Fats and Health

Other discussions not related to the Permanent Portfolio

Moderator: Global Moderator

Post Reply
Pet Hog
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 218
Joined: Tue May 28, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Fats and Health

Post by Pet Hog » Thu Nov 13, 2014 3:06 pm

MachineGhost wrote: It's because mustard gas is derived from the erucic acid in rapeseed oil.
As an organic chemist, I must object!  The chemical structure of erucic acid (a long-chain fatty acid) is completely unrelated to that of mustard gas (a short sulfur-containing molecule).  There is no way anyone would synthesize it that way.  The only connection I can think of might be if the oil was used in the formulation of mustard gas, but that doesn't appear to be the case either.  I suspect the misunderstanding has come about because erucic acid is a component of mustard oil, which is completely unrelated to mustard gas (so named because its odor is similar to that of mustard).

By the way, canola oil contains at most 2% erucic acid (5% in the EU), whereas rapeseed oil can contain up to 54% of the stuff, so the two oils are not exactly the same thing.
User avatar
MachineGhost
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 10054
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 9:31 am

Re: Fats and Health

Post by MachineGhost » Thu Nov 13, 2014 11:07 pm

Pet Hog wrote: As an organic chemist, I must object!  The chemical structure of erucic acid (a long-chain fatty acid) is completely unrelated to that of mustard gas (a short sulfur-containing molecule).  There is no way anyone would synthesize it that way.  The only connection I can think of might be if the oil was used in the formulation of mustard gas, but that doesn't appear to be the case either.  I suspect the misunderstanding has come about because erucic acid is a component of mustard oil, which is completely unrelated to mustard gas (so named because its odor is similar to that of mustard).
Right you are, sir!
http://www.cansa.org.za/debunking-canola-myths/ wrote:]Mustard gas is not made from rape seed oil, but by treating a chemical called ethylene with sulphur chloride or dihydroxyethyl with hydrochloric gas. In other words, mustard gas is produced synthetically and is not derived from rape oil at all;
It seems that the mustard gas connection was an Internet urban legend back in the day: http://www.snopes.com/medical/toxins/canola.asp

Amusing that I still have crap like that floating around in my brain.
"All generous minds have a horror of what are commonly called 'Facts'. They are the brute beasts of the intellectual domain." -- Thomas Hobbes

Disclaimer: I am not a broker, dealer, investment advisor, physician, theologian or prophet.  I should not be considered as legally permitted to render such advice!
User avatar
pugchief
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3988
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2012 2:41 pm
Location: suburbs of Chicago, IL

Re: Fats and Health

Post by pugchief » Fri Nov 14, 2014 7:01 am

MG, in the article you just quoted, it states:
  • Canola oil contains linolenic acid, which increases one of the essential omega-3 fatty acids called EPA in human tissues and actually reduces the stickiness of red blood corpuscles and therefore reduces blood clotting tendencies.
and
  • Canola oil contains high levels of omega-3 fatty acids as mentioned above and omega-3 fatty acids help to stimulate the immune system, not put it to sleep.
The article goes on to basically state that canola oil is not toxic and is even good for you. The fact that is was once an industrial oil is really irrelevant. So what's your beef with it?
"Congressmen should wear uniforms, you know, like NASCAR drivers, so we could identify their corporate sponsors."
dragoncar
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1111
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2011 7:23 pm

Re: Fats and Health

Post by dragoncar » Fri Nov 14, 2014 9:51 am

pugchief wrote: MG, in the article you just quoted, it states:
  • Canola oil contains linolenic acid, which increases one of the essential omega-3 fatty acids called EPA in human tissues and actually reduces the stickiness of red blood corpuscles and therefore reduces blood clotting tendencies.
and
  • Canola oil contains high levels of omega-3 fatty acids as mentioned above and omega-3 fatty acids help to stimulate the immune system, not put it to sleep.
The article goes on to basically state that canola oil is not toxic and is even good for you. The fact that is was once an industrial oil is really irrelevant. So what's your beef with it?
To be fair, MG didn't mention industrial oil, that was Mark Leavy.  I guess I'm not old or industrial enough for "it's really rapeseed oil!" to make me think of industrial lubricants, beyond the scary sounding word "rape."
User avatar
Benko
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1833
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 9:40 am

Re: Fats and Health

Post by Benko » Fri Nov 14, 2014 10:12 am

1. "Canola oil is low in saturated fat and contains both omega-6 and omega-3 fatty acids in a ratio of 2:1"

This is from wikipedia, and I think they meant all of the above as selling points (which is sad)

2.  Conversion of omega 3 precursors to e.g. EPA is limited by many things (including age).  This is why flax is not a good substitute for "fish oil" and there are studies to demonstrate this.

3.  Omega 3 precursors only convert to EPA, not DHA.

EDIT:  I should add the olive oil has omega 6 fatty acids also, but it has (if you actually get the good stuff) benefits as well.
Last edited by Benko on Fri Nov 14, 2014 10:16 am, edited 1 time in total.
It was good being the party of Robin Hood. Until they morphed into the Sheriff of Nottingham
User avatar
pugchief
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3988
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2012 2:41 pm
Location: suburbs of Chicago, IL

Re: Fats and Health

Post by pugchief » Fri Nov 14, 2014 10:26 am

Benko/MG:
What is your opinion of the studies that now link fish oil supplements to substantial increase in incidence of prostate cancer?
"Congressmen should wear uniforms, you know, like NASCAR drivers, so we could identify their corporate sponsors."
User avatar
Benko
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1833
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 9:40 am

Re: Fats and Health

Post by Benko » Fri Nov 14, 2014 11:04 am

Pug,

Examine.com makes some very good points on this:

http://examine.com/blog/fish-oil-and-your-prostate/

The whole page is worth reading, but here is the bottom line:

What Should I Know?


Stating "fish oil causes cancer" due to this study would be a mistake, as it is a case-cohort study (conducted at one time point only), and a temporal relationship is not made. While unlikely, with the data available, it could also be possible to state "prostate cancer causes a higher n3 concentration in the blood."

The temporal aspect is important, since fish oil supplementation can drastically change serum levels of omega-3s in the blood. It is quite common for people diagnosed with prostate cancer to supplement with fish oil, as it is commonly touted to be cancer-protective (which would mean that prostate cancer precedes fish oil supplementation). A previous study using persons from SELECT using a design that could assess this temporal relationship found no relation (either protective or harmful) with prostate cancer incidence.

Furthermore, this study did not measure mortality. When looking at mortality, fish oil seems to be associated with reduced mortality. In simpler words, it was found to not help prevent prostate cancer, but reduced your chances of dying from it.

Also of interest is the large ranges observed (as in, the 71% value had an actual range of somewhere between 0% and 192% with a 5% margin of error), which either suggests other factors are at play influencing the results or large differences in how one’s body responds to omega-3 ingestion.

At the most, we can state that prostate cancer is associated with higher omega-3 ratios in your blood. This study poses a chicken-egg problem - which causes which?


This study and no other studies in existence can causatively state that fish oil causes prostate cancer. If anything, this study begets a plethora of questions in regards to the relationship between prostate cancer and omega-3 but proves nothing.
It was good being the party of Robin Hood. Until they morphed into the Sheriff of Nottingham
User avatar
Benko
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1833
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 9:40 am

BMJ: cardiologist admits low sat fat diet will not prevent heard disease

Post by Benko » Fri Nov 14, 2014 12:16 pm

From Chris Kresser's weekly roundup of useful info:

Cardiologist in the British medical Journal:

But Dr. DiNicolantonio says there is insufficient evidence to suggest that reducing saturated fat intake helps to reduce the risk of heart disease, and consuming refined carbohydrate or polyunsaturated fat, such as omega-6, may even increase the risk of heart disease and other conditions.

So cutting sat fat and adding canola may give you heart disease.
It was good being the party of Robin Hood. Until they morphed into the Sheriff of Nottingham
User avatar
pugchief
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3988
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2012 2:41 pm
Location: suburbs of Chicago, IL

Re: Fats and Health

Post by pugchief » Fri Nov 14, 2014 12:48 pm

Benko, thanks for the reply and the link. Lots of good info on examine.com
"Congressmen should wear uniforms, you know, like NASCAR drivers, so we could identify their corporate sponsors."
User avatar
MachineGhost
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 10054
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 9:31 am

Re: Fats and Health

Post by MachineGhost » Fri Nov 14, 2014 1:23 pm

pugchief wrote: The article goes on to basically state that canola oil is not toxic and is even good for you. The fact that is was once an industrial oil is really irrelevant. So what's your beef with it?
I didn't post those links for truth in accuracy but to address the mustard gas myth.  So it's marketing fiction from vested interests.  ALA is barely converted to EPA or DHA in the body if theres no LA obstruction and is not considered a credible dietary source of either EFA anyway.  Furthermore, the whole point of refining is to get rid of the LA/ALA because it is what oxidizes the oil and makes it shelf unstable.  Whatever LA/ALA remains in refined oil is sort of a frankenstein trans-fat produced by refining as opposed to hydrogenation.

Compared to unrefined olive oil with its array of polyphenols and aspirin-like olive water, refined canola has nothing healthy to offer.  It is a shelf-stable, refined, junk food product created just to cash in on the vegetable oil craze that has been going on since toxic trans-fat Crisco came out over 100 years ago. 

Besides, the main problem with canola oil is it contains too much toxic Omega-6 and is about 22% by weight.  Natural state EVOO, tropical oils and animal fats are all 12% or less.  All Omega-6 oxidizes during digestion (assuming its not pre-oxidized to begin with) and it is harmful past 4% max of calories.  Anyone concerned about their health reduces Omega-6 intake as if it is the plaque.  Like all vegetable oils, canola is a hybridized frankenfood and is not a natural-state food that we evolved to eat.

Also, I may have tried unrefined canola oil at one time and still had a negative inflammatory reaction to it just as I do to refined canola
"All generous minds have a horror of what are commonly called 'Facts'. They are the brute beasts of the intellectual domain." -- Thomas Hobbes

Disclaimer: I am not a broker, dealer, investment advisor, physician, theologian or prophet.  I should not be considered as legally permitted to render such advice!
User avatar
MachineGhost
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 10054
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 9:31 am

Re: Fats and Health

Post by MachineGhost » Fri Nov 14, 2014 1:30 pm

pugchief wrote: Benko/MG:
What is your opinion of the studies that now link fish oil supplements to substantial increase in incidence of prostate cancer?
I think that was one of the typical, flawed, biased studies with a poor methodology that the mainstream media loves to parrot without any real investigative journalism.  The study was not about dietary fish oil supplements and the one-time serum levels were still 60% below the marker for optimal health.  There were also many confounding factors.  Junk science.  Sadly, this is the norm nowadays as making a public health career depends on making a splash and what better way than to kowtow to Ceasar?  Critical thinking and facts be damned!

So if not outright crony corruptism, then it is just outright naivety and ignorance.  People in the public health field have very little experience with optimal nutrition and optimal dosing of nutrients.  How can they?  We're talking largely about undergraduate and postgraduates here.  They're still young adults that barely know diddley squat about anything.  Theory is not practice.
Last edited by MachineGhost on Fri Nov 14, 2014 1:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"All generous minds have a horror of what are commonly called 'Facts'. They are the brute beasts of the intellectual domain." -- Thomas Hobbes

Disclaimer: I am not a broker, dealer, investment advisor, physician, theologian or prophet.  I should not be considered as legally permitted to render such advice!
User avatar
Benko
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1833
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 9:40 am

Re: Fats and Health

Post by Benko » Fri Nov 14, 2014 1:35 pm

Somewhat off the topic, but since we're touting the benefits of olive oil, people should know that claims that olive oil is actually extra virgin are only true about half the time (perhaps 40 or 60% I don't remember exactly) as there is big time fraud in the olive oil industry.  There are some articles around reviewing different brands, but basically there is no easy way unless you have a store in town that buys from known suppliers and charges correspondingly. 
It was good being the party of Robin Hood. Until they morphed into the Sheriff of Nottingham
Post Reply