romper wrote:

> Does anyone having any info as to why saturated fats are ok?
>
> That study said they weren't.
>
> ,Micke

Romper,

As I understand it, saturated fats are those which have all of the
carbon atoms fully bound.  That makes them chemically stable.  They
won't go rancid in the body.  Unsaturated fats on the other hand are
capable of oxidizing and going rancid, which produces poisonous and/or
carcinogenic compounds.

If you have ever noticed the outside of a bottle of vegetable oil, after
it has been opened, and oil has dripped on it, you probably noticed that
the oil has become rather sticky or hardened.  This is oxidized rancid
oil.  Certainly, I do not want my body's fat to harden in my fat cells,
or in my arteries.  In fact, the biggest market for vegetable based oils
was at one time PAINT.  The unsaturated oils were the ingredients that
made paint dry and get hard.

It is interesting that the mammalian body produces saturated fats when
faced with a surplus of calories.  Saturated fats are the bodies first
choice.  I believe that the body could have learned to make unsaturated
fats if they were in fact better for our survival over the long term.
Remember that mammals have to store fat for years and decades, while
plants only need the fat for a season or so (for energy for the
seedlings).

The whole issue of whether saturated fats are bad for you is clouded by
the fact that people do not normally eat purely saturated or unsaturated
fat.  Beef fat for example is about half saturated fat, and half
unsaturated fat.  So if a study shows that people who ate more beef had
a higher incidence of heart disease, or colon cancer, was it the
saturated fat, or was it the unsaturated fat that made the difference?

The above ramblings are strictly my opinion, and make sense to me. YMMV.

--
Bill

Remove spam in email address to reply.