Thank you for finding the link to the actual study. Can we have this edited to point to it, rather than the Telegraph's clickbaity reblog of it?
From the study:
> "Intake of total fat and each type of fat was associated with lower risk of total mortality (quintile 5 vs quintile 1, total fat: HR 0·77 [95% CI 0·67–0·87], ptrend<0·0001; saturated fat, HR 0·86 [0·76–0·99], ptrend=0·0088; monounsaturated fat: HR 0·81 [0·71–0·92], ptrend<0·0001; and polyunsaturated fat: HR 0·80 [0·71–0·89], ptrend<0·0001)"
This is the sentence immediately before the one you quoted, and I believe it is deceptive to quote the non-result on CVD in particular, rather than the positive result on all-cause mortality.
From the study:
> "Intake of total fat and each type of fat was associated with lower risk of total mortality (quintile 5 vs quintile 1, total fat: HR 0·77 [95% CI 0·67–0·87], ptrend<0·0001; saturated fat, HR 0·86 [0·76–0·99], ptrend=0·0088; monounsaturated fat: HR 0·81 [0·71–0·92], ptrend<0·0001; and polyunsaturated fat: HR 0·80 [0·71–0·89], ptrend<0·0001)"
This is the sentence immediately before the one you quoted, and I believe it is deceptive to quote the non-result on CVD in particular, rather than the positive result on all-cause mortality.