Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

anyone read this article previously?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • anyone read this article previously?

    if so just wondering if they could translate it in layman's? I tried reading it but to complicated with English not being my first language.

    http://www.jlr.org/content/23/2/243.full.pdf

    Would be appreciated thanks
    Last edited by sting; 06-12-2013, 02:06 AM.

  • #2
    I read it over very quickly.

    The body may not be able to deal with erucic acid, an omega 9 fatty acid. The results are fat deposits in the heart and also high fat levels in the blood plasma.

    It was an argument against using canola oil at the time, in 1982. There are plenty of arguments against using canola oil still. But seed oils have been bred to be low in erucic acid in more recent times.

    Comment


    • #3
      Thanks Richard they mentioned monounsaturated fats in the study what did they have to say about them if you don't mind?, where i got lost was i thought monounsaturated fats were medium chain fatty acids which burn faster than long chain fatty acids like saturated fats, but in this article they kept mentioning tham as 22 long chain fatty acids?

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by sting View Post
        Thanks Richard they mentioned monounsaturated fats in the study what did they have to say about them if you don't mind?, where i got lost was i thought monounsaturated fats were medium chain fatty acids which burn faster than long chain fatty acids like saturated fats, but in this article they kept mentioning tham as 22 long chain fatty acids?
        they are talking about 22:1 omega 9 fatty acids. Erucic acid is one, and they have bred this out of "modern" crap edible oils mostly since this study. A lot of vegetable oils have omega 9 fats in them still I'm sure...

        Comment


        • #5
          OK thanks

          Comment

          Working...
          X