Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion GroupsGeneral TopicsLow CarbWeightWatchers
WeightAdviser.com
Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map

Weight Loss Forum / General Topics / June 2004

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Trans Fats

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Dave - 23 Jun 2004 16:14 GMT
I introduced my parents to concerns about trans fats with an email link to a
Harvard analysis.  So, at dinner Sunday my dad showed me his new margarine
and pointed out that it had no trans fats.  When I looked at the label I
immediately saw HYDROGENATED Soybean Oil.  However, under fats, Transfats
were specifically listed as zero.  The tub has over 30 servings, so I'm
guessing the tiny serving had less than .5 grams of transfat.  I have read
that items less than .5 grams are listed as zero.  Doing this with transfats
seems like cheating.   The total fat was 5 grams per serving, so I figure
the transfats could be 10%.

Is my interpretation right?   Anything hydrogenated should be a transfat.  I
had read that trans fat labeling was not required until 2006.  I don't buy
margarine, so I was surprised by all this.

I started to try to explain about serving sizes to my 74 year old dad, but
he is certain that there are no transfats in the tub.

Dave
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/LowCarbHighFat/links

http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/LowCarbHighFat/

LowCarbHighFat-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
MattLB - 23 Jun 2004 18:51 GMT
> I introduced my parents to concerns about trans fats with an email link to a
> Harvard analysis.  So, at dinner Sunday my dad showed me his new margarine
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> I started to try to explain about serving sizes to my 74 year old dad, but
> he is certain that there are no transfats in the tub.

Note that trans fatty acids are unsaturated fatty acids that have gone
through the hydrogenation process without getting hydrogenated. Strictly
speaking only "partially hydrogenated oils" should have trans fats.
Fully hydrogenated fats/oils should have no trans fats as they have no
unsaturated fat at all. Whether the food labelling legal directives
allow some loopholes I don't know.

MattLB
Dave - 23 Jun 2004 19:29 GMT
> Note that trans fatty acids are unsaturated fatty acids that have gone
> through the hydrogenation process without getting hydrogenated. Strictly
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> MattLB

Hmmm.

If I understand you, saturated fats cannot be made in trans fats.  Soybean
oil is 14% saturated fat, so I figure the other 86% is unsaturated fat.
When you say that a fully hydrogenated fat or oil would have no trans fats
because they have no unsaturated fat, you imply that our example,
hydrogenated soybean oil has no transfats.  However, if the soybean oil is
86% unsaturated fat, the result of hydrogenation should produce trans fats.
No?

Your first sentence seems to say that unsaturated fatty acids can go through
the hydrogenation process without getting hydrogenated.  This seems self
contradictory.  Can a house go through the painting process without getting
painted?

Either I am seriously failing to understand you, or you are yanking my
chain.  The later would not be unusual on USENET.

Dave
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/LowCarbHighFat/links

http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/LowCarbHighFat/

LowCarbHighFat-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
sstamp@physics.mun.ca - 23 Jun 2004 20:08 GMT
In sci.med.nutrition Dave <LowCarbHighFat-subscribe@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

> However, if the soybean oil is 86% unsaturated fat, the result of
> hydrogenation should produce trans fats.

Hydrogenation produces saturates, partial hydrogenation produces trans-fatty
acids.

Signature

Cliff Stamp                  
sstamp@physics.mun.ca             http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/

The one unforgivable sin, the offence against one's own integrity,
is to accept anything at all simply on authority -- Maureen Johnson Long

Anyone can hold the helm when the sea is calm.   -- Publilius Syrus

Dave - 23 Jun 2004 21:59 GMT
Thanks Cliff,
So, if I'm getting this, saturated fat created in an oil by hydrogenation is
not considered a trans fat; and trans-fatty acids produced in an oil by
partial hydrogenation are trans fats.  Am I close?

If so, the studies showing that trans fats caused more CHD than saturated
fat were studying trans-fatty acids.  (?)

> In sci.med.nutrition Dave <LowCarbHighFat-subscribe@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> Hydrogenation produces saturates, partial hydrogenation produces trans-fatty
> acids.
Lisa - 24 Jun 2004 00:40 GMT
The term hydrogenation stems from the chemical structure of lipids.
Every lipid molecule is simple a carbon chain with varying numbers of
hydrogen atoms attatched and varying numbers of double bonds.
"saturation" is the degree to which the maximum number of hydrogen
bonds are attatched....so unsaturated fats have fewer H atoms while
saturated fats are fully loaded with the maximum H atoms possible per
carbon atom.  Saturated fat has no double bonds to the structure is
flatter and the molecules pack together....hence its solid at room
temperature.  Unsaturated fats have some double bonds between carbon
atoms and so don't have the maximal amount of H atoms.  This results
in a less linear structure so the lipids don't pack together as
well....thus liquid at room temperature.  Mono-unsaturated fat has one
double bond while polyunsaturated can have three (the omega-3's), six
(the omega 6's) and on up.

so, trans-fat is produced commercially by forcing normally unsaturated
fats (vegetable oils) to give up some of their double bonds and accept
more H atoms.  Hence the fat is now partially hydrogenated...still has
some double bonds, but less than it naturally should.  Food companies
do this because the partially hydrogenated oils have different melting
points and other properties that they find desirable to make their
food last longer on the shelf.....oh and impair our health.  These
trans-fats have conformations unlike naturally saturated or naturally
unsaturated fats and, as I understand it, when the body trys to
encorporate these weird shapes into membranes, etc. things don't work
as well.

Hopefully this helps, I'm going off what I remember from nutritional
biochem so some details may be less than exact, but the general gist
is right.

Cheers!
Lisa

> > Note that trans fatty acids are unsaturated fatty acids that have gone
> > through the hydrogenation process without getting hydrogenated. Strictly
[quoted text clipped - 29 lines]
>
> LowCarbHighFat-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
MattLB - 24 Jun 2004 13:07 GMT
> > Note that trans fatty acids are unsaturated fatty acids that have gone
> > through the hydrogenation process without getting hydrogenated. Strictly
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
> Your first sentence seems to say that unsaturated fatty acids can go through
> the hydrogenation process without getting hydrogenated.

That's true.

>  This seems self
> contradictory.  Can a house go through the painting process without getting
> painted?

If you don't have enough paint, yes.

> Either I am seriously failing to understand you, or you are yanking my
> chain.  The later would not be unusual on USENET.

No chain yanking, I promise.
A bit of background: Saturated fats have straight fatty acids, whereas
unsaturated fats have kinked fatty acids. This leads to saturated fat
being solid a room temperature, whereas unsaturated fat is liquid (oil).
To make margarine, which is solid, requires converting some of the
unsaturated (with hydrogen) oil to saturated fat. This is done by
pumping hydrogen gas through the oil in the presence of a catalyst.

The catalyst binds and distorts the unsaturated fatty acid making it
vunerable to attack by the hydrogen. If the hydrogen attacks and binds
the fatty acid it will no longer be unsaturated, it will have become
saturated (with hydrogen). If there is enough hydrogen and the process
is done for long enough you should end up with all the fatty acids fully
hydrogenated (saturated). If the hydrogenation is only partial - just
enough to make the oil more solid - not all of the unsaturated will be
turned into saturated.

If the unsaturated fatty acid is released from the catalyst without
picking up any hydrogen it will spring back to its original shape, OR,
it will spring back in a trans shape. The key thing is that this trans
shape, while still unsaturated is straight instead of kinked. This means
it appears to be a saturated fat and behaves like one physically, but as
soon as the body tries to burn it like saturated fat it finds it can't.

The result is that trans fats hang around in the body and are difficult
to get rid of without free radicals. Any unsaturated fats + free
radicals = damage to the body, so all in all trans fats are bad news.

MattLB
Dave - 24 Jun 2004 15:11 GMT
Wow.   Thank you so much.

So, in a sense it is the catalyst that triggers the problem.  What do they
use as a catalyst?

If one take an anti-oxidant, will this make it harder for the body to remove
transfats?

(I'm thinking of making a webpage out of your explanation.)

Dave
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/LowCarbHighFat/links

http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/LowCarbHighFat/

LowCarbHighFat-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

> > > Note that trans fatty acids are unsaturated fatty acids that have gone
> > > through the hydrogenation process without getting hydrogenated. Strictly
[quoted text clipped - 58 lines]
>
> MattLB
MattLB - 24 Jun 2004 17:52 GMT
> Wow.   Thank you so much.
>
> So, in a sense it is the catalyst that triggers the problem.  What do they
> use as a catalyst?

Usually nickel, because it's cheap and easy to get hold of.

> If one take an anti-oxidant, will this make it harder for the body to remove
> transfats?

Tricky one. The attempted removal of trans fats is done by white blood
cells, which generate free radicals on demand (usually to attack
bacteria), so it's possible there may be a reduction in their
effectiveness with high levels of antioxidants. On the other hand the
places trans fats tend to end up, like the fatty deposits in arteries,
don't have much in the way of antioxidants anyway, which is half the
problem.

> (I'm thinking of making a webpage out of your explanation.)

Okay, that'll be 1000 dollars a word :-)

MattLB
Dr.Bob - 26 Jun 2004 07:53 GMT
> > > Note that trans fatty acids are unsaturated fatty acids that have gone
> > > through the hydrogenation process without getting hydrogenated. Strictly
[quoted text clipped - 58 lines]
>
> MattLB

Matt,

Another point, just to kind of add to an already thorough explanation
is that trans-fats aren't just flat.  They're rigid and flat and thus
will increase the melting temperature of the fats that they pack
with(much the way cholesterol increases the rigidity of cell
membranes).  Thus the reason why people believe that trans-fats are
believed to increase the deposit of arterial plaque(high melting fatty
gloop).
kvs - 27 Jun 2004 04:42 GMT
> > > Note that trans fatty acids are unsaturated fatty acids that have gone
> > > through the hydrogenation process without getting hydrogenated. Strictly
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> > >
> > > MattLB

>  The catalyst binds and distorts the unsaturated fatty acid making it
> vunerable to attack by the hydrogen. If the hydrogen attacks and binds
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> enough to make the oil more solid - not all of the unsaturated will be
> turned into saturated.

It begs the question why companies would expend money to convert
unsaturated oil to saturated fat if there are natural saturated fats
(e.g. coconut oil) that can be used.   Full hydrogenation is an
asymptotic limit which will never be reached in an industrial process
constrained by time and money.  So any hydrogenated oil will have some
(small) percentage of trans fat.

>  If the unsaturated fatty acid is released from the catalyst without
> picking up any hydrogen it will spring back to its original shape, OR,
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> to get rid of without free radicals. Any unsaturated fats + free
> radicals = damage to the body, so all in all trans fats are bad news.

There is a hubris to the food industry where some engineer hacks
together some "great idea" like hydrogenation with a very simple
intent and no consideration of the complex effects that it has.  
Genetically modified crops also sit in this category of "innovation".
For example, there are regions where soil aluminum content is too high
to allow normal crops to grow so some genius decided that all we need
is modified plants to solve this problem.  The obvious fact that these
crops will have abnormal aluminum content doesn't seem to be noticed.
sstamp@physics.mun.ca - 28 Jun 2004 15:56 GMT
In sci.med.nutrition kvs <kvstratus@yahoo.ca> wrote:

> It begs the question why companies would expend money to convert
> unsaturated oil to saturated fat if there are natural saturated fats
> (e.g. coconut oil) that can be used.

Because saturated fats are regarded by many as "bad", and trans-fats being
mono or poly are therefore "good" by default. It took awhile for the adverse
health effects of trans-fats to become known.

Signature

Cliff Stamp                  
sstamp@physics.mun.ca             http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/

The one unforgivable sin, the offence against one's own integrity,
is to accept anything at all simply on authority -- Maureen Johnson Long

Anyone can hold the helm when the sea is calm.   -- Publilius Syrus

MattLB - 28 Jun 2004 18:22 GMT
> In sci.med.nutrition kvs <kvstratus@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> mono or poly are therefore "good" by default. It took awhile for the adverse
> health effects of trans-fats to become known.

Also, because it allows you to fine tune the consistency of the the
result. Depending on how long you hydrogenate for you either get a
slightly less runny oil, a gloopy oil, a greasy paste or a solid fat.
Apparently, pure saturated fat is far too solid to spread on bread, so
margarines always stop short of full hydrogenation. They can also claim
their margarine contain "healthy" unsaturated fats that way too.

MattLB
sstamp@physics.mun.ca - 28 Jun 2004 19:11 GMT
In sci.med.nutrition MattLB <mattlb@fakebitangelfire.com> wrote:

> Also, because it allows you to fine tune the consistency of the the
> result.

You could also get this by altering the amount of the saturated fat, taste
may be an issue here, though they could always use the same thing as they do
for the highly processed PUFA.

Expense could also be an issue, as the oils typically used for margerines
are the cheapest ones, so even if the processing is more involved, the low
base costs might keep totals down.

Signature

Cliff Stamp                  
sstamp@physics.mun.ca             http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/

The one unforgivable sin, the offence against one's own integrity,
is to accept anything at all simply on authority -- Maureen Johnson Long

Anyone can hold the helm when the sea is calm.   -- Publilius Syrus

Patricia Heil - 23 Jun 2004 21:19 GMT
> I introduced my parents to concerns about trans fats with an email link to a
> Harvard analysis.  So, at dinner Sunday my dad showed me his new margarine
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
>
> LowCarbHighFat-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

I don't know about the exact details on this item but it's true in general
that if the amount of X in a product falls below a threshold level, the
producer is allowed to claim it's zero.

About the 2006 schedule it's amazing what the companies can pull out.  Every
time the FTC comes up with something to prohibit false advertising, the
companies claim they need time to get it on the label.  But it has made my
head spin how fast they have come out with labeling on carbs and transfats
even though I know it has to do with $$$$$.
Doug Freyburger - 25 Jun 2004 21:14 GMT
> I introduced my parents to concerns about trans fats with an email link to a
> Harvard analysis.  So, at dinner Sunday my dad showed me his new margarine
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
> Is my interpretation right?

I don't know if it is really right, but that's the worst case.  Labels
get to round 0.5 down to zero, so assume anything that claims zero is
actually 0.5 unless you have carefully inspected the label and can
prove otherwise.

This is much like using the hidden carb formula to find the 0.5
amounts of carb in stuff claiming zero.  It's a pessimistic claim, but
how often can you go wrong being pessimistic when the label has big
print making claims about zero, medium print that could be rounded
down, nd fine print giving ingredients that should mean other than
zero?
Bob in CT - 25 Jun 2004 21:23 GMT
>> I introduced my parents to concerns about trans fats with an email link
>> to a
[quoted text clipped - 25 lines]
> down, nd fine print giving ingredients that should mean other than
> zero?

I think they should do what they do in Europe:  Provide facts for 100
grams of material.  This way, there'd be no way for them to make the
serving size tiny, as they do now, in order to arbitrarily have low
values.

Signature

Bob in CT
Remove ".x" to reply

Heywood Mogroot - 27 Jun 2004 20:14 GMT
> > I introduced my parents to concerns about trans fats with an email link to a
> > Harvard analysis.  So, at dinner Sunday my dad showed me his new margarine
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
> down, nd fine print giving ingredients that should mean other than
> zero?

what the large print giveth the small print taketh away
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2012 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.