Saturated fat is once again being dragged back into the spotlight, but this time the debate isn’t just about nutrition — it’s about politics, power, and who controls the narrative around public health. In this video, Dr. Eric Westman reacts to recent comments from the FDA Commissioner, appointed under RFK Jr., and breaks down how saturated fat, heart disease, and dietary guidelines are being communicated to the public. What sounds like settled science quickly unravels when you actually examine the data, the studies being cited, and what’s being left out of the conversation.

For decades, Americans were told to fear butter, red meat, and full-fat dairy based on the saturated fat–heart disease hypothesis that originated in the 1960s. That belief shaped national dietary guidelines, school lunches, and medical advice, even as multiple large randomized controlled trials failed to show meaningful reductions in heart attacks, cardiovascular deaths, or all-cause mortality from lowering saturated fat. Dr. Westman explains why selective reporting, oversimplified messaging, and institutional groupthink continue to dominate public guidance long after the science has become far more nuanced.

If you’ve ever wondered why nutrition advice feels contradictory, why outdated ideas refuse to disappear, or why “follow the science” often clashes with lived results, this video pulls back the curtain. The real issue isn’t butter or steak — it’s how weak evidence becomes dogma, how politics influences public health messaging, and why millions of people are still being given advice that may not serve them.

It's exhausting to see people throwing around "misinformation" rather then engaging with the literature. At some people people should admit they are driven by philosophy and not data. The term misinformation implies source of truth correctness........ which can't be backed up by the people throwing it around - i.e. I think there is room for debate, but not room to claim you are beyond question.... That is just dogma.