FoodBanter.com - View Single Post - Fat Substitute, Once Praised, Is Pushed Out of the Kitchen

at Tue, 15 Feb 2005 03:07:40 GMT in
>,
(Bob) wrote :

>On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 00:03:36 -0000,
>(Alex Rast) wrote:
>
>>at Mon, 14 Feb 2005 05:22:27 GMT in
>><q4d011tgs6ds56fbbtc88r9snoheld18pn@ 4ax.com>,
(Bob) wrote :
>>
>>>On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 04:33:03 -0000,
>>>(Alex Rast) wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I don't know why they don't use *fully* hydrogenated vegetable oil.
>>>>>It does not contain any trans- fats, just saturated fats and maybe a
>>>>>little monounsaturateds.
>>>>
>>>>AFAIK, fully hydrogenated fats still contain large amounts of trans
>>>>fats because it's a by-product of the hydrogenation process.
>>>
>>>By definition, there is no trans fat in fully hydrogenated fat. Trans
>>>fat is a byproduct of _partial_ hydrogenation. If hydrogenation is
>>>complete, there is no unsaturation, cis or tarns.
>>
>>It is my understanding that both terms: cis- and trans-fats, apply to
>>saturated fats. It's simply a difference in molecular configuration.
>>
>
>No. Cis and trans refer to the molecular configuration at unsaturated
>points. They have no meaning with saturation.

Thanks for correcting me on this one. I thought these referred to the
possible isomers in a saturated fat

H
|
H H H H H H-C-H H
| | | | | | |
x-C-C-C-C-x vs. x-C---C---C-x
| | | | | | |
H H H H H H H

as opposed to, in an unsaturated fat,

H H H H H H H
| | | | | | |
x-C-C=C-C-x vs. x-C-C=C-C-x
| | | | |
H H H H H

based on what I'd read. What would you call the above saturated isomers and
has there been any research on the differences?

--
Alex Rast

(remove d., .7, not, and .NOSPAM to reply)