Your evidence is, once again, fraught with bias and cherry-picking. > Supported by the Global Dairy Platform > Although data from experimental models suggest

Your evidence is, once again, fraught with bias and cherry-picking. > Supported by the Global Dairy Platform > Although data from experimental models suggest that rTFA may beneficially affect risk of CVD and cancer, further research is needed to determine the effects of VA and c9,t11-CLA in humans. Data from existing human studies do not consistently support the findings from experimental studies. > thus, it is difficult to draw conclusions regarding VA and c9,t11-CLA and various cancers. You're never going to convince me trans fat is good for you. http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMra054035 http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMra054035 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22059639 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22059639 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22403632 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22403632 > 'The National Academy of Sciences’ report is the first attempt by a panel of experts to set a safe intake level for trans fat. The panel found that, like saturated fat, trans fat promotes heart disease. Furthermore, the panel concluded that the only safe intake of trans fat is ‘zero.’ However, because it would be impractical to eliminate all trans fat from the diet, the panel recommended that people consume as little trans fat as possible. Yet it is currently impossible for consumers to follow the panel’s advice because the Food and Drug Administration does not require trans fat to be listed on Nutrition Facts food labels. http://www.cspinet.org/new/200207101.html http://www.cspinet.org/new/200207101.html Please, don't recommend people eat animal products for beneficial properties of trans fat. It's just scientifically untenable.