Re: Cooking Oils and Cancer

[Guest guest]

Rodney,

I have been thinking about some of the points raised in your note

since you brought up the subject of aflatoxin.

In previous notes I have suggested that we should eat WHOLE FOODS

containing the essential fatty acids needed for health and for energy.

I think that when we consume macronutrients (carbs & oils) that have

been isolated, our body loses the ability to moderate intake because

food stripped of fiber, micronutrients, and natural flavors lacks

the bulk and other elements that trigger satiety.

What is true of refined carbohydrates is probably true for cooking

oils: We should probably avoid them. To get 15 grams of EFAs per day

(about 1 tablespoon), you need to eat about 35 to 50 grams of nuts

(about 1/4 cup). For millenia, oils were available only from whole

foods as nuts, coconuts, grains, and animal fats. Today, you can buy

cooking oils in quart and gallon bottles, so it is very easy to

overeat oil.

Here are my thoughts on each of your points:

>A) The fat molecules are themselves carcinogenic.

Not likely. Fatty acids are essential building blocks of our cellular

structure. You cannot have cell walls without fat.

> The carcinogen is a substance that is often associated with the

>oil, not the fat molecule itself. (Aflatoxin as a possible example).

This is a likely possibility, specially if some spoiled (non-premium)

grain is processed in the manufacture of the oil. This reminds me of

the attitude about processing milk from cows that ate radioactive

fallout from Chernobyl. Several countries decided that butter from

the milk was safe to eat because the radioactivity was only in the

calcium of the milk and not in the butter which does not contain

calcium.

http://www.unescap.org/drpad/vc/document/compendium/in15.htm

>C) The carcinogen is associated with the method used to extract the

>oil from the seeds. (Solvents perhaps?).

This is possible, but not very likely because the solvents would

probably evaporate during cooking. This would be a good reason to use

" cold-pressed " oils.

>D) Perhaps while the fat molecules in their natural state may not be

>carcinogenic, when subjected to heat or oxidation in processing or

>storage perhaps some small proportion of the oil is converted into a

>carcinogenic compound.

This has higher probability. Oil extraction and refinement may expose

oils to high temperatures that may create unusual compounds or free

radicals. We have discussed examples of lung cancer in cooks exposed

to fumes of heated cooking oil. Therefore, high temperatures CAN

create carcinogenic compounds from cooking oil.

>E) Eating highly calorically dense fats uses up too much of our

>daily caloric allocation and thereby deprives us of the anti-cancer

>attributes of the less calorically dense foods we would otherwise be

>eating.

This is true. A high fat diet is not compatible with CRON, but not

necessarily a CAUSE of cancer.

Tony

>>>

Message 17302

From: " Rodney " <perspect1111@y...>

Date: Sat Jan 29, 2005 9:47 pm

Subject: Cooking Oils and Cancer

Hi folks:

Here's a suggestion for discussion:

For a long time it has been known that consumption of some edible

oils is associated with increased cancer incidence. It is many years

since I first heard that corn oil was carcinogenic. More recently

the PHS has found an association between ALA and prostate cancer.

So what is the mechanism that is involved? I can think of at least

five possibilities:

A) The fat molecules are themselves carcinogenic.

The carcinogen is a substance that is often associated with the

oil, not the fat molecule itself. (Aflatoxin as a possible example).

C) The carcinogen is associated with the method used to extract the

oil from the seeds. (Solvents perhaps?).

D) Perhaps while the fat molecules in their natural state may not be

carcinogenic, when subjected to heat or oxidation in processing or

storage perhaps some small proportion of the oil is converted into a

carcinogenic compound.

E) Eating highly calorically dense fats uses up too much of our

daily caloric allocation and thereby deprives us of the anti-cancer

attributes of the less calorically dense foods we would otherwise be

eating.

Regarding the above, two issues: first, are there other broad

possible types of explanation, in addition to the five suggested?

Second, what input do people here have as to which is the most likely

explanation for the apparently observed associations?

Thanks for any input. If we knew the reason we could probably find a

way to avoid the problem - for those who believe that eating some

high fat products in small quantities, nuts and seeds for example,

may be desirable.

Rodney.

[Guest guest]

This is a follow-up on cancer and cooking.

Eating charred or burned food can cause cancer. Cooking

carbohydrate-rich foods at high temperatures creates carcinogenic

acrylamides. Cooking meats at high temperatures creates toxic

chemicals such as nitrosamines that can cause cancer. Smoked meats

and cheeses contain many toxic chemicals from the smoke and the

chemical breakdown of the food components.

I suppose that you can reduce your chances of getting cancer by

restricting consumption of toasted breads, crispy fried foods, sauces

and glazes made from roast pan drippings, grilled and smoked foods.

It is interesting that a popular technique for making " tasty " sauces

is to pour some liquid, usually wine, on a pan that has been used for

browning some meat to dissolve the burned leftovers on the pan.

All those burned corners in your toast and the grill marks on your

steak or chicken should be a warning sign. If the burned food tastes

bitter, DO NOT eat it. Not much research has been done on formation

of acrylamides during toasting, so it is not possible to estimate the

level of risk.

Tony

===

http://dceg.cancer.gov/pdfs/sinha1431891999.pdf

Role of well-done, grilled red meat, heterocyclic amines (HCAs) in the

etiology of human cancer.

Rashmi Sinha, iel Rothman

Cancer Letters 143 (1999) 189-194

High-temperature cooking techniques and doneness level of red meat are

linked to cancer of various sites, particularly colorectal cancer. In

a colorectal adenoma study, we found an elevated risk for red meat

consumption that was mainly due to an association with well-done/very

well-done red meat. High-temperature cooking methods (i.e. grilling)

were also associated with increased risk.

[Guest guest]

Hi Tony:

What an interesting (pdf) link that is!

For those who haven't done so, check the data in tables 1 and 2.

Check the difference between chicken well-done baked, compared with

everything else in Table 1. And in Table 2 compare chicken well-done

skinless with chicken well-done cooked with skin on.

Amazing. But I guess not surprising.

Rodney.

>

> This is a follow-up on cancer and cooking.

>

> Eating charred or burned food can cause cancer. Cooking

> carbohydrate-rich foods at high temperatures creates carcinogenic

> acrylamides. Cooking meats at high temperatures creates toxic

> chemicals such as nitrosamines that can cause cancer. Smoked meats

> and cheeses contain many toxic chemicals from the smoke and the

> chemical breakdown of the food components.

>

> I suppose that you can reduce your chances of getting cancer by

> restricting consumption of toasted breads, crispy fried foods,

sauces

> and glazes made from roast pan drippings, grilled and smoked foods.

> It is interesting that a popular technique for making " tasty " sauces

> is to pour some liquid, usually wine, on a pan that has been used

for

> browning some meat to dissolve the burned leftovers on the pan.

>

> All those burned corners in your toast and the grill marks on your

> steak or chicken should be a warning sign. If the burned food

tastes

> bitter, DO NOT eat it. Not much research has been done on formation

> of acrylamides during toasting, so it is not possible to estimate

the

> level of risk.

>

> Tony

>

> ===

> http://dceg.cancer.gov/pdfs/sinha1431891999.pdf

> Role of well-done, grilled red meat, heterocyclic amines (HCAs) in

the

> etiology of human cancer.

> Rashmi Sinha, iel Rothman

> Cancer Letters 143 (1999) 189-194

>

> High-temperature cooking techniques and doneness level of red meat

are

> linked to cancer of various sites, particularly colorectal cancer.

In

> a colorectal adenoma study, we found an elevated risk for red meat

> consumption that was mainly due to an association with well-

done/very

> well-done red meat. High-temperature cooking methods (i.e. grilling)

> were also associated with increased risk.

[Guest guest]

As I was thinking about cooking and cancer, it occurred to me that

cooking can aerosolize some of the carcinogenic substances generated

during high-temperature cooking and cause lung cancer. Sure enough,

in addition to the previously discussed study of increased incidence

of lung cancer from cooking with polyunsaturated oils (canola aka

rapeseed, flax aka linseed), there is another study of increased

incidence of lung cancer from fumes generated during frying or

grilling meats.

The lessons from these papers:

1) avoid high-temperature cooking

2) do not use polyunsaturated oils (e.g., canola [22%LA, 10%ALA]) for

frying.

2) work in a well-ventilated kitchen

3) when you operate your self-cleaning oven on the cleaning cycle, get

out of the house for several hours until the air is clear.

Tony

===

Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2000 Nov;9(11):1215-21.

Fumes from meat cooking and lung cancer risk in Chinese women.

Seow A, Poh WT, Teh M, Eng P, Wang YT, Tan WC, Yu MC, Lee HP.

Department of Community, Occupational and Family Medicine,

National University of Singapore, Singapore. cofseowa@...

Chinese women are recognized to have a high incidence of lung

cancer despite a low smoking prevalence. Several studies have

implicated domestic exposure to cooking fumes as a possible risk

factor, although the exact carcinogens have yet to be identified.

Heterocyclic amines are known carcinogens, which have been identified

in cooked meat, and also in fumes generated during frying or grilling

of meats. We conducted a case-control study of 303 Chinese women with

pathologically confirmed, primary carcinomas of the lung and 765

controls to examine the association between exposure to meat cooking

and lung cancer risk. Data on demographic background, smoking status,

and domestic cooking exposure, including stir-frying of meat, were

obtained by in-person interview while in hospital. The response rates

among eligible cases and controls were 95.0 and 96.9%, respectively.

The proportion of smokers (current or ex-smokers) among cases and

controls was 41.7 and 13.1%, respectively. Adenocarcinomas comprised

31.5% of cancers among smokers and 71.6% among nonsmokers. When cases

were compared with controls, the odds ratio (OR) for lung cancer (all

subtypes) among ex-smokers was 4.3 [95% confidence interval (CI)

2.7-6.8] and that among current smokers was 5.0 (95% CI, 3.4-7.3).

Among smokers, women who reported that they stir-fried daily in the

past had a significantly increased risk of lung cancer (adjusted OR,

2.0; 95% CI, 1.0-3.8) and among these women, risk was enhanced for

those who stir-fried meat daily (OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.3-5.5). Women who

stir-fried daily but cooked meat less often than daily did not show an

elevated risk (OR, 1.0. 95% CI, 0.5-2.4). Risk was further increased

among women stir-frying meat daily who reported that their kitchen was

filled with oily fumes during cooking (OR, 3.7; 95% CI, 1.8-7.5).

These cooking practices on their own did not increase risk among

nonsmokers in our study population. Our results suggest that

inhalation of carcinogens, such as heterocyclic amines generated

during frying of meat, may increase the risk of lung cancer among

smokers. Further studies in different settings are warranted to

examine this possibility, which may also help to explain the higher

risk observed among women smokers compared with men.

PMID: 11097230

===

Lung Cancer. 2002 Feb;35(2):111-7.

Cooking oil fumes and risk of lung cancer in women in rural Gansu,

China.

Metayer C, Wang Z, Kleinerman RA, Wang L, Brenner AV, Cui H, Cao

J, Lubin JH.

Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer

Institute, 6120 Executive Boulevard, Rockville EPS/7044, Bethesda, MD

20892, USA.

Cooking oil fumes have been suggested to increase the risk of lung

cancer in Chinese women by exposing them to mutagenic substances. We

investigated the association between lung cancer and locally made

rapeseed and linseed oils in a population-based case-control study in

Gansu Province, China. Two hundred and thirty-three incident, female

lung cancer cases diagnosed from 1994-98 were identified. A control

group of 459 women was selected from census lists and were frequency

matched on age and prefecture. Interviewers obtained information on

cooking practices and cooking oil use. The odds ratio (OR) for lung

cancer associated with ever-use of rapeseed oil, alone or in

combination with linseed oil, was 1.67 (95% CI 1.0-2.5), compared to

use of linseed oil alone. ORs for stir-frying with either linseed or

rapeseed oil 15-29, 30 and > or =31 times per month were 1.96,1.73,

and 2.24, respectively (trend, P=0.03), relative to a lower frequency

of stir-frying. Lung cancer risks also increased with total number of

years cooking (trend, P<0.09). Women exposed to cooking fumes from

rapeseed oil appeared to be at increased risk of lung cancer, and

there was some evidence that fumes from linseed oil may have also

contributed to the risk.

PMID: 11804682

[Guest guest]

>

> Eating charred or burned food can cause cancer. Cooking

> carbohydrate-rich foods at high temperatures creates carcinogenic

> acrylamides.

<snip>

> I suppose that you can reduce your chances of getting cancer by

> restricting consumption of toasted breads, crispy fried foods, sauces

> and glazes made from roast pan drippings, grilled and smoked foods.

> It is interesting that a popular technique for making " tasty " sauces

> is to pour some liquid, usually wine, on a pan that has been used for

> browning some meat to dissolve the burned leftovers on the pan.

>

> All those burned corners in your toast and the grill marks on your

> steak or chicken should be a warning sign. If the burned food tastes

> bitter, DO NOT eat it. Not much research has been done on formation

> of acrylamides during toasting, so it is not possible to estimate the

> level of risk.

This is all very depressing. I am a regular toast eater. And other

char producers in my diet include roasted asparagus and my daily

egg-white omelette, which I purposely let get the nice crispy edges.

The warnings about aerosolized oils from frying, also deserve attention

as I pretty much always start a meal by sauteing onions and garlic (if you

don't know what you want for dinner, start this way, and it'll all just come

together from the inspiration of the smells).

Anyway, I reckon I knew about these acrylamides, but to hear it again I've

become concerned all over again. I guess that's the point. Now, whether

I cut out some of these food favorites in response is the decision to be made.

Thanks,

-

[Guest guest]

Hi All,

See also:

``The levels of individual PAH [Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons] in

meat, fish, dairy products, vegetables and fruits, cereals and their

products, sweets, beverages, and animal and vegetable fats

and oils were within the range 0.01-10 µg/kg.

Concentrations of over 100 µg/kg have been detected in

smoked meat and up to 86 µg/kg in smoked fish; smoked

cereals contained up to 160 µg/kg.''

This is taken from:

http://www.inchem.org/documents/ehc/ehc/ehc202.htm

This is given, apparently inthe National Cancer Institute - the PAHs

form when oil drips from the meat onto heating elements, and then

infuses into the meat from the smoke. See:

`` " Grilled meat contains potent carcinogens called heterocyclic

aromatic amines that form when amino acids in meat and creatine,

a chemical in muscle tissue, are heated together at temperatures

exceeding 212°F. Smoked meat is also contaminated with polycyclic

aromatic hydrocarbons, another carcinogen created when fat from

meat drips onto hot coals and sends smoke back up into the meat. " ''

Cheers, Al Pater.

>

> Rodney,

>

> I have been thinking about some of the points raised in your note

> since you brought up the subject of aflatoxin.

>

> In previous notes I have suggested that we should eat WHOLE FOODS

> containing the essential fatty acids needed for health and for

energy.

> I think that when we consume macronutrients (carbs & oils) that have

> been isolated, our body loses the ability to moderate intake because

> food stripped of fiber, micronutrients, and natural flavors lacks

> the bulk and other elements that trigger satiety.

>

> What is true of refined carbohydrates is probably true for cooking

> oils: We should probably avoid them. To get 15 grams of EFAs per

day

> (about 1 tablespoon), you need to eat about 35 to 50 grams of nuts

> (about 1/4 cup). For millenia, oils were available only from whole

> foods as nuts, coconuts, grains, and animal fats. Today, you can

buy

> cooking oils in quart and gallon bottles, so it is very easy to

> overeat oil.

>

> Here are my thoughts on each of your points:

>

> >A) The fat molecules are themselves carcinogenic.

> Not likely. Fatty acids are essential building blocks of our

cellular

> structure. You cannot have cell walls without fat.

>

> > The carcinogen is a substance that is often associated with the

> >oil, not the fat molecule itself. (Aflatoxin as a possible

example).

> This is a likely possibility, specially if some spoiled (non-

premium)

> grain is processed in the manufacture of the oil. This reminds me

of

> the attitude about processing milk from cows that ate radioactive

> fallout from Chernobyl. Several countries decided that butter from

> the milk was safe to eat because the radioactivity was only in the

> calcium of the milk and not in the butter which does not contain

> calcium.

> http://www.unescap.org/drpad/vc/document/compendium/in15.htm

>

> >C) The carcinogen is associated with the method used to extract the

> >oil from the seeds. (Solvents perhaps?).

> This is possible, but not very likely because the solvents would

> probably evaporate during cooking. This would be a good reason to

use

> " cold-pressed " oils.

>

> >D) Perhaps while the fat molecules in their natural state may not

be

> >carcinogenic, when subjected to heat or oxidation in processing or

> >storage perhaps some small proportion of the oil is converted into

a

> >carcinogenic compound.

> This has higher probability. Oil extraction and refinement may

expose

> oils to high temperatures that may create unusual compounds or free

> radicals. We have discussed examples of lung cancer in cooks

exposed

> to fumes of heated cooking oil. Therefore, high temperatures CAN

> create carcinogenic compounds from cooking oil.

>

> >E) Eating highly calorically dense fats uses up too much of our

> >daily caloric allocation and thereby deprives us of the anti-cancer

> >attributes of the less calorically dense foods we would otherwise

be

> >eating.

> This is true. A high fat diet is not compatible with CRON, but not

> necessarily a CAUSE of cancer.

>

> Tony

[Guest guest]

Hi Al:

This is very interesting. Some months ago some people here were

lauding the merits of coconut oil, despite its high content of both

lauric acid and myristic acid. One person, IIRC, said he made a

point of consuming it daily. Well, if he is still alive he really

needs to read the following from your link:

" The levels of PAH in meat, fish, dairy products, vegetables and

fruits, cereals and their products, sweets, beverages, and animal and

vegetable fats and oils were within the range 0.01-10 µg/kg.

Concentrations of over 100 µg/kg have been detected in smoked meat

and up to 86 µg/kg in smoked fish; smoked cereals contained up to 160

µg/kg. Coconut oil contained up to 460 µg/kg. The levels in human

breast milk were 0.003-0.03 µg/kg. "

IMO yer have to be nutz to touch anything to do with coconuts. (JMO)

Rodney.

--- In , " old542000 " <apater@m...>

wrote:

>

> Hi All,

>

> See also:

>

> ``The levels of individual PAH [Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons] in

> meat, fish, dairy products, vegetables and fruits, cereals and

their

> products, sweets, beverages, and animal and vegetable fats

> and oils were within the range 0.01-10 µg/kg.

> Concentrations of over 100 µg/kg have been detected in

> smoked meat and up to 86 µg/kg in smoked fish; smoked

> cereals contained up to 160 µg/kg.''

>

> This is taken from:

>

> http://www.inchem.org/documents/ehc/ehc/ehc202.htm

>

> This is given, apparently inthe National Cancer Institute - the

PAHs

> form when oil drips from the meat onto heating elements, and then

> infuses into the meat from the smoke. See:

>

> `` " Grilled meat contains potent carcinogens called heterocyclic

> aromatic amines that form when amino acids in meat and creatine,

> a chemical in muscle tissue, are heated together at temperatures

> exceeding 212°F. Smoked meat is also contaminated with polycyclic

> aromatic hydrocarbons, another carcinogen created when fat from

> meat drips onto hot coals and sends smoke back up into the

meat. " ''

>

> Cheers, Al Pater.

>

> --- In , " citpeks " <citpeks@y...>

wrote:

> >

> > Rodney,

> >

> > I have been thinking about some of the points raised in your note

> > since you brought up the subject of aflatoxin.

> >

> > In previous notes I have suggested that we should eat WHOLE FOODS

> > containing the essential fatty acids needed for health and for

> energy.

> > I think that when we consume macronutrients (carbs & oils) that

have

> > been isolated, our body loses the ability to moderate intake

because

> > food stripped of fiber, micronutrients, and natural flavors lacks

> > the bulk and other elements that trigger satiety.

> >

> > What is true of refined carbohydrates is probably true for cooking

> > oils: We should probably avoid them. To get 15 grams of EFAs

per

> day

> > (about 1 tablespoon), you need to eat about 35 to 50 grams of nuts

> > (about 1/4 cup). For millenia, oils were available only from

whole

> > foods as nuts, coconuts, grains, and animal fats. Today, you can

> buy

> > cooking oils in quart and gallon bottles, so it is very easy to

> > overeat oil.

> >

> > Here are my thoughts on each of your points:

> >

> > >A) The fat molecules are themselves carcinogenic.

> > Not likely. Fatty acids are essential building blocks of our

> cellular

> > structure. You cannot have cell walls without fat.

> >

> > > The carcinogen is a substance that is often associated with

the

> > >oil, not the fat molecule itself. (Aflatoxin as a possible

> example).

> > This is a likely possibility, specially if some spoiled (non-

> premium)

> > grain is processed in the manufacture of the oil. This reminds

me

> of

> > the attitude about processing milk from cows that ate radioactive

> > fallout from Chernobyl. Several countries decided that butter

from

> > the milk was safe to eat because the radioactivity was only in the

> > calcium of the milk and not in the butter which does not contain

> > calcium.

> > http://www.unescap.org/drpad/vc/document/compendium/in15.htm

> >

> > >C) The carcinogen is associated with the method used to extract

the

> > >oil from the seeds. (Solvents perhaps?).

> > This is possible, but not very likely because the solvents would

> > probably evaporate during cooking. This would be a good reason

to

> use

> > " cold-pressed " oils.

> >

> > >D) Perhaps while the fat molecules in their natural state may

not

> be

> > >carcinogenic, when subjected to heat or oxidation in processing

or

> > >storage perhaps some small proportion of the oil is converted

into

> a

> > >carcinogenic compound.

> > This has higher probability. Oil extraction and refinement may

> expose

> > oils to high temperatures that may create unusual compounds or

free

> > radicals. We have discussed examples of lung cancer in cooks

> exposed

> > to fumes of heated cooking oil. Therefore, high temperatures CAN

> > create carcinogenic compounds from cooking oil.

> >

> > >E) Eating highly calorically dense fats uses up too much of our

> > >daily caloric allocation and thereby deprives us of the anti-

cancer

> > >attributes of the less calorically dense foods we would

otherwise

> be

> > >eating.

> > This is true. A high fat diet is not compatible with CRON, but

not

> > necessarily a CAUSE of cancer.

> >

> > Tony

[Guest guest]

corn oil is high in beta-sitosterol.

regards.

----- Original Message -----

From: Rodney

Sent: Saturday, January 29, 2005 8:47 PM

Subject: [ ] Cooking Oils and Cancer

Hi folks:Here's a suggestion for discussion: For a long time it has been known that consumption of some edible oils is associated with increased cancer incidence. It is many years since I first heard that corn oil was carcinogenic. More recently the PHS has found an association between ALA and prostate cancer. So what is the mechanism that is involved? I can think of at least five possibilities:A) The fat molecules are themselves carcinogenic. The carcinogen is a substance that is often associated with the oil, not the fat molecule itself. (Aflatoxin as a possible example).C) The carcinogen is associated with the method used to extract the oil from the seeds. (Solvents perhaps?).D) Perhaps while the fat molecules in their natural state may not be carcinogenic, when subjected to heat or oxidation in processing or storage perhaps some small proportion of the oil is converted into a carcinogenic compound.E) Eating highly calorically dense fats uses up too much of our daily caloric allocation and thereby deprives us of the anti-cancer attributes of the less calorically dense foods we would otherwise be eating.Regarding the above, two issues: first, are there other broad possible types of explanation, in addition to the five suggested?Second, what input do people here have as to which is the most likely explanation for the apparently observed associations?Thanks for any input. If we knew the reason we could probably find a way to avoid the problem - for those who believe that eating some high fat products in small quantities, nuts and seeds for example, may be desirable. Rodney.[Now I give my left arm half an hour's rest!]

[Guest guest]

--- In , " Rodney " <perspect1111@y...>

wrote:

>

> Hi Al:

>

> This is very interesting. Some months ago some people here were

> lauding the merits of coconut oil, despite its high content of

both

> lauric acid and myristic acid. One person, IIRC, said he made a

> point of consuming it daily. Well, if he is still alive he really

> needs to read the following from your link:

>

> " The levels of PAH in meat, fish, dairy products, vegetables and

> fruits, cereals and their products, sweets, beverages, and animal

and

> vegetable fats and oils were within the range 0.01-10 µg/kg.

> Concentrations of over 100 µg/kg have been detected in smoked meat

> and up to 86 µg/kg in smoked fish; smoked cereals contained up to

160

> µg/kg. Coconut oil contained up to 460 µg/kg. The levels in human

> breast milk were 0.003-0.03 µg/kg. "

However, also in the same link

(http://www.inchem.org/documents/ehc/ehc/ehc202.htm):

" The PAH content of coconut, soya bean, maize, and rapeseed

oil was radically reduced during refining, particularly by treatment

with activated charcoal (Larsson et al., 1987). This method is now

widely used (Dennis et al., 1991). "

-

[Guest guest]

Hi :

Good point. I wonder if the 460 number is before or after refining.

The other products for which data are listed - smoked meat, smoked

fish, breast milk etc. - suggest that, at least for those (they do

not receive further processing after being smoked, for example) it is

the concentration in the final product. But certainly it is the

final product concentration that is of interest.

These data make me glad my consumption of Lapsang Souchong tea has

not been excessive. Same for kippers, smoked oysters, etc.! Sure

are tasty though.

Rodney.

> >

> > Hi Al:

> >

> > This is very interesting. Some months ago some people here were

> > lauding the merits of coconut oil, despite its high content of

> both

> > lauric acid and myristic acid. One person, IIRC, said he made a

> > point of consuming it daily. Well, if he is still alive he

really

> > needs to read the following from your link:

> >

> > " The levels of PAH in meat, fish, dairy products, vegetables and

> > fruits, cereals and their products, sweets, beverages, and animal

> and

> > vegetable fats and oils were within the range 0.01-10 µg/kg.

> > Concentrations of over 100 µg/kg have been detected in smoked

meat

> > and up to 86 µg/kg in smoked fish; smoked cereals contained up to

> 160

> > µg/kg. Coconut oil contained up to 460 µg/kg. The levels in human

> > breast milk were 0.003-0.03 µg/kg. "

>

> However, also in the same link

> (http://www.inchem.org/documents/ehc/ehc/ehc202.htm):

>

> " The PAH content of coconut, soya bean, maize, and rapeseed

> oil was radically reduced during refining, particularly by

treatment

> with activated charcoal (Larsson et al., 1987). This method is now

> widely used (Dennis et al., 1991). "

>

> -

[Guest guest]

Rodney, you are making some unwarranted assumptions about PAH in

coconut oil

Coconut contains no PAH. PAH is introduced when the " meat " , called

copra, is dried over an open fire. The high PAH numbers for grilled

or smoked meat or smoked cheese result from the same source -- fire,

or more precisely, by incomplete combustion incomplete combustion.

When Coconut oil is refined (called RBD for Refined, Bleached, and

Deodorized), the PAHs are removed. Probably all of them.

So-called " Virgin Coconut Oil " is made from fresh, young coconuts,

not the stuff with the rock hard shells sold in super markets. It

contains no PAH if it is truly virgin, nor should one expect there

to be. Copra is sometimes sun dried, and oil extracted from it has

no PAH

I hold no special brief for coconut, but a recent study (September,

2004), claims that virgin coconut oil, at least, has beneficial

cholesterol effects. The reference is below.

I really wonder why there is so much concern about " bad " fats among

those who are likely to have gold standard cholesterol levels

(CRONers). Every one is suspicious of trans-fats for their

enstein-like character, but what's the problem if your total

cholesterol is low, HDL is acceptably high, etc. etc.?

As has been pointed out here, one big advantage of saturated fats is

they resist rancidity(in the body too?) That makes them valuable in

sauteing, although I water-saute onions, garlic, etc., and add the

oil -later. Another method is to heat the vegetables gently in a

toaster oven until they are soft, then add the oil.

I never eat fried foods, or for that matter grilled meats, smoked

cheese or salmon.

I don't worry about burned toast. Just scrape off the burned part as

best you can or toss the piece if it's too far gone. As far as

toasting itself, I believe it's entirely harmless. It merely changes

sugar to starch

Mike

Here it is the study abstract:

Beneficial effects of virgin coconut oil on lipid parameters and in

vitro LDL oxidation.

Nevin KG, Rajamohan T.

Department of Biochemistry, University of Kerala, Kariavattom,

Thiruvananthapuram 695 581, India.

PMID: 15329324 [PubMed - in process]

OBJECTIVES: The present study was conducted to investigate the

effect of consumption of virgin coconut oil (VCO) on various lipid

parameters in comparison with copra oil (CO). In addition, the

preventive effect of polyphenol fraction (PF) from test oils on

copper induced oxidation of LDL and carbonyl formation was also

studied. DESIGN AND METHODS: After 45 days of oil feeding to Sprague-

Dawley rats, several lipid parameters and lipoprotein levels were

determined. PF was isolated from the oils and its effect on in vitro

LDL oxidation was assessed. RESULTS: VCO obtained by wet process has

a beneficial effect in lowering lipid components compared to CO. It

reduced total cholesterol, triglycerides, phospholipids, LDL, and

VLDL cholesterol levels and increased HDL cholesterol in serum and

tissues. The PF of virgin coconut oil was also found to be capable

of preventing in vitro LDL oxidation with reduced carbonyl

formation. CONCLUSION: The results demonstrated the potential

beneficiary effect of virgin coconut oil in lowering lipid levels in

serum and tissues and LDL oxidation by physiological oxidants. This

property of VCO may be attributed to the biologically active

polyphenol components present in the oil.

And the link for anyone interested:

http://tinyurl.com/54cjd

> > >

> > > Hi Al:

> > >

> > > This is very interesting. Some months ago some people here

were

> > > lauding the merits of coconut oil, despite its high content of

> > both

> > > lauric acid and myristic acid. One person, IIRC, said he made

a

> > > point of consuming it daily. Well, if he is still alive he

> really

> > > needs to read the following from your link:

> > >

> > > " The levels of PAH in meat, fish, dairy products, vegetables

and

> > > fruits, cereals and their products, sweets, beverages, and

animal

> > and

> > > vegetable fats and oils were within the range 0.01-10 µg/kg.

> > > Concentrations of over 100 µg/kg have been detected in smoked

> meat

> > > and up to 86 µg/kg in smoked fish; smoked cereals contained up

to

> > 160

> > > µg/kg. Coconut oil contained up to 460 µg/kg. The levels in

human

> > > breast milk were 0.003-0.03 µg/kg. "

> >

> > However, also in the same link

> > (http://www.inchem.org/documents/ehc/ehc/ehc202.htm):

> >

> > " The PAH content of coconut, soya bean, maize, and rapeseed

> > oil was radically reduced during refining, particularly by

> treatment

> > with activated charcoal (Larsson et al., 1987). This method is

now

> > widely used (Dennis et al., 1991). "

> >

> > -

[Guest guest]

Hi Mike:

You may be right. But here are a couple of links which indicate that

in Europe for coconut oil, both PAHs and aflatoxin are a major issue.

This certainly indicates one needs to be very sure of the source one

gets this stuff from, if one chooses to use it.

http://www.mb.com.ph/BSNS2004082416971.html

http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/infocentre/export/0311e_354.html

In addition, if the high myristic/lauric acid content in coconut oil

is not harmful then Hegsted, and others, are out to lunch.

(Naturally, it is possible they are).

Rodney.

> > > >

> > > > Hi Al:

> > > >

> > > > This is very interesting. Some months ago some people here

> were

> > > > lauding the merits of coconut oil, despite its high content

of

> > > both

> > > > lauric acid and myristic acid. One person, IIRC, said he

made

> a

> > > > point of consuming it daily. Well, if he is still alive he

> > really

> > > > needs to read the following from your link:

> > > >

> > > > " The levels of PAH in meat, fish, dairy products, vegetables

> and

> > > > fruits, cereals and their products, sweets, beverages, and

> animal

> > > and

> > > > vegetable fats and oils were within the range 0.01-10 µg/kg.

> > > > Concentrations of over 100 µg/kg have been detected in smoked

> > meat

> > > > and up to 86 µg/kg in smoked fish; smoked cereals contained

up

> to

> > > 160

> > > > µg/kg. Coconut oil contained up to 460 µg/kg. The levels in

> human

> > > > breast milk were 0.003-0.03 µg/kg. "

> > >

> > > However, also in the same link

> > > (http://www.inchem.org/documents/ehc/ehc/ehc202.htm):

> > >

> > > " The PAH content of coconut, soya bean, maize, and rapeseed

> > > oil was radically reduced during refining, particularly by

> > treatment

> > > with activated charcoal (Larsson et al., 1987). This method is

> now

> > > widely used (Dennis et al., 1991). "

> > >

> > > -

[Guest guest]

Hi All,

Olive oil has been officially recognized as being healthy.

For a synopsis of the fats in oils, see:

http://www.freshhempfoods.com/nutrition/comp-table.html = Oils and

meat fats.

See:

washingtonpost.com

Olive Oil: The Slippery Details

By Lean Plate Club

Tuesday, November 9, 2004

It's official: Under a " qualified health claim " granted last week by

the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), bottles of olive oil can now

boast what proponents of the Mediterranean style of eating have long

contended: Olive oil may help reduce the risk of heart disease.

That's because olive oil contains mono-unsaturated fatty acids, which

lower the dangerous type of blood cholesterol known as low-density

lipoprotein (LDL). Polyunsaturated fat, such as safflower oil, does

the same. Neither affects the " good cholesterol " (high-density

lipoprotein, HDL). But olive oil also appears to reduce the

inflammation tied to artery damage and it seems to keep the inner

lining of arteries calm and less likely to contract in a dangerous

way.

But before you start drizzling olive oil on everything but your

breakfast cereal, read the fine print of the new claim -- it's based

on " limited and not conclusive scientific evidence, " says the FDA --

and listen to what experts advise:

Swap, don't add. All fat has nine calories per gram -- more than

twice the amount found in protein or carbohydrates. The health claim,

which can be put on olive oil labels as well as on labels of foods

rich in olive oil, designates just 23 daily grams of olive oil --

about two tablespoons -- as possibly beneficial in preventing heart

disease. The FDA's intent is for olive oil " to replace a similar

amount of saturated fat " -- not to increase the total number of

calories consumed. Doing that could boost weight, itself a risk

factor for heart disease.

Let's do the math: Two tablespoons of olive oil have 240 calories. If

those are added to the diet rather than replacing other foods, that

could add an extra 20 pounds to a person's weight in a year.

" The issue is keeping calories in balance, " said Meir J. Stampfer,

professor of nutrition at the Harvard School of Public Health. " Olive

oil is a fat, it's not a low-fat food. " So use it to replace

saturated-fat-rich butter, some margarines or unhealthy salad

dressings, but not to add fat.

Measure, measure, measure. If you freely pour olive oil on your

salad, pasta or in a skillet, " you have no idea how much you put in, "

said registered dietitian Nonas, director of obesity and

diabetes programs at North General Hospital in New York. Just half a

cup of olive oil has 1,000 calories -- nearly a day's worth for many

people. And that popular practice of dipping bread in olive oil at

restaurants? That's easily " four tablespoons of olive oil -- 480

calories -- before the bread, " Nonas notes. " So portion out your

olive oil, no matter how heart-heathy it is. Eating olive oil is

healthy, but obesity is not. "

Make olive oil part of an overall smart food regimen. " It's not just

one thing that makes a diet healthy, " said Valentin Fuster, director

of the cardiovascular institute at Mt. Sinai School of Medicine in

New York and a past president of the American Heart

Association. " It's important that people don't take this as the

answer to all the dietary problems or have olive oil and then eat

everything else that they want. "

Focus first, he said, on eating fruit, vegetables and whole grains,

then add the olive oil -- as well as other healthy foods, including

beans, fish, low-fat or nonfat dairy products, lean meat and poultry

without the skin. It's this combination of foods in the Mediterranean

diet -- as well as more physical activity -- that appears to lower

heart disease risk.

Use olive oil to enhance healthy foods. Odds are you probably won't

be replacing butter or margarine with olive oil on your breakfast

toast. But a little olive oil on pasta or rice is a good idea. Top a

salad with olive oil for great taste; this may help you and your

family eat more salad. Sauté lean meat, fish, poultry or even your

grilled (preferably low-fat) cheese sandwich in olive oil instead of

butter. Ditto for broccoli, spinach and other vegetables. Not only

does it boost flavor, but olive oil also helps increase absorption of

vitamins A, E and K.

Look to other healthy oils. Which ones? Canola, soybean and safflower

oils are also heart-healthy choices, notes Alice Lichtenstein,

professor of nutrition at Tufts University and chair of the American

Heart Association's Nutrition Committee. Some margarine-like spreads,

such as Take Control and Benecol, contain plant stanols and sterols

that have been proven to help lowerLDL by as much as 6 percent. Other

food sources of healthy fat include fish, flaxseed, avocados, nuts

and, of course, olives. But you'd have to eat a lot of them -- an

estimated 23 jumbo olives, about 280 calories -- to get the

equivalent amount of healthy fat found in those two tablespoons of

olive oil.

See the below on what to look out for in a high quality olive oil.

Wahington Post

Buying oilve oil?

>>>Read this first

By Judith Weinraub

Washington Post Staff Writer

Wednesday, January 26, 2005; Page F01

Three chefs were sitting at the kitchen table at RistoranteTosca

recently, comparing bottles.

" Aromatic, more complex, " said Andres. " Very flowery, " said Ris

Lacoste. " A better color, " said Cesare Lanfranconi.

The language sounds familiar to anybody who's ever been to a wine

tasting. But in this case, the liquid was olive oil.

It's a good time of year to taste olive oils: Olives are harvested in

the late fall and early winter. The oils that emerge are now making

their way into gourmet food stores and some supermarkets.

Olive oils are a lot like wines. The olives that spawn them come in

many varieties and reflect qualities determined by the land, sun and

water where they grow. The oils are sold at vastly different prices.

And there are some you wouldn't want to taste on their own that are

perfectly serviceable for cooking.

With the growing focus on olive oil as a healthful fat, the

increasing availablility of a wide variety of oils, and the new

opportunities to taste them at stores and markets, we invited three

well known area chefs to educate us on what to look for. Olive oil

labels contain quite a bit of information, but not necessarily one of

the most important pieces -- the age of the oil. The government does

not require that olive oils state when the oil was pressed or

bottled. Those that do include that information tend to be boutique

brands.

What are the specific differences among olive oils, and how do the

differences affect their use? Are expensive oils worth the money? How

much can the consumer tell about an olive oil simply by reading the

label on the bottle? To answer these questions, we arranged an

informal tasting of -- three high-priced, three midrange and three

relatively inexpensive oils. The oils were not identified or

presented in any particular order.

Since olive oil preferences have to do with personal taste as well as

quality, we selected chefs with different culinary heritages.

Lanfranconi (executive chef at Tosca in downtown Washington) is from

the Lake Como region of Italy. Lacoste (executive chef at 1789 in

town) is from New Bedford, Mass., of French Canadian

extraction. And Andres (executive chef at Jaleo in Washington,

Bethesda and Crystal City; Cafe Atlantico and Zaytinya in the Penn

Quarter, and Oyamel in Arlington) grew up near Barcelona in the

Catalan region of Spain. We asked our tasters to consider color,

aroma and taste, and then tell us what they thought.

We learned a lot.

First off, we found out that in olive oils, youth is a good thing.

Oils will stay reasonably fresh for the first 12 months after

bottling and be fine for another year. But after that, the flavor

diminishes. So do the aroma and some of the health benefits. " After a

year, the aromatics in an olive oil are gone, " says

Andres. " Sometimes the bottles on the shelf in the supermarket are

there a lot longer than you are, " he joked.

One way to prolong the life of a fresh oil is to keep it away from

the light. Dark glass bottles and closed kitchen cabinets are

recommended.

Color and aroma are good indicators of age. Younger oils tend to have

more intense colors as well as fresher flavors and aromas. And that

makes a difference in how they are best used.

Flavorful extra-virgin olive oils, for example, will enhance salads

on their own or complement some already cooked foods. If you want to

dress a salad simply and retain the flavor of the oil (perhaps for a

mozzarella and tomato salad, where an edge of acid is provided by the

tomatoes), you'll probably be happier with these oils.

But you might want a strongly flavored olive oil to finish off

grilled meat or a stew -- not a flowery oil, though. Instead you

would need an oil whose flavor is strong enough to stand up to the

meat.

Another way our chefs liked to use some of the full-flavored oils was

as an accent for mashed potatoes. " This one is perfect " for them,

said Andres, tasting one of the more affordable oils. " You can taste

the pepper, " said Lanfranconi. " It would be a welcome component. With

other oils, you'd have to add pepper. "

A different situation comes into play if you're looking for an oil to

use in a vinaigrette or dressing. In that case, a less-strongly

flavored oil or a blend is a better choice. " There's not a lot of

acid in this one, " said Lacoste as she tasted one of the least

expensive oils. " You wouldn't want to use it alone, but it would be

fine in a light dressing or a mayonnaise. "

With many full-flavored oils, the taste and aroma point to the

birthplace of the olive groves from which the oil was made. Good

French oils, for example, tend to be more flowery. Our chefs were

even able to identify regions of France and Italy as sources of two

of the oils. And the style of one oil from California made Andres

think it was Spanish -- not a bad guess. " Who do you think planted

the olive groves in California? " he asked.

Cooking with olive oils -- as opposed to using them on salads, or as

a dipping sauce for bread or fresh vegetables or as a finishing

flavor for already cooked foods -- presents different challenges.

Like age, heat can destroy the flavor of olive oils, and healthful

antioxidants, too. So there's no point in using fine fresh oils to

saute or grill foods.

Besides, those oils tend to be expensive. Price is tricky and not

necessarily an indicator of quality. Although the more costly oils in

our tasting tended to get higher marks on color, aroma and taste, the

chefs were pleasantly surprised to discover that one oil they liked

was not only affordable but available in most supermarkets and

bodegas (See chart, above for our Best Value).

If you want to try a comparative tasting of your own, follow our

chefs' lead: Pour a little into a small glass. Warm the glass with

your hands. Check out the aroma. Look at its color. Savor the taste

on your tongue and as it goes down your throat. Dip a piece of bread

or a sliced vegetable in it, too. You just might find you know more

about olive oil than you realized.

2005 The Washington Post Company

Cheers, Al Pater