Bad foods not bad?

Good Foods Loom Larger than Bad Foods in MetSyn Risk

For premenopausal women, the amount of "unhealthy" foods -- such as meats and salty snacks -- they eat may matter less in the development of metabolic syndrome than the amount of vegetables, whole grains, and other healthy foods, a researcher said here. ....

Full article: http://www.medpagetoday.com/MeetingCove ... rid=249096

What I am understanding from this article is that eating more good foods (examples: raw vegetables and fruits, legumes, nuts, eggs, nonhydrogenated vegetable oils, whole grains, and fish) reduced the risk of metabolic syndrome - no surprise.

However, eating more bad foods (examples: Sugary sodas, cookies, fast foods, mayonnaise, salty snacks, hydrogenated oils and fats, red meats, and refined grains ) did not increase the risk of metabolic syndrome.

Check out the article for youself.

I've seen similar studies and what I think is that as long as you do eat the right stuff, having the wrong stuff becomes less important.

That is because there is not much difference between their so-called Mediterranean (or good/healthy) diet and the Western (bad/unhealthy) diet.

There is nothing really healthy about whole grains, legumes, or vegetable oils (regardless if oil is hydrogenated or not), and too many fruits. All of these so-called "healthy foods have the same metabolic effects as the ones listed as bad. They promote chronic low-level inflamation, high triglycerides and elevated fasting blood glucose levels. So obviously they saw little difference in the metabolic sydrome characteristics between so-called "good" and bad diets.

The "true" and traditional Mediterranean diet consists of no vegetable oils (instead only olive oil), few legumes and grains, and lots of vegetables and high omega-3 rich fish. Also, there is nothing unhealthy about eating red meat and/or saturated fat as long as the animals they were sourced from were free-range organic animals.

Flawed and useless study.