Jump to content

Talk:Trans fat regulation

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good articleTrans fat regulation was one of the Natural sciences good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
In the news Article milestones
DateProcessResult
November 10, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
January 31, 2007Featured article candidateNot promoted
September 13, 2007Good article nomineeListed
April 18, 2013Good article reassessmentDelisted
In the news A news item involving this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "In the news" column on June 17, 2015.
Current status: Delisted good article

Causation confused with correlation

[edit]

Second paragraph says : "...by raising levels of LDL cholesterol and lowering levels of "good" HDL cholesterol." We don't know if the shifts of LDL and HDL are causative or a result of autoimmune reaction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.243.106.82 (talk) 23:35, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Trans fat point?

[edit]

There is smoke point and flash point. So how about a new term that could be called trans fat point; the temperature at which a specific polyunsaturated fat starts to become transfatty? Does anyone have any data? Until then, I suspect that such a temperature could be deceptively below the smoke points of many culinary seed oils--Zymatik (talk) 22:05, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is usually done with a catalyst, and at raised temperature. I suppose there is some reaction without the catalyst, but also the whole thing will start to degrade in some way. Gah4 (talk) 20:42, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Canola

[edit]

Is rapeseed oil!! Canola is a abreviation for Canadian Oil.

And there is no such thing as a Canola Bean.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.57.249.9 (talk) 18:29, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have found many references. I'll edit the first occurrence using a WP reference. David Spector (talk) 15:45, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Where dairy products come from

[edit]

I don't like this phrase from the second paragraph:

"...dairy products from ruminants."

Aren't all dairy products from ruminants? Isn't this like saying "pork from pigs"? Pork always comes from pigs! Unless the author can name a dairy product which doesn't come from a ruminant, I really think these two words should either go or be re-written as "dairy products and meat from ruminants. Chrisrus (talk) 22:50, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are rare exceptions. Mare's milk is consumed regularly in Central Asia, and kumis is the national drink of Kyrgyzstan. But by and large it is true that all dairy products consumed regularly by humans (other than mother's milk, of course!) come from ruminants. --Saforrest (talk)
Wait: What does the word "ruminant" mean? I'll bracket off a link and we can check if mare's or yak's milk comes from a ruminant, too. Chrisrus (talk) 19:30, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Huh. I guess you're right: horses aren't ruminants, or at least it doesn't say so there, and they have an extensive list. But nevertheless, if it's all the same to you, why don't I change it to ""dairy products and meat from ruminants"? I like it better than "meat and dairy products from ruminants."
Human milk is definitely not from ruminants. I've seen reliable sources that it has been used for drinking by adults, although very rarely, so I suppose it could be called 'dairy'. Of course, such use is not related to partial hydrogenation. David Spector (talk) 15:52, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Omega-7 fatty acids need to be discussed separately

[edit]

Omega-7 fatty acids like vaccenic acid and the conjugated linoleic acids (CLAs), although technically trans fats, are naturally occurring and have specific metabolic behaviors in humans. Recent studies have shown omega-7 fatty acids to have definite health benefits[1][2]. It is therefore incorrect to include them in an article which categorizes all trans fats as harmful. Gahuntly (talk) 19:14, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(moved into date sequence)LeadSongDog (talk) 19:29, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There may be value in the research paper, but if so, the response to that should be to include the material in the article. I'm pretty sure that the National Dairy Council would be a less-than-objective source, though so we should attempt to find another source.LeadSongDog (talk) 19:38, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ AFNS. Alberta natural trans fat research earns global recognition. Apr 2, 2008.
  2. ^ http://www.nationaldairycouncil.org/NationalDairyCouncil/Health/Digest/dcd71-4Page1.htm Emerging Health Benefits Of CLA (Conjugated Linoleic Acid)

Autoimmune Targeting of Sphingolipids

[edit]

The only significant source of trans fats in the biological world is in the form of sphingolipid. These fats (often found in the form of gangliosides) are very important for myelin function, intercellular signalling, and mediating the inflammatory response. Since trans fats in the diet mimic sphingolipids, AND the ingestion of trans fats is associated with inflammation, AND several neurological pathologies are associated with anti-ganglioside antibodies (Wilson HJ; J Neurochem. 2007 Nov;103 Suppl 1:143-9), THEN it is reasonable to assume that ingesting large quantities of trans fats could lead to autoimmune targeting of sphingolipids resulting in anflammatory and neurological diseases... right? Well, ask the scientific community... There are no published, peer-reviewed papers investigating the link between dietary consumption of trans fats and the development of an anti-sphingolipid immune response! If you happen to know someone with research funding, feel free to toss this idea around. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cransona (talk • contribs) 17:24, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]


"Worldwide perspective" on dietary fats/oils

[edit]

IMHO this article has "worldwide perspective" problems (WP:WORLDVIEW}, as it focuses strongly on Europe and North America.

In particular, the sentence "Prior to 1910, dietary fats primarily consisted of butterfat, beef tallow, and lard" strikes me as strongly suspect.

I'm no authority on the history of dietary fats, but Vegetable fats and oils gives us a quick list - Palm, Soybean, Rapeseed (including Canola), Sunflower seed, Peanut oil, Cottonseed, Palm Kernel, Coconut, Olive.

We know that olive oil has been one of the most important dietary fats/oils throughout history. I don't know much about the culinary history of China, but I doubt that butterfat was of much importance there, and I strongly suspect that fats/oils other than beef tallow and lard were widely used.

As I say, I don't know much about this subject and am not competent to work on this article. But can the people who are working on it please correct this problem? Thanks. -- 201.37.230.43 (talk) 02:57, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The exact date may be in some question, but there's little doubt of the basic point. Oilseeds and nut oils were not much used until the industrial age made them easier and cheaper to mill. Have a look at the Butter, Tallow and Lard articles, or just think your way through international animal husbandry practices. In India, Tibet, and much of Africa butters (from cows, sheep, goats, camels, and horses' milk) predominated. In China, southeast Asia, and Polynesia pork lard was preferred to the fat from fowl due to its higher smoke point, though little was wasted (milking a buffalo or an ox is not for the timid...) Olive oil was (then as now) popular around the Mediterranean, but not so much elsewhere. Olive trees just aren't that easy to grow. In short, I don't see a big problem.LeadSongDog come howl 04:55, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am sure that "milking an ox is not for the timid" -- oxen lack udders, and I should think they would object violently if you put your hands where the udder should be. -- Solo Owl 01:26, 12 August 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eall Ân Ûle (talk • contribs)

Dont u guyz think we should put more of what a trans fat is than the history behind it?--Antonio cruzazul (talk) 22:59, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Trans fats vs saturated fats

[edit]

How bad are trans fats when compared to saturated fats? I.e. should I choose the butter with 7g (saturated) fat per serving, or the margarine with 4g of trans fat per serving? (Assuming no other alternative.)

I seem to find little discussion of this. The article seems to assert that the effect of transfats on LDL cholesterol are about twice as bad, but other bad effects might be equal; the UK FSA seems to assert that their danger is about equal by saying "look for the lowest combined amount of saturated and trans fats". Is there any scientific consensus on this? -- Marcika (talk) 15:58, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]


I think this page might help you. http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=532 Pyrolord777 (talk) 16:53, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Limited in scope

[edit]

This page is currently limited in scope. This page could use some more images such as:

  1. a map outlining transfat consumption in various countries
  2. how rates of transfat consumption has changed over time
  3. Tags need to be dealt with

Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 08:35, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Transfats are not the same as saturated fats. Some saturated fats such as coconut oil and palm oil are staurated fats but do not contain transfats let alone they are transfats. Coconut oil and palm oil are indeed very essentila to health! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.206.70.207 (talk) 18:12, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A fat that is hydrogenated is ______.

[edit]

A fat that is hydrogenated is ______.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.223.16.46 (talk) 09:11, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

...is treated with hydrogen gas (or a hydrogen compound) in the presence of a catalyst such as nickel metal. Chemically, some double carbon-to-carbon bonds have been broken and the resulting single loose bonds have been connected to a single hydrogen atom from the gas. Note: this answer has been simplified, so it is technically incorrect. David Spector (talk) 15:59, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Possible inconsistency: Gonna add something: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogenation "the process is commonly employed to reduce or saturate organic compounds." This article often refers hydrogenation in the history, well, by hydrogenating you're removing a double bond between carbons saturating the fat. "Trans ... are a type of unsaturated fat ..." 1st line of this article, "Production of hydrogenated fats increased steadily until the 1960s, as processed vegetable fats replaced animal fats in the United States and other Western countries. At first, the argument was a financial one due to lower costs; advocates also said that the unsaturated trans fats of margarine were healthier than the saturated fats of butter." margarine being "worked in the late 1890s to develop the chemistry of hydrogenation, which enabled the margarine" - THIS DOESN'T SEEM TO MAKE SENSE, it appears to confuse saturated with trans. I think this whole article needs clean up.188.82.186.212 (talk) 22:41, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The usual goal is partially hydrogenation. The problem is that the catalyst works on two steps, and reversal after the first step tends to produce trans bonds. Newer processing methods reduce the production of trans fats. Exactly how good or bad that is, I don't know. Gah4 (talk) 06:59, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The very first sentence of the article is wrong!

[edit]

"These saturated fats have.."

By definition, trans-fatty acids are unsaturated (at least as far as aliphatic-chained higher carboxylic acids are concerned, since in unsubstitued aliphatic chains, only sp2-hybridised carbon atoms display E/Z-isomerism). See cis-trans isomers for details.
Cheers,--93.192.179.236 (talk) 03:48, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]


This article is produced by scientists for scientists. Like many wikipedia articles it needs a simple explanation early in the article. This statemnent can then be qualified by increasing degrees of sophistication.

So start ; "Trans fats are mainly vegetable fats cooked at very high tempretures". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.14.80.128 (talk) 16:47, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose, but hydrogenation is usually done with a catlyst, so not at a very high temperature, just ordinarily high. What is supposed to happen is that cis bonds are hydrogenated. As it is a two step process, sometimes after only the first step, the process reverses, which tends to generate trans fats. Recent changes in the process have reduced the production of trans bonds. As well as I know, this process isn't explained in the article. Also, unhydrogenated vegetable oils should be fine. Gah4 (talk) 01:11, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Allergies to trans fats

[edit]

When I was a child my mother discovered the hard way that she was allergic to nickel, which often gets into partially hydrogenated oils due to its use in the manufacturing process. She wore nickel-plated glasses and still has scars from the rashes which formed around her eyes.

Nickel allergies are not uncommon. For people with nickel allergies, hydrogenated foods can cause a sore throat, or in my mother's case, persistent coughing and hacking up phlegm. Until the incident with the glasses, she thought she would always have the cough; but quitting hydrogenated oils solved the problem, unlike her years of vegetarianism (which caused her to use margarine, which is hydrogenated).

I'd like the article to include something about this but I don't have the citations.

207.241.137.116 (talk) 03:44, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find reliable online references for oral or systemic allergy from partially-saturated fat. But remember that reactions to toxicity and allergy are very different medical conditions. I did find many references for contact dermatitis caused by unspecified amounts of nickel, problems with nickel in dental alloys, and possible links to arthritis. David Spector (talk) 15:42, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks David, I'd been meaning to look into this for a while, though it's way off topic here. The whole hapten discussion was news to me. PMID 17100760 explains that in sensitive individuals Ni exposure changes levels of IL-2, IL-4, IL-13 and Interferon gamma, linking this change to elevated Th1- and Th2-type cytokine levels. PMID 17244072 found somewhat similar but distinct results. A review at PMID 19447733 supports using ELISPOT testing methods to distinguish allergic contact dermatitis from irritant contact dermatitis based on the presence or absence of allergen-specific T-cells. LeadSongDog come howl! 18:28, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Trans fats and acne

[edit]

I've noticed that I never get acne if I avoid trans fats, and get it the very next day if I eat more than about a gram.

I have a theory as to why this happens. I believe that fats are digested, pass through the intestinal walls into the blood stream as lipids, then are pulled out of the capillaries by the sebaceous glands, which produce oil that then flows up the pores to the skin. Normally this process works well, but when trans-fats are present, they solidify in the pores and block them, causing acne.

I'd like to know if anyone else has noticed this or if any research has been done in this area. StuRat (talk) 03:58, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:NOT#FORUM. User:LeadSongDog come howl 04:13, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Should the theory be included in the main article? Just asking, because it looks reasonable. Whoop whoop pull up (talk) 00:31, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This acne is quite possibly caused by inflammation caused by the trans fats.

First, look at Wikipedia:No original research please. What you are discussing regarding acne WOULD be original research unless you can cite sources to back up this theory, such as peer-reviewed studies, news articles, etc. HOWEVER, I did find one source at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26203267 published July 15, 2015; this source says “Three major food classes that promote acne are: 1) hyperglycemic carbohydrates, 2) milk and dairy products, 3) saturated fats including trans-fats and deficient ω-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs).” So according to it, trans fats and saturated fats both promote acne, and it is not just fats which promote acne but also certain carbohydrates as well as almost any dairy products. I have not found any other good sources. Anyway using that source would NOT be original research and you CAN use that source to say trans fats increase acne; however, please do not quote it out of context or act as if trans fats are the ONLY foods which cause acne because the list there also includes hyperglycemic carbohydrates (i.e. refined sugars and starches), milk and dairy products, and saturated fats, along with trans fats... and the mention of “deficient ω-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs)” means, if you have a deficiency of omega-3 fatty acids, the so-called “good fats”, this also promotes acne according to this study.

Anyway, my point is, I DID find a source to validate this theory, a NEWER source than any of your old comments, but, your theory acts as if trans fats are worse than saturated fats with regard to promoting acne, and actually, the one scientific paper on this says that BOTH trans fats and saturated fats are bad with regard to acne. Are trans fats worse than saturated fats? Certainly on some other health aspects such as cardiovascular health and diabetes, trans fats are definitely worse than saturated fats, but on acne, all we know is that both types of fats are bad and make acne worse. The idea that trans fats are worse than saturated fats specifically when it comes to acne is still theoretical although I would tend to think that it is likely, but still, it is just speculation to say trans fats are WORSE specifically on acne compared to saturated fats (both of them are bad). Anyway, anything you put into the article has to follow the science and not go beyond what is said in studies like the one I linked to, if you are making scientific claims, since original research is not allowed on Wikipedia. If you put it into the article please keep it in context and do not exaggerate the claims beyond what the scientific study says. That being said, please feel free to add what the aforementioned peer-reviewed scientific study I linked to says regarding trans fats making acne worse as long as you keep it in context and do not exaggerate!

Also I did find other sources saying trans fats make acne worse such this one: https://supernaturalacnetreatment.com/do-trans-fats-cause-acne/. However I do not think that it or any of the other articles like it I have found really constitutes a reliable source by Wikipedia standards (see Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources), unlike the scientific study I linked to earlier, which is obviously reliable. One measure of its reliability is, 91 other scientific studies have all cited it as a source already in just 3 years according to Google Scholar. And it was published in Clinical, Cosmetic and Investigational Dermatology, a peer-reviewed scientific journal published by Dove Medical Press. Dove Medical Press did have a controversy in 2013 after publishing a fake paper by mistake as part of the Who's Afraid of Peer Review? sting operation, and got removed from the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association, but they cleaned up their review process by 2015 and got reinstated by Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association in 2015, the same year this study was published, so, at the time this was published, they had cleaned up their act and were only publishing legitimate scientific studies, thus making the aforementioned study a reliable source if you combine this with how often this study has been cited by other studies, something which indicates that the mainstream scientific community certainly considers it reliable. Yetisyny (talk) 00:56, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I have added nuanced language regarding trans fats and acne that is properly sourced to the article as per my above comment. Thank you for giving me the idea to pursue this lead, StuRat, even if originally it was just original research and speculation, prior to the 2015 scientific study on this. It turns out the scientific evidence DOES support the conclusion that eating trans fats makes acne worse, although trans fats are just one of a bunch of foods that do this and I listed the others. It might be good to put references to this study along with its results into other relevant articles, such as the Western pattern diet article in particular. I will look into the Western pattern diet article and edit it as necessary. Yetisyny (talk) 01:31, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"0 Grams"

[edit]

In the section about Major Users, "0 grams" is used frequently, but it is not entirely clear whether this means "no hydrogenated oils" or "less than .5 grams". This should be cleared up, I think 75.189.148.197 (talk) 16:50, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As well as I understand it, from the US FDA, it is less than 0.5g. If you eat a lot of such, you get more than 0.5g. Gah4 (talk) 00:40, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Citation need for lipase activity on trans fats

[edit]

The 2nd paragraph in the Health Risks section talks about the inability of lipase to break down trans fats. There's a number of problems with this:

  • This really belongs in its own section, probably a biochemistry section, and not an anonymous paragraph under health risks.
  • The paragraph starts out describing this as "the prevalent theory", indicating that there is at least some credible debate on this, but then makes a flat statement of fact "The human lipase enzyme is ineffective with the trans configuration".
  • Neither "the prevalent theory" nor the flat statement of fact are backed up with a citation.
  • If human lipase was ineffective with the trans configuration, is it reasonable to suggest that humans would be less able to digest trans fats in the first place and would not absorb as much (or any) trans fatty acids from the digestive system?

A potential citation is Hill, Marvin S.; Sandström, Brittmarie; Bysted, Anette; Hølmer, Gunhild (2001), "Effect of 6 dietary fatty acids on the postprandial lipid profile, plasma fatty acids, lipoprotein lipase, and cholesterol ester transfer activities in healthy young men", American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 73 (2): 198–208 {{citation}}: More than one of |first1= and |first= specified (help); More than one of |last1= and |last= specified (help), but the full text is behind a pay wall and I don't have access.

Pstemari (talk) 18:14, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Other related citations include: Zottor, B.A.K; Walker, B.L. (1989), "Relative hydrolysis of trans- and cis-triglyceride by rat mammary lipoprotein lipase", Nutrition Research, 9 (6): 679–683, and Zabala, A; Churruca, I; Fernández-Quintela, A; Rodríguez, VM; Macarulla, MT; Martínez, JA (2006), "trans-10,cis-12 Conjugated linoleic acid inhibits lipoprotein lipase but increases the activity of lipogenic enzymes in adipose tissue from hamsters fed an atherogenic diet", J. Nutr, 95 (6) {{citation}}: |first7= missing |last7= (help); |first8= missing |last8= (help).

Both are paywalled, and seem to apply to rodents. However in none of these citations is the claim that "human lipase enzyme works only on the cis configuration and cannot metabolize a trans fat" supported. What they seem to indicate is that lipase is less effective on trans fats than it is on cis fats, though the enzyme does work on them. The first citation is from here, where the same claim is made (with sufficiently similar verbiage that I suspect that the claim was taken from wikipedia), but the citation doesn't support even that post's claim.

Lucaswiman (talk) 19:56, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Triple-bond lipids?

[edit]

The article makes a single reference to lipids containing a triple bond, saying that they "cannot be trans fats," but no lipids containing triple bonds are identified in this article or in any of the articles dealing with lipids. What is the reason behind such a glaring omission? Whoop whoop pull up (talk) 00:55, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Other types of fats are of little nutritional significance. Epoxidized fatty acids are found in 2.5% proportion in peanuts, and cyclohexyl-terminated fatty acids are found in small quantities in butter, but this is hardly relevant. By the way, epoxides can be cis or trans, but this is overshadowed by their overt toxicity. --vuo (talk) 17:53, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What are examples of epoxidized fatty acids? Whoop whoop pull up (talk) 23:52, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There has been recent literature involving the use of epoxidized soy bean oil (ESBO) in jar seals. Seems that when the jars contained oily foods, the ESBO was migrating into the oil at unsafe levels. See PMID 18348048.

epoxidized linseed oil (ELSO) is also used in some sustainable plastics applications, and others are being developed for use in paints and polyurethanes. But why is that a "glaring omission"? Is there some triple bond lipid that you think belongs? LeadSongDog come howl! 16:08, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there is one, and it is now in the article, but it needs an article of its own as well. --Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty | Averted crashes 23:26, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

30,000-100,000 deaths?

[edit]

As far as I can tell, the cited study makes no mention of this figure. Am I missing something? Budser (talk) 09:26, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, the 30,000 seems to go back to {{cite journal |author=Ascherio A, Willett WC |title=Health effects of trans fatty acids |journal=Amer. J. Clin. Nutr. |volume=66 |pages=1006S–10S |year=1997 |pmid=9322581 |url=http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/reprint/66/4/1006S.pdf )). Since these two authors crop up repeatedly in the sources cited, I'd suggest looking through their more recent ones to find where the 100,000 came from. The more recent reviews would obviously be preferred sources. I'd suggest Danaei G, Ding EL, Mozaffarian D, Taylor B, Rehm J, Murray CJ, Ezzati M (2009 April). "The preventable causes of death in the United States: comparative risk assessment of dietary, lifestyle, and metabolic risk factors". PLoS Med. 6 (4): e1000058. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000058. PMC 2667673. PMID 19399161. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link). That analysis puts the total mortality due to high TFAs in the US at (82,000; 63,000-97,000) of the annual 2.5 million. LeadSongDog come howl! 21:18, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy completely ignored

[edit]

This article completely ignores the controversy about how ingredients containing trans fats were promoted to replace saturated fats only for it to later come out that trans fats are worse than the saturated fats they replaced. Lambanog (talk) 18:34, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy? I thought that was simple history. Is there some source showing it to be controversial? LeadSongDog come howl! 04:21, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Update Major Users' Response

[edit]

The Major Users' Response section includes several future tense statements based on announcements of actions that will take place in 2006 and 2007. This section should be updated to include the current progress on those actions. TV4Fun (talk) 16:34, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Update UK Situation

[edit]

An update on the UK situation was removed under the excuse it was a diversion, in what sense is the voluntary code and the companies which have agreed to it a diversion from the topic? We also require academic views for balance.--Andromedean (talk) 16:56, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you feel we should include the original research (and can find it) or it should be summarised further please do this, but these new developments most definitely warrant inclusion in some form. --Andromedean (talk) 17:05, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re- source of conflict of interest - According to the Independent it was Private Eye, but I can't find the edition. --Andromedean (talk) 17:49, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Journalistic "smear"

[edit]

"Lansley and his special Adviser Bill Morgan, have been criticised by the political opposition for previously working for firms with interests in the food industry. (reference)" There is no allegation that Lansley's previous links have anything to do with his stance towards trans-fats. Moreover, as the reference demonstrates, the BIJ is NOT "the political opposition". Finally, and more globally, a reference to politicians having past links to the industry that they are dealing with should not be made in isolation. The "revolving door" has well-researched both advantages and disadvantages. Suggest deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theeurocrat (talk • contribs) 19:13, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you wish the following sentence taken out "Lansley and his special Adviser Bill Morgan, have been criticised by the political opposition for previously working for firms with interests in the food industry.[111]" of course that the criticism took place, and their recent connections with the food industry are facts of the matter. I suggest you add on a sentence which states 'a Department of Health spokesman responding to these allegations claimed there were no conflicts of interest in either case. It seems he is officially restricted from lobbying or providing 'advice' between 1 and 2 years. so it seems enough of an issue for the PR company itself to mention it on their website --Andromedean (talk) 21:52, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No, Andromedean, you have side-stepped the point. It is not that there was not a potential conflict of interest; it was rather the way that the potential conflict was presented, as if this was something exceptional. The article should be as neutral as possible - I hope that we all agree. There is a distinction between potential and actual conflicts of interest, which if you read the press, most journalists and politicians (except when they are subject to accusations themselves) totally ignore. If you want to recruit an expert to police a given area, there will be potential conflicts of interest, and accusations of real conflicts. Doesn't matter which "side" he is on: BP or Greenpeace. This as such is unremarkable - if you find someone who claims to be a banking expert, but who never worked in a bank, you have probably met the village idiot. If you want a food expert, no matter who you recruit, there will be potential conflicts. If not, you can conclude that you have recruited a pig.Theeurocrat (talk) 20:03, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Austria

[edit]

Did they really total ban the Trans fats in Austria? They don't say that on the german version of this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.108.59.61 (talk) 21:43, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

[edit]
This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Trans fat/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

Areas of concern

[edit]
  • Breadth of coverage: The "history" and "nutritional guidelines" examples have been flagged for being too U.S.-centric.
  • Verification/citations: A number of links are dead, and there are {{citation needed}} tags elsewhere.
  • Timeliness: The topic drew more interest in 2006–2007, it would appear, based on the date much of the sources were retrieved. (Article was listed as GA in 2007.) The "major users' response" section has been marked as out-of-date.
--Jprg1966 (talk) 20:16, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Update

[edit]

I forgot all about this GAR until another user flagged it for me. Having seen no clear attempt to address the above concerns, I think it is appropriate at this stage to remove Good Article status. I will do so now. --Jprg1966 (talk) 14:35, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New Introduction, this is not a Chemistry Text Book

[edit]

The introduction to this article should start something like this:

"Trans-fats are a chemical compound <gibberish here> that are typically found in common foods such as x, y and z. Many Authorities say that trans-fats are bad because of a, b and c. There have been movements to attempt to control the exposure of trans-fats to the public in places g, h and i with the results of l, m and o. etc...."

I hate it when wikipedia starts-off an article as far away from the typical reader as they could possibly get, and then it forces that reader to wade through sentence after sentence, paragraph after paragraph of unmitigated dreck that is only comprehensible and interesting to less than 1% of the population, when 100% of the population eats, and almost all of them consume trans-fats to some degree or another. the 1, 1 tri-chloro-, di-fluoro tetrahedral reactions and their post-ionic permutations are of absolutely no interest, use or value to anyone, and it's well-past the time to stop being cowed into submission by a class of people that do not understand them either.Jonny Quick (talk) 23:43, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Worth discussing a cleanup, though it's hardly necessary to disparage the editors. The article has a long and embattled history, from a time when the dangers of the product were widely denied by fans of fast food, though that seems to be passing now. Getting these artificial products off the market is now seen as a major public health goal, comparable in impact to the fight against smoking, but more attainable. The chemistry does have a place, though. I'd start with something more along the lines:
"Trans-fats, also called trans-fatty acids (TFAs) or partially-unsaturated fatty acids (PUFA), are a form of edible fat which is almost entirely artificially made. For most of the twentieth century they were generally recognized as safe for use in processed food, and were widely adopted for their low cost and long shelf life. They are now known to be a leading cause of cardio-vascular disease and authorities are working toward the virtual elimination of their use.
TFAs are made by adding hydrogen to some (but not all) of the backbone carbon atoms in unsaturated fat molecules, which causes a bend in that backbone. The bent shape makes the molecule more likely to adhere to surfaces, including the interior of blood vessels."
Howzat? LeadSongDog come howl! 15:12, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like a promising starter for the lede, though I had the impression (possibly mistaken) that the bent carbon chains were actually less harmful to health than the straight chains. Either way, WP:RS are needed. The detailed chemistry coverage is important to the article, but I agree that the lede should first say why trans fats are of interest, and then delve into some of the chemistry. Reify-tech (talk) 01:58, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Paragragh mentioned "a mixture of pork lard and soy fat" in parallel to artifitial trans fat is incorrect

[edit]

No matter from our intuition, from footnotes 6, or from my roughly searched results from Google, it is none sense to create a object featuring the mixture of lard and soy fat and indentify it as one sort of artificial trans fat. The only trace I found is in footnote 6, where the study choose "regular (pork/soy) fat (RG)" as one of 8 experiment diets. But the comparison method and outcome of study sharply hinted that this diet is NOT trans fat as the name "regular" suggested. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.154.45.127 (talk) 11:54, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Found source- dont know how to add so here you guys go

[edit]

naturally in the milk and body fat of ruminants (such as cattle and sheep) at a level of 2–5% of total fat. Natural trans fats, which include conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) and vaccenic acid, originate in the rumen of these animals.

http://www.fs.ntou.edu.tw/handout/1022OrgChemII/102_Org_CHem_II_2.pdf , page 213, after you guys add it please delete the thread — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.200.181.204 (talk)

It's been added. Too prominently, IMO. We don't delete comments just because concerns they raise have been addressed.--Elvey(t•c) 20:40, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Major users' response

[edit]

Re. The Walt Disney Company announced that they will begin getting rid of trans fats in meals many years ago. I can't find any sources saying that they indeed finished getting rid of it - or even got it down to < 0.5 g/serving. Should we delete the sentence? Can't prove a negative...--Elvey(t•c) 20:40, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Girl Scout cookies, OTOH, are down to < 0.5 g/serving, so I tweaked accordingly. --Elvey(t•c) 20:40, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The claim re. Raising Canes seems verifiable, but they have ~45 locations, so inclusion here seems undue. Removing, accordingly. --Elvey(t•c) 20:40, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like Wendy's has eliminated artificial trans fat, per https://www.wendys.com/redesign/wendys/pdf/en_US_nutrition.pdf; the Buttery Best Spread's first ingredient is Liquid and Partially Hydrogenated Soybean Oil, but presumably portion size is small enough (11 g) that less than 0.5 g is trans fat; the rest seems to be natural.

Proposal: Much of section can probably refactored/shrunk to: " The following major fast food chain menus and product lines are artificial trans fat free (that is, < 0.5 g/serving) : Taco Bell, Chick-fil-A, Girl Scout Cookies, KFC (eliminated from all but Mac and cheese, biscuits and chicken potpie in '07, the rest in '09[1] ), ... McDonald's, Burger King and Wendy's have greatly reduced PHOs in their food; most of the remaining trans fat is naturally occurring, in the form of about a gram per 1/4 lb. burger patty, and smaller amounts in fatty dairy products such as cheese and cream. Naturally occurring trans fat causes, e.g. the Baconator to have 2.5 grams; each 1/4 lb.* Hamburger Patty has a gram. A large chain's large fries typically had about 6 grams until around 2007[2]." Thoughts?--Elvey(t•c) 20:40, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://www.kfc.com/about/news/2009/012909.asp
  2. ^ http://www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2014/14_0202.htm Figure 4
Following up 18 months later... Implementing proposals.--Elvey(t•c) 20:02, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Butter v. Margarine

[edit]

I noticed this on the web: “Butter is mostly made of the fat that raises your bad cholesterol levels – saturated fat at around 50% and trans fat at more than 4%. Compare those figures to margarine spreads at an average of 14% and 0.2 % respectively“ [butter 1]

Yet, our article says margarine is 3-26% trans fat (3 to 26 g/100g).

Updates are needed. We have severely dated content, like this: "Baking shortenings, in general, contain 30% trans fats compared to their total fats, whereas animal fats from ruminants such as butter contain up to 4%." It seems many or most shortenings have been reformulated, and "up to" is terrible language for an encylopedia. I'm being bold, since my last comments, above, went unaddressed. --Elvey(t•c) 20:02, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ "Heart Foundation: Butter has 20 times the trans fats of marg | Australian Food News". www.ausfoodnews.com.au.
I would caution accepting any single study as authoritative. Butter, like human milk, varies widely in its trans fat content according to the diet of the donor. And as more and more commercial products are being reformulated, the amount in the average tub of margarine or baking shortening is steadily falling. Whatever Wikipedia says, it will be a snapshot of one corner in a complex and rapidly-changing situation. If two reliable studies give conflicting stats, that gives us a chance to say so. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 08:09, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Then again, there has been some suggestion recently that even fully organic butter naturally contains some trans fats and that these may be shorter-chain than typical industrial trans fats. Whether such natural trans fats are harmful like the industrial ones or beneficial like other natural fats, appears unknown. All good reasons for caution. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 09:34, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
(I edited what I quoted above to remove the non-MEDRS health claim.)--Elvey(t•c) 20:41, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Chemistry section - USDA labeling of margarine produced by new process

[edit]

A new, manufacturing process is described which produces a fat which, when "Blended with unhydrogenated liquid soybean oil, the high-pressure-processed oil produced margarine containing 5 to 6% trans fat. Based on current U.S. labeling requirements (see below), the manufacturer could claim the product was free of trans fat.[45]" - The reference links to an article which states that for a product to be labeled as free of TFAs, it must contain less than 0.5g of fat per 14g serving; 0.5 / 14 = 3.57%, not 5 to 6%. Am I missing something, or is this an error? Reference 45: http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jf047849%2B — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ardkorjunglist (talk • contribs) 23:59, 12 April 2015

@Ardkorjunglist, trans fatty acids (TFA) are an unwanted by-product of incompletely hydrogenating unsaturated vegetable oils to give them a higher melting point and longer shelf life. If you look at Table 1 on the second page of that paper (J. Agric. Food Chem., Vol. 53, No. 15, 2005 at page 5983) there's a comparison of the result of hydrogenating soya bean oil at a variety of temperatures and pressures, e.g. method A (20psi at 221°C for 50 minutes) generates an oil with 39.7% TFA. Table 2 says that if method A's output is blended with unprocessed liquid soya bean oil, in the proportion 30% method A to 70% unprocessed oil, the blended result will be 11.9% TFA. A food product that contains 60% of the method A blend therefore incorporates 7.14% TFA, so a 14g portion would have 1 gram of TFA, which would have to be disclosed as trans fat on the product packaging. By comparison, method B (200psi at 140°C for 152 minutes) generates an oil with 16.6% TFA. Blending method B 30% with 70% unprocessed oil would be 5.0% TFA. A food product that contains 60% of the method B blend incorporates 3.0% TFA, so a 14g (half-ounce) portion would have 0.42g TFA. Because this is under 0.5 grams, under US law the manufacturer would not be required to disclose the presence of trans fats on the packaging, even if the product is typically consumed in portions much larger than 14g. - Pointillist (talk) 17:16, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We need a picture!

[edit]

Guys (and gals),

We need a picture of this glorious cardiovascular ailment causing substance! In a tub, in its pure state, and highly concentrated in food form as well, perhaps. To draw the casual reader (like me!) in to a very science-y article, we need some pretty pictures! Thanks for all your work. -A casual reader! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.204.51.213 (talk) 14:31, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Done - added File:Margaryn 022.jpg to the lead section. Rcsprinter123 (gossip) @ 10:12, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Trans fat. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:19, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Trans fat. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:55, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nickel residues in hydrogenated oil?

[edit]

Are there any articles about nickel left in the fat after hydrogenation? Can it have any health effects? How are the catalysts separated from the fat? --Nefronus (talk) 12:07, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Udo Erasmus, Fats that Heal, fats that Kill, notes "traces" of nickel and aluminum. He notes that nickel is one of the essential trace elements in our diet and that it is common enough that supplements are never necessary. He is aware of no harmful effects from overexposure. The article on nickel notes one adverse health effect of excess nickel, which is to promote certain pathogenic bacteria. The catalyst is a solid matrix over which the heated fat is passed. There may be some sort of filtration to catch any gross fragments which might break off, but the minute traces of the catalyst which come free and dissolve into the fat, right down to single atoms, will just be left there. I guess there are far worse things to be found in hydrogenated oils. HTH. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 14:32, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
In a Codex Alimentarius working group document, the levels were usually 0.2-0.5 ppm but occasionally up to 1 ppm. This would be typically 20-50 µg, or up to 100 µg per 100 g of fat consumed. EPA estimates that a typical daily exposure is 100-300 µg, and essential intake would be 50 µg. So, it would seem that consuming fats hydrogenated on nickel should increase nickel exposure. Indeed, this is observed: in hair, there is twice as much nickel in people that eat hydrogenated fats, which would required a doubled dose against the natural background (i.e. a person receiving 100 µg would get 200 µg). However, the reference dose for toxicity (the smallest dose that can potentially be observably hazardous) is 20 µg/kg/d, which for a 100 kg person would be 2000 µg, which is an order of magnitude higher. (Moreover, the reference dose is not a proper toxic dose, but the point where the toxic effects begin increasing with dose. For example, 1 atom of nickel isn't that much different from 2 atoms of nickel; this is below the reference dose. But 4000 µg vs. 8000 µg isn't; 8000 µg is observably more toxic.) According to this, the solid nickel catalyst is removed by filtration, then bleaching clay is added and filtered out, sequestering the nickel. Citric or phosphoric acid can be added to chelate or precipitate the nickel. --vuo (talk) 23:56, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Trans fat. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:54, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Trans fat. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:31, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 6 external links on Trans fat. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:35, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Author names removed from 4 citations

[edit]

With this edit, multiple author names were removed from 4 citations by User:Materialscientist. Why, MS? Intentional? Also, your edit summary is messed up. Buggy bot? --Elvey(t•c) 23:43, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it is because some papers, especially in particle physics, can have ridiculous numbers of authors credited, some running notoriously into three figures, so in the interests of fairness and balance Wikipedia is trying to cut down. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 12:19, 29 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Trans fat. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:44, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Article's Canadian Spam

[edit]

Why is there so much information on the history of Canada's regulatory process regarding trans-fats? This could be done for any country, but it generally hasn't. Seems like the article is being trolled by Canadians. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.215.113.195 (talk) 09:25, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Redirection from "Hydrogenated Oil or Fats

[edit]

This is misleading. Hydrogenation of oil or fats can lead to trans or saturated fats. It should really point to "Hydrogenation" and "Partially Hydrogenated Vegetable Oil" could point here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.251.206.225 (talk) 14:35, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I did the first one. It seems that partially hydrogenated fat redirects here, I suppose partially hydrogenated oil could, too. Gah4 (talk) 21:01, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Table Images

[edit]

In the comparison table under the chemistry section, the first two entries (Elaidic and Oleic Acid) use a space filling model image but the last (Stearic Acid) uses a ball and stick model. It would be much clearer for all the images to use the same model, if anyone can get a suitable space filling image for Stearic Acid. Benjabby (talk) 13:57, 19 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Trans fat. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:57, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Trans fat. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:28, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Trans fat. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:00, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

History of trans fat

[edit]

Hi Wikipedians! I just made some minor changes in the first paragraph of this article. My Ph.D. student Ronald Mensink and me originally discovered the adverse affects of trans fats on blood lipids.[1] Now that I am retired I want to contribute some of my experience to Wikipedia, and I thought I'd start with a topic I am very familiar with, i.e. trans fatty acids. Your comments are appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mkatan (talk • contribs) 17:59, 16 June 2019 (UTC) Mkatan (talk) 11:53, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Mensink, R.P., and Katan, M.B. (1990). Effect of dietary trans fatty acids on high-density and low- density lipoprotein cholesterol in healthy subjects. N Engl J Med 323, 439–445.www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJM199008163230703

Did fast foods switched *to* or *away from* trans fats?

[edit]

"Activists, such as Phil Sokolof, who took out full page ads in major newspapers, attacked the use of beef tallow in McDonald's french fries and urged fast-food companies to switch to vegetable oils. The result was an almost overnight switch by most fast-food outlets to trans fats."

Either I misunderstand the last sentence, or there is a mistake. Pawelz (talk) 23:10, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fast food changed from animal fats to trans fats in the 80s/90s because of Sokolof. He believed animal fats were unhealthy and transfats were good. This turned out to be false, but restaurants never switched back. Then a guy named Fred Kummerow campaigned against transfats, saying they were bad. So again there was a switch. Now there's a growing campaign against PUFAs, which replaced transfat oils. If you ask anybody who at fast food in the 80s or earlier, they'll tell you how absolutely delicious that stuff was. Fast food today doesn't even compare. It's truly sad. KRLA18 (talk) 02:13, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Partially hydrogenated vegetable oil" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

The redirect Partially hydrogenated vegetable oil has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 6 § Partially hydrogenated vegetable oil until a consensus is reached. Jay 💬 05:20, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Trans_fat_regulation&oldid=1212529101"