3 ms·

You do realize that the campaign of low fat diets has completely been extinguished in the last 10 years? https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/hsph-in-the-news/low

• blackeyeblitzar 3y ago
  I think you’re misinterpreting the reevaluation of fats in recent years. I’m not demonizing fats and saying they need to be avoided entirely. But I am saying people (especially in America) need to moderate their intake of calories in general and fats specifically as well (as they’re a vehicle for calories). There are also different varieties of fats with different health effects. Using nonstick cookware is an easy way to reduce the intake of fats (and therefore calories) even if you are not banning them from your diet entirely. Let’s take a simple example: have you tried to make a fried egg in a cast iron pan and compared it to a nonstick pan? In a cast iron, you’ll need to use a pat of butter to get the egg to slide easily (around 100 calories). In nonstick you can get away with zero butter. It adds up.
  • happyopossum 3y ago
    A) A pat of butter is around 35 calories, and B) if you're putting a ton of butter in there it isn't exactly getting absorbed into the egg, most of it is left in the pan.
    • blackeyeblitzar 3y ago
      I did several searches, and the sources I saw said a pat is 1 tablespoon and is 100 calories. Example: https://www.nutritionix.com/food/butter/pat https://www.nutritionix.com/food/butter/pat But your latter point is fair. I haven’t measured it. I just know that my experience of cooking in my cast iron requires a lot more fat than my other pans.
      • WrongAssumption 3y ago
        A tablespoon of butter is significantly more than what is considered a pat of butter.
  • nostrebored 3y ago
    People in America should be upping their fats and completely eliminating any low fat packaged foods from their diets. The results are unambiguous.