On Thu, 23 Dec 1999, alexs wrote:

> >Canola is frowned on, since the rapeseed from which it is
> >extracted is not, as far as I know, a human food.
>
> Huh. "Frowned on"?
>
> "Canola" is just a N. American marketing label
> stuck on extract of low-erucic "oilseed rape", as it's
> known just about everywhere else. Since rapeseed is a
> culturally repugnant name in this era, some better
> moniker had to be found.

Yes, but what does this have to do with its nutritional
properties?  Many would consider the word "lard" to have acquired
negative connotations as well, for all the difference it makes.
For the record, the "rape" in rapeseed is derived from the Latin
name of one of the plants in this family: Brassica rapa.

> Its other industrial uses include a possible replacement
> for diesel oil, burning in lamps, plastics manufacture
> and pesticide!

Animal fats also have industrial uses.  This is irrelevant.

> It is a commodity in Global Free Trade
> -- a dirty phrase here in Seattle -- and is produced
> using transgenic methods. It is up there with
> cottonseed oil in being an unnatural food for
> any animal without significant high-tech processing.

I'm not so sure about this.

> So "canola" is just a selectively-bred, genetically-
> manipulated, economically significant, high-tech
> industrial oil and animal feed crop being pandered as a
> human foodstuff.

Selectively bred, yes, as are most of the foodstuffs that we have
availabel to us in the supermarket, including the meats.
Genetically manipulated, yes, to increase oil yields.
Economically significant, yes, coming in third after palm oil in
the world vegetable oil markets, according to the references you
supplied.  Do you object to palm oil for its economic
significance?

The rapeseed meal is used as animal feed, but the interesting
question to me is whether the plant is edible to humans after
all.  After reading the articles that you linked in your message
I learned that the rape plant is in fact a member of a botanical
family of plants that are in fact edible to humans.  Notably it
is a close relative of mustard greens, which are of course
edible. This is the same family as cabbage, broccoli,
cauliflower, turnips, etc. This in itself doesn't mean that the
rape weed is edible, but it increases the chances that it might
be.

Euell Gibbons did not mention the rape plant specifically, but
did say "There are about ten species of the true wild mustards,
or Brassicas, found growing wild in this country, and all of them
are perfectly safe for human food."  Well, the plant used in oil
production is a hybrid of two wild Brassicas: Brassica
oleracea Linnaeus and Brassica campestris.  Both are edible.  The
first is the cabbage/kale family; the second is the rutabaga
family.

So, while this isn't conclusive it is enough to make me withdraw
my assertion that canola oil isn't paleo until I get a bit more
information.  It's beginning to look like it might be.

> http://www.aphis.usda.gov/bbep/bp/rapeseed.html

This one was very useful.

> Canola is quintessentially, excruciatingly non-paleo. Avoid it!

Better yet, do some research and help me find the truth about
this plant.  It is a fact that the fatty acid composition of
canola oil looks quite good: high in monounsaturates and with a
w6:w3 ratio of only about 2:1.  If it turns out to be from an
edible plant it would be as paleo as olive oil.

Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]