disease left and right. This is why, to this day, you’re encouraged to stick to a diet light on the fried stuff, butter, and red meat. But the study’s conclusions were controversial even at the time, and over the last forty-odd years, people have gotten more granular with its results.

That brings us to an overview of research conducted by Tufts University and the University of Sydney. They looked closely at the various research done on butter over the years and found the science boils down to a pretty simple statement. Butter is fine for you provided you don’t stuff your face with it.

So why bother researching it at all? Basically the team behind this, some of whom were also involved of clearing whole milk of murder charges, is arguing that our current take on diet is too simplistic and it behooves us to take a closer look at individual nutrients. For example, they found data that indicates a daily tablespoon of butter raises your mortality risk by one percent, but it drives down your diabetes risk by four percent. Why? They have no idea. It might not even have anything to do with the butter.

And that’s the point. For all that we think we know about what we eat, there’s far more to be understood. So, while you should still go light on the butter, at least enjoy it knowing it’s not particularly bad for you.

(Via Stat News)

Around The Web