ทานสเลด
in nature, either displaying no relationship or potential benefit with
greater levels in the diet. N-3 PUFA displayed greater variance with
some studies showing a beneficial role, some null, and some suggest-
ing an increased risk. This was especially the case with marine-based
N-3 FA, but less so with nonmarine N-3 (ALA), as this plant-based FA
was either null or protective of risk, but also less studied. Findings on
the overall N-6 to N-S ratio suggested no association with risk of type
2 diabetes.
Research on SFA and type 2 diabetes risk, or diabetes risk factors,
demonstrated either null associations or potentially an increased risk with
higher SFA intake. Research on TFA was similar, with some evidence sug-
gesting a harmful role, some null, and some even suggestive of protective
' associations. Despite the lack of clarity for TFA in relation to diabetes risk,
the accepted role of TFA in increasing the risk for cardiovascular disease
should take precedence in dietary recommendations. Studies of FA consumed in very small quantities originating from ruminant animals also
display a range of associations fromprotective to harmful, and this specific
issue is worthy of further studies that may bring clarity to the question.
In sum, the inconsistent results across FA classes with type 2 diabetes
underlines the need to continue to carefully study the topic, update related
study methods, analytical approaches, and creatively examine the subject
matter. They also stress the need to interpret any results in the spectrum
of the overall dietary pattern, so the fatty acid intake has some context.
Dietary fat plays an essential and critical role in human biological function;
however, the role of different FA classes in the etiology and prevention of
type 2 diabetes has some general direction but remains inconclusive.