2 ms·
The indigestible fats are demonstrably non-absorbable, so they are less likely to have subtle, sinister side-effects of which we are not yet aware. (By demonstr
by carbocation 17y ago
The indigestible fats are demonstrably non-absorbable, so they are less likely to have subtle, sinister side-effects of which we are not yet aware. (By demonstrably, I mean they are easily detected, both by the consumer of said fats, and by lab tests looking for steatorrhea: http://www.annals.org/content/132/4/279.2.full http://www.annals.org/content/132/4/279.2.full ).
There are risks, and they are fairly well-characterized: you risk malabsorption of fat-soluble vitamins (K,A,D,E).
The fructose issue is far more terrifying, both because (a) it is absorbed, and (b) the epidemiology and biochemistry are plausible.
You know a product is bad for you when it has to put out commercials claiming that it's no worse for you than sugar...
- joe_the_user 17y agoMmm, Well, I believe that one can prove that these chemicals aren't absorbed by the human digestive tract. I offer that one might INDEED experience "subtle, sinister side-effects" by way of substances which "merely" pass through the digestive tract. I know that eating fair quantities dirt or sawdust generally is rightly discouraged. Of course, this isn't certain ... bu, bu, but my point is that we moderns haven't so far done well by offering ourselves for science's experimentation. There might will likely be a tipping point, where this science finally delivers more than it takes away. But we ought to take concerning whether we've reached that point or not.
- carbocation 17y agoI guess my point wasn't that Olestra has no important side effects, but instead that it has very important side effects which are in plain view.