This article was in our paper this morning, and I found it quite interesting.

For around eight long years a group of 20,000 mostly over weight postmenopausal women reduced their fat consumption as part of a $415 million government study. The results were published recently in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

The goal of the study was to track how a low-fat diet may decrease a woman's chances of developing cancer and heart disease. The other group of approximately 30,000 were permitted a diet that included more fat, or life as usual.

For the group doing with less, that meant nearly a decade of saying no when they wanted to say yes. Of thinking constantly about what they consumed; of being monitored; of being 100 percent "good."

Much to everyone's surprise, the results showed little difference in rates of breast cancer, colorectal cancer and heart disease between the two groups. That is, it didn't make a difference what they ate.

It was noted that this could be the result of their already being overweight, as well as the impact of the foods they comsumed when they were younger. Researchers and scientists also determined that the participants, whose average age was 62, didn't reduce fats quite as much as the scientists had hoped. Furthermore, during the couse of the study, scientific thinking on the role different fats play in disease prevention evolved. Instead of altering participants' diets by further specifying that they consume less "bad" fats and increase consumption of "good fats," they stayed the lengthy, rather vague course.

I also find this very interesting. Do you have a link by any chance?

Please can any one give me some recipe suggestions for meals post fill number 2. There are only so many burgers and crackers you can eat!