rancidity of oils
Posted by:
Panchito
()
Date: February 27, 2014 03:26AM [nutritionfacts.org]
"When you look at a bottle of oil in the grocery store there are “best-before” date, advising consumers how long they have to consume it before it starts going rancid and builds up oxidation products that can be particularly harmful to human health. Here are the best-before dates for eight culinary oils: almond oil, avocado oil, hazelnut, macadamia, grape seed, rice bran, toasted sesame, and walnut oil. These are the best-before dates in number of months, counting from the day the oil is made. So if you make batch of walnut oil on January 1st 2012, the best-before date printed on the bottle from that batch would be 12 months later, January 1, 2013. Now this is making some pretty strict assumptions. This is based you are keeping the oil in the refridgerator in a airtight, dark containiner, so it’s not exposed to air, room temperature, or light, particularly after it’s opened. This group of scientists were skeptical that the companies were printing accurate dates, and so they put all the oils to the test to find out that the true these expirations dates were. Would it match what the companies say? Would the companies put a longer duration trying to make the oil appear more stable than it really is? Or would they put a shorter duration on, to encourage people to buy their product more frequently? For rice bran oil the company said 7 months. Actual estimated shelf-life found in their tests? 6.5 months. Not bad, pretty close. In some cases, though, the truth was stretched one way; in others it was stretched the other way. Look at almond oil. They said it would last over a year, and it really only stays good for 3 months, and remember that’s 3 months in the fridge, in the dark, and after production, not after when you buy it. Macadamia oil and walnuts were the real outliers though. Mac oil lasted the longest —over a year, the company totally undersold it’s stability, but for walnut oil, they said a year and it only lasts about 2 and a half weeks, according to testing with the “Rancimat.”" from a comment: "Dr. Vogel conducted a study that compared different fats and oils (olive oil, canola oil, and salmon) and how they impaired our endothelial cells. Our endothelial cells are within our blood vessels lining their walls. They keep clots from forming and keep our blood running smoothly. It also helps our blood vessels dilate and contract when needed. The participants of the study ate a meal containing 3.5 tablespoons of olive oil and the examiners measured their arterial damage after 3 hours. “Contrary to part of our hypothesis, our study found that omega-9 (oleic acid)-rich olive oil impairs endothelial function postprandially.” They also make note that “In terms of their postprandial effect on endothelial function, the beneficial components of the Mediterranean and Lyon Diet Heart Study diets appear to be antioxidant-rich foods, including vegetables [and] fruits”" [content.onlinejacc.org] Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/27/2014 03:29AM by Panchito. Re: rancidity of oils
Posted by:
SueZ
()
Date: February 27, 2014 04:50AM Panchito Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- > [nutritionfacts.org] > e-of-cooking-oils/ > > "When you look at a bottle of oil in the grocery > store there are “best-before” date, advising > consumers how long they have to consume it before > it starts going rancid and builds up oxidation > products that can be particularly harmful to human > health. > > Here are the best-before dates for eight culinary > oils: almond oil, avocado oil, hazelnut, > macadamia, grape seed, rice bran, toasted sesame, > and walnut oil. These are the best-before dates in > number of months, counting from the day the oil is > made. So if you make batch of walnut oil on > January 1st 2012, the best-before date printed on > the bottle from that batch would be 12 months > later, January 1, 2013. Now this is making some > pretty strict assumptions. This is based you are > keeping the oil in the refridgerator in a > airtight, dark containiner, so it’s not exposed > to air, room temperature, or light, particularly > after it’s opened. > > This group of scientists were skeptical that the > companies were printing accurate dates, and so > they put all the oils to the test to find out that > the true these expirations dates were. Would it > match what the companies say? Would the companies > put a longer duration trying to make the oil > appear more stable than it really is? Or would > they put a shorter duration on, to encourage > people to buy their product more frequently? > > For rice bran oil the company said 7 months. > Actual estimated shelf-life found in their tests? > 6.5 months. Not bad, pretty close. In some cases, > though, the truth was stretched one way; in others > it was stretched the other way. Look at almond > oil. They said it would last over a year, and it > really only stays good for 3 months, and remember > that’s 3 months in the fridge, in the dark, and > after production, not after when you buy it. > > Macadamia oil and walnuts were the real outliers > though. Mac oil lasted the longest —over a year, > the company totally undersold it’s stability, > but for walnut oil, they said a year and it only > lasts about 2 and a half weeks, according to > testing with the “Rancimat.”" Ok, for store bought non-raw oils, but so what anyway and what the heck is a "rancimat"? And next we read on to the usual trademark panchito "let's see how far we can twist all this stuff around and shove extra bogus study stuff into it to make oil look really really bad with a gigantic shoehorn which no one will notice"... > from a comment: > > "Dr. Vogel conducted a study that compared > different fats and oils (olive > oil, canola oil, and salmon) and how they impaired > our endothelial > cells. Our endothelial cells are within our blood > vessels lining their > walls. They keep clots from forming and keep our > blood running smoothly. > It also helps our blood vessels dilate and > contract when needed. The > participants of the study ate a meal containing > 3.5 tablespoons of olive > oil and the examiners measured their arterial > damage after 3 hours. > “Contrary to part of our hypothesis, our study > found that omega-9 (oleic > acid)-rich olive oil impairs endothelial function > postprandially.” They > also make note that “In terms of their > postprandial effect on > endothelial function, the beneficial components of > the Mediterranean and > Lyon Diet Heart Study diets appear to be > antioxidant-rich foods, > including vegetables fruits”" > > [content.onlinejacc.org] > 5/1455 This is one of the most asinine studies I've seen yet. I'd say a more accurate conclusion than these M.D,'s pulled out of their butts would be not to eat oil with bread and crackers. Re: rancidity of oils
Posted by:
Panchito
()
Date: February 27, 2014 03:59PM you can always remain skeptic. Nobody is forcing you to beleive. Re: rancidity of oils
Posted by:
jtprindl
()
Date: February 27, 2014 04:59PM Panchito only believes what he wants to believe. I've asked him for the slightest bit of evidence against high-fat raw plant-based diets, which he claims is "everywhere", but he can't come up with anything. This is not a disagreement, this is simply asking for real evidence as opposed to hearsay. Not a study done on high-fat animal and/or processed foods, a study done on high-fat raw plant-based diets, considering all lifestyle factors. Re: rancidity of oils
Posted by:
Panchito
()
Date: February 27, 2014 05:04PM lol. did you bother to read the post? there is a link with a study that says that olive oil damages the inner layer of the blood vessels (supposedly because high fats are loaded with AGEs and that is what they touch). I just don't want to be a victim of idiotic discussions. I'll leave that for other newer people Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/27/2014 05:05PM by Panchito. Re: rancidity of oils
Posted by:
jtprindl
()
Date: February 27, 2014 05:14PM Panchito Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- > lol. did you bother to read the post? there is a > link with a study that says that olive oil damages > the inner layer of the blood vessels (supposedly > because high fats are loaded with AGEs and that is > what they touch). I just don't want to be a victim > of idiotic discussions. I'll leave that for other > newer people That's one form of PURE fat... what about nuts, seeds, and coconut? Newer people? Do you really believe you are well-versed in nutrition and health because you go on a nutrition website daily? Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/27/2014 05:15PM by jtprindl. Re: rancidity of oils
Posted by:
Panchito
()
Date: February 27, 2014 05:43PM ja ja. you finally GOT the study. Now, don't try to spin things around or try change the subject. Re: rancidity of oils
Posted by:
jtprindl
()
Date: February 27, 2014 05:49PM Panchito Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- > ja ja. you finally GOT the study. Now, don't try > to spin things around or try change the subject. So because olive oil (which is ONE form of PURE fat) and something you wouldn't find anywhere in nature is unhealthy, that means all types of fats are unhealthy? You'd be better off not posting. Re: rancidity of oils
Posted by:
Panchito
()
Date: February 27, 2014 05:55PM Lets make clear that you have not refuted your original claim. You are changing it after I showed you the study. What happened to your logic? Re: rancidity of oils
Posted by:
jtprindl
()
Date: February 27, 2014 06:02PM Panchito Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- > Lets make clear that you have not refuted your > original claim. You are changing it after I showed > you the study. What happened to your logic? I'm not changing any of my claims, what are you talking about? When did I say anything about olive oil? Still waiting on that study proving high-fat raw plant-based diets are unhealthy. You fail to make the distinction between different forms of fats (fats are not just pure oils). You also fail to understand that because one form of pure fat (removed from its natural source) is unhealthy, that doesn't mean all fats from all sources are unhealthy. Get it? Re: rancidity of oils
Posted by:
Panchito
()
Date: February 27, 2014 06:05PM jtprindl Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- > Panchito only believes what he wants to believe. > I've asked him for the slightest bit of evidence > against high-fat raw plant-based diets, which he > claims is "everywhere", but he can't come up with > anything. you do have a very short term memmory (convenience?) bye bye!!! (I wasted enough of my time doing the fool) Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/27/2014 06:09PM by Panchito. Re: rancidity of oils
Posted by:
jtprindl
()
Date: February 27, 2014 06:10PM Panchito Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- > jtprindl Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Panchito only believes what he wants to > believe. > > I've asked him for the slightest bit of > evidence > > against high-fat raw plant-based diets, which > he > > claims is "everywhere", but he can't come up > with > > anything. > > you do have a very short term memmory > (covenience?) > > bye bye!!! I honestly think you have some type of mental problem. I'm being serious and anyone reading your responses could come to the same conclusion. Olive oil being unhealthy doesn't even qualify as the "slightest bit of evidence" against high-fat raw plant-based diets. A diet can be high-fat, raw, and plant-based and completely exclude all oils, do you not understand this? Not to mention, the study you're referring to doesn't even mention the quality of olive oil used and how it was processed. Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/27/2014 06:11PM by jtprindl. Re: rancidity of oils
Posted by:
Diogenez
()
Date: February 28, 2014 10:06AM
life vs lifelessness Re: rancidity of oils
Posted by:
SueZ
()
Date: February 28, 2014 02:10PM "Professional Hygienists point out that the body’s needs for oil are very small. All condemn free oils, that is, oils out of context with the food in which nature developed them."
"Professional Hygienists". Lol. Re: rancidity of oils
Posted by:
jtprindl
()
Date: February 28, 2014 04:41PM T.C. Fry died of heart failure when he was 70. Re: rancidity of oils
Posted by:
Diogenez
()
Date: February 28, 2014 09:32PM ad hom. look at the cause , cookery and a past life of enervation.
eat your food whole or risks the consequences. mal absorbtion, weight gain as the toxins fromt toxic plants.spices herbs get stores to protect your body or emaciated liek landis and cousens unable to uptake life vs lifelessness Re: rancidity of oils
Posted by:
jtprindl
()
Date: February 28, 2014 09:38PM Diogenez Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- > ad hom. look at the cause , cookery and a past > life of enervation. > > eat your food whole or risks the consequences. > mal absorbtion, weight gain as the toxins fromt > toxic plants.spices herbs get stores to protect > your body or emaciated liek landis and cousens > unable to uptake It's not an ad hominem argument, it's fact. I wouldn't be too interested in taking advice from someone who's an "expert" in health when they died of heart failure at a young age (70 is quite young) and many SAD eaters live much longer without disease. Re: rancidity of oils
Posted by:
jtprindl
()
Date: February 28, 2014 10:26PM THeSt0rm Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- > I was looking into raw cacao butter.. it's > interesting that it may actually be beneficial the > same way people love coconut butter and palm oil, > or olive oil. It doesn't go rancid. Is it > underrated? I've been starting to question this as well, many people in the raw food community demonize raw chocolate but it's a fantastic source of minerals and antioxidants. There's supposedly a "neurotoxin" in it, theobromine, which is similar to caffeine, but for all I know it could be in such miniscule amounts that it'd be comparable to avoiding sprouted nuts and seeds because there may be a tiny amount of phytic acid remaining. I've also heard from David Wolfe that you can combine it with certain foods like mucuna and it will negate the stimulatory effects. Re: rancidity of oils
Posted by:
Diogenez
()
Date: February 28, 2014 10:32PM : jtprindl when you leave cognitive dissonance , i remain more than willing to connect
you seem new yes? life vs lifelessness Re: rancidity of oils
Posted by:
jtprindl
()
Date: February 28, 2014 10:34PM Diogenez Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- > : jtprindl when you leave cognitive dissonance , > i remain more than willing to connect > > you seem new yes? I don't have any cognitive dissonance, but nice, mature, evidenced-backed response. If you think sprouts are unhealthy, it's not even worth discussing diet-related things with you. Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2014 10:35PM by jtprindl. Re: rancidity of oils
Posted by:
Diogenez
()
Date: March 02, 2014 03:54AM worhtless waste of space . toxins as said. attain some real callories if you can from mature. it's like being a plant pendophile.. if that's your thing. w/e but its not optimum life vs lifelessness Re: rancidity of oils
Posted by:
SueZ
()
Date: March 02, 2014 07:58PM Diogenez Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- > worhtless waste of space . toxins as said. > attain some real callories if you can from mature. > it's like being a plant pendophile.. if that's > your thing. w/e but its not optimum Another incoherent babble post which may have been sent by a lunatic fringer from a faraway galaxy. Well, let's hope it's far away and that the entity forgot it's towel and is on it's way back for it... Re: rancidity of oils
Posted by:
jtprindl
()
Date: March 02, 2014 08:28PM Diogenez is so far off-base that it's not even worth it.
"Never argue with a fool, they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience" Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
|
|