Well, mono and di glycerides does not *imply* trans fats, it's more like 'fats but in a funny form'. Normally you get three fats stuck together, for some reason these aren't like that. I bet the 'some reason' involves some madman with a bolt through his neck in a laboratory in the transylvanian highlands not worrying too much about downstream biochemistry.
As I say, I'd normally just read that as 'evil witch-food, don't know what it is, probably poisonous'. Along with carrageenan, polysorbate 80, and cellulose gum (What the fuck? Last time I had contact with polysorbate I was using it to get salt crystals to stick to nylon filter masks in the pandemic).
You guys have actually banned trans-fats (I think?), so Walmart are being very naughty indeed if they are sneaking trans-fats into their 'evil witch additives of unknown degree of witchiness'.
But here, because we haven't banned trans fats and don't have any particular words that must be used on foods that contain them, that likely means 'secretly trans-fats ha!'.
But I don't know, American food labelling regulations do seem designed to obscure and confuse. I love the story of the sugar-free sugar pills.
Don't eat what you don't understand. Capitalism will give you what you want for cheap, so be careful what you want.
Well, the way in which we have "banned" trans fats is ridiculous.
You can no longer sell foods containing more trans fats so that they would show up present in the serving size on the label.
But you can pick the serving size, and you can round down anything below .5g to 0g and then it "doesn't show up."
The serving size for nearly all fats/oils and many snacks is 15g (~1tbsp). So up to 3% of it can legally be trans-fats and you don't have to report it and therefore it's not banned.
Of course, almost all seed oils contain 2-3% trans fats from the factory when they get tested.
This actually explains why they always put "Contains less than 2%/1%" on there, that's probably the cutoff where they're signaling to the FDA that it's definitely below the rounding error.
Oh for fuck's sake. That is such subtle evil that you could be mistaken for some sort of rogue British colony.
So you haven't actually banned trans-fats any more than we have, you just have an even better way of hiding them in the small print.
I mean, whatever we think is wrong with PUFAs goes double for trans-PUFAs. Probably. And somehow both medical "science" and I agree that trans-PUFAs are bad. Probably.
trans-oleic acid is a whole nother can of worms, and the entirely natural trans-fat vaccenic acid may be good or bad or neutral, and may not even be that natural.
Is it even possible to find out what is in 'heavy cream'? Or is it just that Walmart are being more honest than other heavy cream sellers?
Come to think of it, what do Sainsbury's actually mean when they say that the ingredients in their double cream are 'cream'? How much crap are they allowed to sneak in there without putting it on the label? And why for the love of God is everyone trying to sneak filth into everything anyway???
Can I take your comment and make an essay out of it? Attributed of course.
I do think that if they just list cream or milk on the ingredients, it's just that. So I suspect Walmart just has shitty quality, and Whole Foods has better quality, and that's why the Whole Foods $10 cream says "Ingredients: Cream (Grade A)" unless Grade A means something different than I expect.
I think Tucker Goodrich actually believes trans-fats (hydrogenated vegetable oils) are less bad than linoleic acid they're made from, but I'm not sure where I stand on it haha. Luckily it's easy enough to avoid both.
edit: sure @ essay. But I'd research it in more depth, I just got this from someone on Reddit I think.
> I think Tucker Goodrich actually believes trans-fats (hydrogenated vegetable oils) are less bad than linoleic acid they're made from
And he may be right, at that. My problem with Tucker is that he gets his information from the medical literature. And with a little skill and motivation, you can get the medical literature to say whatever you want. That doesn't mean he's wrong, though. Or that they're wrong about the evil of trans-fats.
I want mechanism.
Linoleic acid sets off a cancer defence that blocks glycolysis? Maybe trans-LA sets off the same defence, and maybe it doesn't.
Double bonds are hard to break? Maybe trans bonds are even harder than cis bonds, or maybe they just never get near that pathway at all.
Something something reactive oxygen species something? Who knows?
But for me, cis and trans and trans-cis linoleic acids are all unnatural frankenfoods, guilty until proven innocent and no reason to eat them.
Wow, that's on the label of plenty of shitty cheap heavy creams here! Lol present on the first 4 (!) heavy creams I found on Walmart.com:
https://www.walmart.com/ip/DairyPure-Heavy-Whipping-Cream-Ultra-Pasteurized-Quart/188041147?from=/search
https://www.walmart.com/ip/Tuscan-Dairy-Farms-36-Heavy-Cream-Pint-1-Carton/159739765?from=/search
https://www.walmart.com/ip/Great-Value-Heavy-Whipping-Cream-16-oz/10450339?athbdg=L1200&from=/search
https://www.walmart.com/ip/Land-O-Lakes-Heavy-Whipping-Cream-1-Quart/15556067?from=/search
Well, mono and di glycerides does not *imply* trans fats, it's more like 'fats but in a funny form'. Normally you get three fats stuck together, for some reason these aren't like that. I bet the 'some reason' involves some madman with a bolt through his neck in a laboratory in the transylvanian highlands not worrying too much about downstream biochemistry.
As I say, I'd normally just read that as 'evil witch-food, don't know what it is, probably poisonous'. Along with carrageenan, polysorbate 80, and cellulose gum (What the fuck? Last time I had contact with polysorbate I was using it to get salt crystals to stick to nylon filter masks in the pandemic).
You guys have actually banned trans-fats (I think?), so Walmart are being very naughty indeed if they are sneaking trans-fats into their 'evil witch additives of unknown degree of witchiness'.
But here, because we haven't banned trans fats and don't have any particular words that must be used on foods that contain them, that likely means 'secretly trans-fats ha!'.
But I don't know, American food labelling regulations do seem designed to obscure and confuse. I love the story of the sugar-free sugar pills.
Don't eat what you don't understand. Capitalism will give you what you want for cheap, so be careful what you want.
Well, the way in which we have "banned" trans fats is ridiculous.
You can no longer sell foods containing more trans fats so that they would show up present in the serving size on the label.
But you can pick the serving size, and you can round down anything below .5g to 0g and then it "doesn't show up."
The serving size for nearly all fats/oils and many snacks is 15g (~1tbsp). So up to 3% of it can legally be trans-fats and you don't have to report it and therefore it's not banned.
Of course, almost all seed oils contain 2-3% trans fats from the factory when they get tested.
This actually explains why they always put "Contains less than 2%/1%" on there, that's probably the cutoff where they're signaling to the FDA that it's definitely below the rounding error.
Oh for fuck's sake. That is such subtle evil that you could be mistaken for some sort of rogue British colony.
So you haven't actually banned trans-fats any more than we have, you just have an even better way of hiding them in the small print.
I mean, whatever we think is wrong with PUFAs goes double for trans-PUFAs. Probably. And somehow both medical "science" and I agree that trans-PUFAs are bad. Probably.
trans-oleic acid is a whole nother can of worms, and the entirely natural trans-fat vaccenic acid may be good or bad or neutral, and may not even be that natural.
Is it even possible to find out what is in 'heavy cream'? Or is it just that Walmart are being more honest than other heavy cream sellers?
Come to think of it, what do Sainsbury's actually mean when they say that the ingredients in their double cream are 'cream'? How much crap are they allowed to sneak in there without putting it on the label? And why for the love of God is everyone trying to sneak filth into everything anyway???
Can I take your comment and make an essay out of it? Attributed of course.
I do think that if they just list cream or milk on the ingredients, it's just that. So I suspect Walmart just has shitty quality, and Whole Foods has better quality, and that's why the Whole Foods $10 cream says "Ingredients: Cream (Grade A)" unless Grade A means something different than I expect.
I think Tucker Goodrich actually believes trans-fats (hydrogenated vegetable oils) are less bad than linoleic acid they're made from, but I'm not sure where I stand on it haha. Luckily it's easy enough to avoid both.
edit: sure @ essay. But I'd research it in more depth, I just got this from someone on Reddit I think.
> edit: sure @ essay. But I'd research it in more depth, I just got this from someone on Reddit I think.
I feel the need to warn my American readers, not to analyse their legal code in detail for them. I will caveat, though.
> I think Tucker Goodrich actually believes trans-fats (hydrogenated vegetable oils) are less bad than linoleic acid they're made from
And he may be right, at that. My problem with Tucker is that he gets his information from the medical literature. And with a little skill and motivation, you can get the medical literature to say whatever you want. That doesn't mean he's wrong, though. Or that they're wrong about the evil of trans-fats.
I want mechanism.
Linoleic acid sets off a cancer defence that blocks glycolysis? Maybe trans-LA sets off the same defence, and maybe it doesn't.
Double bonds are hard to break? Maybe trans bonds are even harder than cis bonds, or maybe they just never get near that pathway at all.
Something something reactive oxygen species something? Who knows?
But for me, cis and trans and trans-cis linoleic acids are all unnatural frankenfoods, guilty until proven innocent and no reason to eat them.
> But for me, cis and trans and trans-cis linoleic acids are all unnatural frankenfoods, guilty until proven innocent and no reason to eat them.
Yea, that's my instinct too. We can debate which one of these is worse for you later. Not going to find out myself.