Peanut butter was my weakness also. One day I googled low fat peanut butter (knowing that the "reduced fat" peanut butters was still 12.5g of fat, 200 calories). I came across a Better 'N Peanut Butter found at Trader Joes. It has only 2.5g of fat, and a 2TBSP serving contains only 100 calories. They also have a Low Sodium version. A jar sells for $3.59. I even mentioned this PB in my blog

I just went back and checked my fitday, and I average between 30 and 50g. of fat a day. I don't pay attention to how much each day, and this was the first time I actually looked! I do only eat the good for you fats! (olive oil, nuts, etc. - NO processed food whatsoever) I have had consistently lost every week and have had absolutely no trouble sticking with my plan. I also think reading the "YOU on a diet" book is an excellent idea, it really opened my eyes also.

I've done low fat before and always ended up with really dry hair and itchy skin. This time I'm tracking it on Fitday along with everything else and trying to keep it under 30%, but other than that I don't worry about it. I'm with Robin, tracking calories becomes a natural way to control portions.

As someone who teaches courses on research design and who reads about diets and nutrition as a "hobby", I can understand why you're confused. There does seem to be a lot of conflicting info out there.

A general rule of thumb is to never take too seriously any one single study on a particular issue. Every research study has limitations.

However, if a number of studies have been conducted and all begin to show similar trends, well, then this may be something to pay attention to.

Of course, it's not so easy to see that if you aren't following the research regularly. And let's face it, that's most of us!

If it is an issue that's important to you (as nutrition and weight loss have become to me), then there are other issues you can start paying attention to when you read about these studies.
- For example, who were the people studied? If they all have heart disease, we don't know if the results would apply to people who don't. If they all had less than 100 pounds to lose, we don't know the results would apply to other groups... you get the idea.

- What were the comparison groups? If a study compares an Atkins diet to Weight Watchers and finds one of them "better" does that mean it is better than ALL other diets? No. You can't generalize beyond the groups you studied. If none of the studies looked at the role of exercise, we can't generalize to people who DO exercise... you get the idea.

- Similarly, look at the timeframe. If the study stopped after 6 months... what happened after that? We don't know.

Ultimately, I think the problem is less with the research itself and more with a media that sensationalizes every finding and generalizes them to everyone. And to some extent, the problem is that most of us have never been taught how to evaluate research as well.

Okay, so before I get off my :soap: I'd just like to say that much of the time, the dietary guidelines provided by the government are not a bad way to go, as they are based on an abundance of research evidence (I'm not saying they are perfect or for everyone). In this case, generally the recommmendations are to get something like 20-30% of your calories from fat, mostly unsaturated fats...

So ultimately, Booskie's advice is pretty good!

Heather! Your avatar pic is GORGEOUS! What an inspiration you are!!

Thanks, Jen! :)