[noondip]

It isn't the American Medical Association which I'm referring to, but rather the American Heart Association. From the parent's source:

> The DGAC used the 2013 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology (AHA/ACC) report on lifestyle management to reduce CVD risk for its evaluation of saturated fat intake. The DGAC concurred with the AHA/ACC report that saturated fat intake exceeds current recommendations in the United States and that lower levels of consumption would further reduce the population level risk of CVD.

The cited work is http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/129/25_suppl_2/S76.long

This page explains it well - http://www.pcrm.org/nbBlog/index.php/new-dietary-guidelines-...

> The report suggested that cholesterol in foods is not a major danger, contrasting with the Institute of Medicine, which found that cholesterol in foods does indeed raise blood cholesterol levels, especially in people whose diets are modest in cholesterol to start with. On this topic, the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee did no original research and instead deferred to a 2014 report by the American Heart Association and American College of Cardiology. However, the American Heart Association receives substantial cash payments for certifying food products, including cholesterol-containing food products as “heart healthy,” creating a financial incentive for discounting the relationship between dietary cholesterol and serum cholesterol. The Physicians Committee is concerned that exonerating dietary cholesterol will only confuse an already bewildered public. Most people do not differentiate fat from cholesterol, or dietary cholesterol from blood cholesterol. To suggest that cholesterol in foods is not a problem will lead many to imagine that fatty foods or an elevated blood cholesterol level carry no risk—two potentially disastrous notions.

> Accordingly, the Physicians Committee has petitioned the USDA and DHHS to disregard the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee’s findings on dietary cholesterol. The reliance on the American Heart Association document does not comply with the spirit of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which sets standards for bias among federal advisory committees.

They have filed a lawsuit against the USDA and Department of Health and Human Services:

http://www.foodpolitics.com/wp-content/uploads/Physicians-Co...

I highly recommend reading it to understand the sad, corrupted state of affairs I had alluded to.

[merpnderp]

The PCRM hardly seems like an unbiased group solely focused on human medicine. They are a political advocacy group and who's points are just as tainted as you claim the AHA's are. Only the AHA is much more widely respected. I mean my doctor is a fan of one and not the other. And I trust him with my life.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physicians_Committee_for_Respo...

[noondip]

Please read the court document and evaluate PCRM's position on its own merit. Frankly, I find AHA and others' behavior outlined there to be morally abhorrent and worthy of discussion.

I definitely understand your skepticism, but in this case, your doctor may also be poorly informed - see https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2430660/