The abstract actually says "LDL size was smaller (P < 0.02) after the CHO diet than after the MUFA or SFA diets" in the ApoE4 group, and the full-text conclusions says "Our results showed that replacement of a CHO diet by a
MUFA diet increased the LDL-size in apoE 3/3 young healthy subjects, whereas it decreased LDL-size in apoE 4/3 subjects." I've seen a few papers that show this, and the general consensus is that MUFA/PUFA > CHO > SFA for reductions in LDL-size and particle number (APO-B), which I think is the more relevant finding. At least this is for "moderate" diets as in this paper, in which the CHO diet was 28% of calories with 275 mg/d cholesterol!
Forgive me if I'm misunderstanding you..
The goal is to increase LDL particle size, right? If so, then doesn't the paper suggest that the CHO diet works better for the apoE 4/3 subjects? The apoE 3/4 subjects had the highest LDL size on a CHO diet.
If one were concerned about their ApoE4 status, the effects of these "moderate" diets with minor alterations are insignificant with respect to severely lowering total fat or cholesterol intake, the latter being probably more important. They also only took in about 25 g/d fiber on 2450 kcal/d, so they were probably not eating much in the way of a plant-heavy diet, which again has far better lipid-modifying results than minor changes in dietary fat composition.
Great points. Also had not thought of looking at their fiber.
To this effect, I have a thread on here where I described my ApoE 4/4 status and beginning a plant-based vegan diet quite high in MUFA, total fat, and calories. From what I've seen with myself and others, and the limited relevant research, the results were far and away more significant than the "moderate" diets used in the studies like the one you posted.
Nice thread! I look forward to seeing your number on the next blood test. For anyone reading, it's here.
Edited by Elus, 17 February 2013 - 06:43 PM.