4 ms·

GP posted an article with carefully-made arguments and lots of citations. Your emotional anecdote is unconvincing in comparison and completely ignores GP's link

GP posted an article with carefully-made arguments and lots of citations. Your emotional anecdote is unconvincing in comparison and completely ignores GP's link. Do you have a better argument than using italics on the word "poison?" GPs link: https://junkscience.com/2018/06/flashback-fear-of-margarine-the-trans-fat-myth/ https://junkscience.com/2018/06/flashback-fear-of-margarine-...

ncmncm 5y ago
When I replied, there was no citation. My reply was not an anecdote: it cites actual, long delayed regulatory-agency response to actual research they were charged, by statute, to act upon in the public interest. The other citation is from 1999. Since 1999, both EU and US have banned trans fats in foods, for reasons. Anyone may look up those reasons. (Hint: poison.) The author of the tendentious article is personally responsible for any excess deaths caused by people believing it. The author of the spurious citation is spared immediate responsibility because trans fats are out of the food supply. No doubt they will step up to defend packing sugar into everything.
- jdlshore 5y ago
  Thanks, I've investigated further, and what I found was convincing. I was particularly disturbed to find that Wikipedia says Steve Milloy (behind junkscience.com, and the author of GP's source) is a right-winger who also denies climate change and second-hand smoke. In short: I was duped. I don't know if you care, but although your arguments pushed me to investigate further, they weren't convincing on their own. They were histrionic and based on the actions of government bodies, not the underlying science.
  - ncmncm 5y ago
    Thank you for the report. When even the US government is moved to act on something affecting public health, it has progressed far beyond the point where we need to wonder whether it is real. Of course the EU acted earlier. Postings on HN should not convince anyone on their own. They are a hint, ideally with a pointer to more information. In this case, searching on "Fred Kummerow" reveals all. What I wonder now is whether Crisco, identified on the label as "fully hydrogenated palm oil", but also "trans fats: 0g", is on the up and up. Hydrogenation was the name of the process that was creating the toxic trans fats. But it is also descriptive of changing carbon double-bonds in a lipid backbone into single bonds, and terminating the spares with hydrogen atoms (hence the name). So it makes me wonder what process they are using, and whether it would work on any old oil, or only on palm oil; and if the latter, why?

ncmncm 5y ago

When I replied, there was no citation. My reply was not an anecdote: it cites actual, long delayed regulatory-agency response to actual research they were charged, by statute, to act upon in the public interest. The other citation is from 1999. Since 1999, both EU and US have banned trans fats in foods, for reasons. Anyone may look up those reasons. (Hint: poison.) The author of the tendentious article is personally responsible for any excess deaths caused by people believing it. The author of the spurious citation is spared immediate responsibility because trans fats are out of the food supply. No doubt they will step up to defend packing sugar into everything.

jdlshore 5y ago
Thanks, I've investigated further, and what I found was convincing. I was particularly disturbed to find that Wikipedia says Steve Milloy (behind junkscience.com, and the author of GP's source) is a right-winger who also denies climate change and second-hand smoke. In short: I was duped. I don't know if you care, but although your arguments pushed me to investigate further, they weren't convincing on their own. They were histrionic and based on the actions of government bodies, not the underlying science.
- ncmncm 5y ago
  Thank you for the report. When even the US government is moved to act on something affecting public health, it has progressed far beyond the point where we need to wonder whether it is real. Of course the EU acted earlier. Postings on HN should not convince anyone on their own. They are a hint, ideally with a pointer to more information. In this case, searching on "Fred Kummerow" reveals all. What I wonder now is whether Crisco, identified on the label as "fully hydrogenated palm oil", but also "trans fats: 0g", is on the up and up. Hydrogenation was the name of the process that was creating the toxic trans fats. But it is also descriptive of changing carbon double-bonds in a lipid backbone into single bonds, and terminating the spares with hydrogen atoms (hence the name). So it makes me wonder what process they are using, and whether it would work on any old oil, or only on palm oil; and if the latter, why?