I recently read that, depending on the recipe, coconut oil is a decent
substitute for hydrogenated shortening (for baking) and allegedly a lot
healthier. Is anyone here using it? If so, how would you rate it?
Does it make your bakery taste like coconut or is it imperceptible? Is
there a formula for substitution or is it necessary to use recipes
specifically tested for coconut oil? Does it keep well and, finally,
are certain brands better than others?

Emma

Emma Thackery Apr 5, 3:18 pm show options

Newsgroups: rec.food.cooking
From: Emma Thackery > - Find messages by this author
Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 17:18:17 -0500
Local: Tues, Apr 5 2005 3:18 pm
Subject: Coconut oil for baking?
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse


I recently read that, depending on the recipe, coconut oil is a decent
substitute for hydrogenated shortening (for baking) and allegedly a lot

healthier. Is anyone here using it? If so, how would you rate it?
Does it make your bakery taste like coconut or is it imperceptible? Is

there a formula for substitution or is it necessary to use recipes
specifically tested for coconut oil? Does it keep well and, finally,
are certain brands better than others?

Emma
-------------------------
Coconut oil is NOT one of the healthy oils.
Nancree

"nancree" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Emma Thackery Apr 5, 3:18 pm show options
>
> Newsgroups: rec.food.cooking
> From: Emma Thackery > - Find messages by this author
> Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 17:18:17 -0500
> Local: Tues, Apr 5 2005 3:18 pm
> Subject: Coconut oil for baking?
> Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
> original | Report Abuse
>
>
> I recently read that, depending on the recipe, coconut oil is a decent
> substitute for hydrogenated shortening (for baking) and allegedly a lot
>
> healthier.

FWIW -
There was a study some years back out of the Univ of Georgia (?) as to
which ingested fats had a correspondent cholesteral increases -
only two fats (palm and coconut) of all the animal and vegetable fats
tested had statistical correlation, and the source was isolated to the same
component found of both fats.

( That is not to be construed to imply that hydrogentated fats do not have
other effects than elevated cholesteral - just that steady use of coconut
oil was found tyo have raised cholesteral.)


Is anyone here using it? If so, how would you rate it?
> Does it make your bakery taste like coconut or is it imperceptible? Is
>
> there a formula for substitution or is it necessary to use recipes
> specifically tested for coconut oil? Does it keep well and, finally,
> are certain brands better than others?
>
> Emma
> -------------------------
> Coconut oil is NOT one of the healthy oils.
> Nancree
>

Nancree wrote:

> Coconut oil is NOT one of the healthy oils.

At the end of January, "Ken Davey" posted:

"Recent thinking has it that coconut oil is one of the healthiest available.
http://www.mercola.com/2003/se*p/13/coconut_oil.htm"

Of course, since that site SELLS coconut oil, I'm not so sure that Ken
didn't fall for marketing hype. I'm not going to load up on coconut oil, in
any case.

Bob

Bob wrote:
> Nancree wrote:
>
> > Coconut oil is NOT one of the healthy oils.
>
> At the end of January,(1) "Ken Davey" posted:
>
> "Recent thinking has it that coconut oil is one of the healthiest
available.
> http://www.mercola.com/2003/se=ADp/13/coconut_oil.htm"
>
> Of course,(2) since that site SELLS coconut oil,(3) I'm not so sure
that Ken
> didn't fall for marketing hype. I'm not going to load up on coconut
oil,(4) in
> any case.
>
> B,B,B,B,ob

If not by the case then how about by the single bottle? Btw, ALL FOUR
(4) of your commas are superfluous. B,B,B,B,ob, are you a stutterer?

Sheldon

Bob wrote:
> Nancree wrote:
>
> > Coconut oil is NOT one of the healthy oils.
>
> At the end of January,(1) "Ken Davey" posted:
>
> "Recent thinking has it that coconut oil is one of the healthiest
available.
> http://www.mercola.com/2003/se=ADp/13/coconut_oil.htm"
>
> Of course,(2) since that site SELLS coconut oil,(3) I'm not so sure
that Ken
> didn't fall for marketing hype. I'm not going to load up on coconut
oil,(4) in
> any case.
>
> B,B,B,B,ob

If not by the case then how about by the single bottle? Btw, ALL FOUR
(4) of your commas are superfluous. B,B,B,B,ob, are you a stutterer?

Sheldon

Sheldon wrote:

>> Of course,(2) since that site SELLS coconut oil,(3) I'm not so sure
>> that Ken didn't fall for marketing hype. I'm not going to load up
>> on coconut oil,(4) in any case.
>>
>> B,B,B,B,ob
>
> If not by the case then how about by the single bottle? Btw, ALL FOUR
> (4) of your commas are superfluous. B,B,B,B,ob, are you a stutterer?

The "superfluous" commas didn't appear on my newsreader, and they didn't
appear when I checked with Google. Ergo, you made them up and typed them
into the quote. You're misquoting me, then criticizing the misquoting --
and your criticism is leveled at FABRICATED PUNCTUATION? Pretty impotent,
Portnoy.

Bob

Bob wrote:
> Sheldon wrote:
>
> >> Of course,(2) since that site SELLS coconut oil,(3) I'm not so
sure
> >> that Ken didn't fall for marketing hype. I'm not going to load up
> >> on coconut oil,(4) in any case.
> >>
> >> B,B,B,B,ob
> >
> > If not by the case then how about by the single bottle? Btw, ALL
FOUR
> > (4) of your commas are superfluous. B,B,B,B,ob, are you a
stutterer?
>
> The "superfluous" commas didn't appear on my newsreader,(1) and they
didn't
> appear when I checked with Google. Ergo, you made them up and typed
them
> into the quote. You're misquoting me,(2) then criticizing the
misquoting --
> and your criticism is leveled at FABRICATED PUNCTUATION? Pretty
impotent,
> Portnoy.
>
> Bob

They're all there, each comma exactly as you typed them, I merely
numbered them. In fact two of the commas in your present post are
superfluous also, I numbered those too. You haven't a clue about comma
usage, which of course more often then not makes each and every of your
posts unintelligible.

Sheldon

Sheldon complained:

"If not by the case then how about by the single bottle? Btw, ALL FOUR

(4) of your commas are superfluous. B,B,B,B,ob, are you a stutterer?

Sheldon "
------------
No stuttering on my screen, Sheldon. Something must be wrong at your
end.
Nancree.
-----------------
(quote)
Bob Apr 6, 3:26 am show options

Newsgroups: rec.food.cooking
From: "Bob" > - Find messages by this
author
Date: 6 Apr 2005 05:26:05 -0500
Local: Wed, Apr 6 2005 3:26 am
Subject: Coconut oil for baking?
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse



Nancree wrote:
> Coconut oil is NOT one of the healthy oils.


At the end of January, "Ken Davey" posted:

"Recent thinking has it that coconut oil is one of the healthiest
available.
http://www.mercola.com/2003/se=AD=ADp/13/coconut_oil.htm"


Of course, since that site SELLS coconut oil, I'm not so sure that Ken
didn't fall for marketing hype. I'm not going to load up on coconut
oil, in=20
any case.=20


Bob

"Bob" >, if that's their real name, wrote:

>Nancree wrote:
>
>> Coconut oil is NOT one of the healthy oils.
>
>At the end of January, "Ken Davey" posted:
>
>"Recent thinking has it that coconut oil is one of the healthiest available.
>http://www.mercola.com/2003/se*p/13/coconut_oil.htm"
>
>Of course, since that site SELLS coconut oil, I'm not so sure that Ken
>didn't fall for marketing hype. I'm not going to load up on coconut oil, in
>any case.

This has been discussed in alt.support.diet.low-carb. According to what
I've read there, coconut oil is good for you. This isn't even my opinion.
Just relaying what I've read.

Carol
--
Coming at you live, from beautiful Lake Woebegon

"Sheldon" >, if that's their real name, wrote:

>Bob wrote:
>> Sheldon wrote:
>>
>> >> Of course,(2) since that site SELLS coconut oil,(3) I'm not so
>sure
>> >> that Ken didn't fall for marketing hype. I'm not going to load up
>> >> on coconut oil,(4) in any case.
>> >>
>> >> B,B,B,B,ob
>> >
>> > If not by the case then how about by the single bottle? Btw, ALL
>FOUR
>> > (4) of your commas are superfluous. B,B,B,B,ob, are you a
>stutterer?
>>
>> The "superfluous" commas didn't appear on my newsreader,(1) and they
>didn't
>> appear when I checked with Google. Ergo, you made them up and typed
>them
>> into the quote. You're misquoting me,(2) then criticizing the
>misquoting --
>> and your criticism is leveled at FABRICATED PUNCTUATION? Pretty
>impotent,
>> Portnoy.
>>
>> Bob
>
>They're all there, each comma exactly as you typed them, I merely
>numbered them. In fact two of the commas in your present post are
>superfluous also, I numbered those too. You haven't a clue about comma
>usage, which of course more often then not makes each and every of your
>posts unintelligible.

Check Google, Sheldon. Bob is right. I also think that he's one of the
more sane and intelligent posters in the group.

Bob, you've got my snail mail address so you can send the check?

Carol
--
Coming at you live, from beautiful Lake Woebegon

Damsel in dis Dress wrote:
> "Sheldon" >, if that's their real name, wrote:
>
> >Bob wrote:
> >> Sheldon wrote:
> >>
> >> >> Of course,(2) since that site SELLS coconut oil,(3) I'm not so
> >sure
> >> >> that Ken didn't fall for marketing hype. I'm not going to load
up
> >> >> on coconut oil,(4) in any case.
> >> >>
> >> >> B,B,B,B,ob
> >> >
> >> > If not by the case then how about by the single bottle? Btw,
ALL
> >FOUR
> >> > (4) of your commas are superfluous. B,B,B,B,ob, are you a
> >stutterer?
> >>
> >> The "superfluous" commas didn't appear on my newsreader,(1) and
they
> >didn't
> >> appear when I checked with Google. Ergo, you made them up and
typed
> >them
> >> into the quote. You're misquoting me,(2) then criticizing the
> >misquoting --
> >> and your criticism is leveled at FABRICATED PUNCTUATION? Pretty
> >impotent,
> >> Portnoy.
> >>
> >> Bob
> >
> >They're all there, each comma exactly as you typed them, I merely
> >numbered them. In fact two of the commas in your present post are
> >superfluous also, I numbered those too. You haven't a clue about
comma
> >usage, which of course more often then not makes each and every of
your
> >posts unintelligible.
>
> Check Google, Sheldon. Bob is right.
> Carol

Actually his entire original post has now been removed, but my quoting
is how I found it. He's a sneak and a liar and you're swearing to it.

Sheldon

Sheldon wrote:
> Damsel in dis Dress wrote:
> > "Sheldon" >, if that's their real name, wrote:
> >
> > >Bob wrote:
> > >> Sheldon wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >> Of course,(2) since that site SELLS coconut oil,(3) I'm not
so
> > >sure
> > >> >> that Ken didn't fall for marketing hype. I'm not going to
load
> up
> > >> >> on coconut oil,(4) in any case.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> B,B,B,B,ob
> > >> >
> > >> > If not by the case then how about by the single bottle? Btw,
> ALL
> > >FOUR
> > >> > (4) of your commas are superfluous. B,B,B,B,ob, are you a
> > >stutterer?
> > >>
> > >> The "superfluous" commas didn't appear on my newsreader,(1) and
> they
> > >didn't
> > >> appear when I checked with Google. Ergo, you made them up and
> typed
> > >them
> > >> into the quote. You're misquoting me,(2) then criticizing the
> > >misquoting --
> > >> and your criticism is leveled at FABRICATED PUNCTUATION? Pretty
> > >impotent,
> > >> Portnoy.
> > >>
> > >> Bob
> > >
> > >They're all there, each comma exactly as you typed them, I merely
> > >numbered them. In fact two of the commas in your present post are
> > >superfluous also, I numbered those too. You haven't a clue about
> comma
> > >usage, which of course more often then not makes each and every of
> your
> > >posts unintelligible.
> >
> > Check Google, Sheldon. Bob is right.
> > Carol
>
> Actually his entire original post has now been removed, but my
quoting
> is how I found it. He's a sneak and a liar and you're swearing to
it.
>
> Sheldon



Aha! I found it... and with all four (4) superflouous commas exactly
how Bob typed them... and this time I won't number them. Carol, If I
can find Bob's post on Google then so can you... perhaps you *chose*
not to look very carefully. See below:


-------------
Bob Apr 6, 3:26 am
Newsgroups: rec.food.cooking
From: "Bob" >
Date: 6 Apr 2005 05:26:05 -0500
Local: Wed, Apr 6 2005 3:26 am
Subject: Coconut oil for baking?

Nancree wrote:
> Coconut oil is NOT one of the healthy oils.

At the end of January, "Ken Davey" posted:

"Recent thinking has it that coconut oil is one of the healthiest
available.
http://www.mercola.com/2003/se=AD=ADp/13/coconut_oil.htm"

Of course, since that site SELLS coconut oil, I'm not so sure that Ken
didn't fall for marketing hype. I'm not going to load up on coconut
oil, in any case.=20

Bob=20
------------

=20
Sheldon

Damsel in dis Dress > wrote in
:

> "Bob" >, if that's their real name,
> wrote:
>
> >Nancree wrote:
> >
> >> Coconut oil is NOT one of the healthy oils.
> >
> >At the end of January, "Ken Davey" posted:
> >
> >"Recent thinking has it that coconut oil is one of the healthiest
> >available. http://www.mercola.com/2003/se*p/13/coconut_oil.htm"
> >
> >Of course, since that site SELLS coconut oil, I'm not so sure that
> >Ken didn't fall for marketing hype. I'm not going to load up on
> >coconut oil, in any case.
>
> This has been discussed in alt.support.diet.low-carb. According to
> what I've read there, coconut oil is good for you. This isn't even
> my opinion. Just relaying what I've read.
>
> Carol

There is a blend of oils (including coconut oil) that is very good for
you. I believe the research was done in 2002 or 03. Read about it in the
health news on google. But damned if I remember the other oils used.


--
No Bread Crumbs were hurt in the making of this Meal.
Type 2 Diabetic Since Aug 2004
1AC- 7.2, 7.3, 5.5, 5.6 mmol
Weight from 265 down to 219 lbs. and dropping.
Continuing to be Manitoban

"Sheldon" >, if that's their real name, wrote:

>Aha! I found it... and with all four (4) superflouous commas exactly
>how Bob typed them... and this time I won't number them. Carol, If I
>can find Bob's post on Google then so can you... perhaps you *chose*
>not to look very carefully. See below:
>
>
>-------------
> Bob Apr 6, 3:26 am
>Newsgroups: rec.food.cooking
>From: "Bob" >
>Date: 6 Apr 2005 05:26:05 -0500
>Local: Wed, Apr 6 2005 3:26 am
>Subject: Coconut oil for baking?
>
>Nancree wrote:
>> Coconut oil is NOT one of the healthy oils.
>
>At the end of January, "Ken Davey" posted:
>
>"Recent thinking has it that coconut oil is one of the healthiest
>available.
>http://www.mercola.com/2003/se**p/13/coconut_oil.htm"
>
>Of course, since that site SELLS coconut oil, I'm not so sure that Ken
>didn't fall for marketing hype. I'm not going to load up on coconut
>oil, in any case.
>
>Bob

Where's the B,B,B,B,Bob that you posted? That's what I was replying about.
Is it that you don't like the commas within the above paragraph? I'm not
trying to be a bitch here. I just don't understand what the problem is.

Carol
--
Coming at you live, from beautiful Lake Woebegon

Sheldon wrote:

> You haven't a clue about comma usage, which of course more often
> then not makes each and every of your posts unintelligible.

My posts are unintelligible to you because you lack the mental capacity to
comprehend them. It has nothing to do with commas. (BTW, the correct usage
would have been "more often than not" rather than "more often then not."
It's a common mistake among those whose first language is Hebonics.)

I don't mean to discourage you from continuing to work on your English
skills, so I'm not going to dumb down my posts to a level you can
understand. If you apply yourself to the utmost, maybe someday you'll grasp
a tiny fraction of my meaning. So just keep plugging away, li'l booger!

Bob

Damsel in dis Dress wrote:
> "Sheldon" >, if that's their real name, wrote:
>
> >Aha! I found it... and with all four (4) superflouous commas exactly
> >how Bob typed them... and this time I won't number them. Carol, If
I
> >can find Bob's post on Google then so can you... perhaps you *chose*
> >not to look very carefully. See below:
> >
> >
> >-------------
> > Bob Apr 6, 3:26 am
> >Newsgroups: rec.food.cooking
> >From: "Bob" >
> >Date: 6 Apr 2005 05:26:05 -0500
> >Local: Wed, Apr 6 2005 3:26 am
> >Subject: Coconut oil for baking?
> >
> >Nancree wrote:
> >> Coconut oil is NOT one of the healthy oils.
> >
> >At the end of January, "Ken Davey" posted:
> >
> >"Recent thinking has it that coconut oil is one of the healthiest
> >available.
> >http://www.mercola.com/2003/se=AD=ADp/13/coconut_oil.htm"
> >
> >Of course, since that site SELLS coconut oil, I'm not so sure that
Ken
> >didn't fall for marketing hype. I'm not going to load up on coconut
> >oil, in any case.
> >
> >Bob
>
> Where's the B,B,B,B,Bob that you posted? That's what I was replying
about.
> Is it that you don't like the commas within the above paragraph? I'm
not
> trying to be a bitch here. I just don't understand what the problem
is.
>
> Carol

For someone who admittedly doesn't understand you were sure quick to
take sides (is the sex good). It's the commas within the body of his
post (look right up there) that are superfluous, especially the one in
the last sentence that I focused on... I added the "B,B,B,B,Boob"
"stutter" as an extra added attraction... I don't know why that it's
not obvious that I added that stutter part, couldn't be any more
ob,b,b,bvious. I'm talking about the commas appearing within the body
of his post that he typed, including the one in his attribution... all
four are not only totally unnecessary, they muddle the meaning of what
is said to the point that his post is unintelligible. Commas are the
bane of Usenet. If you're in doubt leave em out.

So, Carol, what's this BITCHY business about your attributing me with
"if that's their real name"? I do use my real name, always have. I
don't remember if you were here yet when I used "penmart10"...
penMARTIN. Martin is my REAL last name, and 'pen" because I collect
pens. It got changed when AOL screwed up and so I had to choose a new
handle and chose my present handle... penmart01. I've always signed my
REAL first name, Sheldon. Sheldon Martin is my REAL name, always was.
Unlike so many others I don't munge. In all the years I've posted to
Newsgroups I've always used my REAL name, and at this point there is no
one else posting to rfc longer than me... more than 90% I consider
newbies, and that's because they are newbies. Your Bob is a newbie,
you're a newbie too.

Sheldon

Emma Thackery wrote:

> I recently read that, depending on the recipe, coconut oil
> is a decent substitute for hydrogenated shortening (for baking)
> and allegedly a lot healthier.

Saturated fats like those in coconut oil contribute to
cardiovascular disease. Few associations between
harmful behaviors and adverse health consequences
are as well-documented as this one.

For more information, see:

http://www.webdietitian.com/document...atedfattyacids

http://www.ianr.unl.edu/pubs/foods/nf61.htm
http://www.diet-and-health.net/Disea...ovascular.html

Coconut oil is even worse than beef fat or lard.

Mark Thorson wrote:
> Emma Thackery wrote:
>
>> I recently read that, depending on the recipe, coconut oil
>> is a decent substitute for hydrogenated shortening (for baking)
>> and allegedly a lot healthier.
>
> Saturated fats like those in coconut oil contribute to
> cardiovascular disease. Few associations between
> harmful behaviors and adverse health consequences
> are as well-documented as this one.
>
> For more information, see:
>
http://zapatopi.net/afdb.html

since you seem to be overly parinoid

"Sheldon" >, if that's their real name, wrote:

>
>Damsel in dis Dress wrote:
>> "Sheldon" >, if that's their real name, wrote:
>>
>> >Aha! I found it... and with all four (4) superflouous commas exactly
>> >how Bob typed them... and this time I won't number them. Carol, If
>> >I can find Bob's post on Google then so can you... perhaps you *chose*
>> >not to look very carefully. See below:
>> >
>> >-------------
>> > Bob Apr 6, 3:26 am
>> >Newsgroups: rec.food.cooking
>> >From: "Bob" >
>> >Date: 6 Apr 2005 05:26:05 -0500
>> >Local: Wed, Apr 6 2005 3:26 am
>> >Subject: Coconut oil for baking?
>> >
>> >Nancree wrote:
>> >> Coconut oil is NOT one of the healthy oils.
>> >
>> >At the end of January, "Ken Davey" posted:
>> >
>> >"Recent thinking has it that coconut oil is one of the healthiest
>> >available.
>> >http://www.mercola.com/2003/se**p/13/coconut_oil.htm"
>> >
>> >Of course, since that site SELLS coconut oil, I'm not so sure that
>Ken
>> >didn't fall for marketing hype. I'm not going to load up on coconut
>> >oil, in any case.
>> >
>> >Bob
>>
>> Where's the B,B,B,B,Bob that you posted? That's what I was replying
>about.
>> Is it that you don't like the commas within the above paragraph? I'm
>not
>> trying to be a bitch here. I just don't understand what the problem
>is.
>>
>> Carol
>
>For someone who admittedly doesn't understand you were sure quick to
>take sides (is the sex good).

I honestly thought that you were saying that the problem was the B,B,B
thing that you added. I didn't take a side. I use many commas in my
writing, too. So I didn't even notice what you were reacting to.

>It's the commas within the body of his
>post (look right up there) that are superfluous, especially the one in
>the last sentence that I focused on... I added the "B,B,B,B,Boob"
>"stutter" as an extra added attraction... I don't know why that it's
>not obvious that I added that stutter part, couldn't be any more
>ob,b,b,bvious. I'm talking about the commas appearing within the body
>of his post that he typed, including the one in his attribution... all
>four are not only totally unnecessary, they muddle the meaning of what
>is said to the point that his post is unintelligible. Commas are the
>bane of Usenet. If you're in doubt leave em out.

I've actually been trying to do that. I'm pretty sure that most of my
commas are appropriate, but I'm trying to fit in better with the status
quo.

>So, Carol, what's this BITCHY business about your attributing me with
>"if that's their real name"? I do use my real name, always have. I
>don't remember if you were here yet when I used "penmart10"...
>penMARTIN. Martin is my REAL last name, and 'pen" because I collect
>pens. It got changed when AOL screwed up and so I had to choose a new
>handle and chose my present handle... penmart01. I've always signed my
>REAL first name, Sheldon. Sheldon Martin is my REAL name, always was.
>Unlike so many others I don't munge. In all the years I've posted to
>Newsgroups I've always used my REAL name, and at this point there is no
>one else posting to rfc longer than me... more than 90% I consider
>newbies, and that's because they are newbies.

Check out my other posts. That's the heading I use for all of my responses
to everyone. It's automatic. If you would like to suggest an alternative,
I'd be interested in considering it. I'm not attacking you at all. You've
been very likeable of late, and I have no intention of putting you down.

>Your Bob is a newbie, you're a newbie too.

He's not my Bob. He's just a poster who(m?) I respect.

I've actually thought of writing to you (we've had great conversations in
the past). I'm beginning to suspect that my e-mail would be unwelcome.

Carol
--
Coming at you live, from beautiful Lake Woebegon

BOB wrote:
> Mark Thorson wrote:
>
>>Emma Thackery wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I recently read that, depending on the recipe, coconut oil
>>>is a decent substitute for hydrogenated shortening (for baking)
>>>and allegedly a lot healthier.
>>
>>Saturated fats like those in coconut oil contribute to
>>cardiovascular disease. Few associations between
>>harmful behaviors and adverse health consequences
>>are as well-documented as this one.
>>
>>For more information, see:
>>
>
> http://zapatopi.net/afdb.html
>
> since you seem to be overly parinoid
>
>

I prefer this one (alas, the original web site is no more):
<http://web.archive.org/web/20021203031802/www.hatsofmeat.com/HatsofMeat/index.html>

Best regards,
Bob

I was overjoyed to read that "Sheldon" > posted:

>So, Carol, what's this BITCHY business about your attributing me with
>"if that's their real name"?

Is this better? My response line was never meant to hurt anyone's
feelings. Since it did, I've changed it.

Carol
--
Coming at you live, from beautiful Lake Woebegon

Damsel in dis Dress wrote on 06 Apr 2005 in rec.food.cooking

> Isn't coconut oil the standard oil used to make movie theater
> popcorn? Or have they been pressure to change to another oil?
>
> Carol

They changed over to Canola oil in either the late 80's or early 90's

--
No Bread Crumbs were hurt in the making of this Meal.
Type 2 Diabetic Since Aug 2004
1AC- 7.2, 7.3, 5.5, 5.6 mmol
Weight from 265 down to 219 lbs. and dropping.
Continuing to be Manitoban

"Bubbabob" > wrote in message
. 3.30...
> Mark Thorson > wrote:
>
> > Emma Thackery wrote:
> >
> >> I recently read that, depending on the recipe, coconut oil
> >> is a decent substitute for hydrogenated shortening (for baking)
> >> and allegedly a lot healthier.
> >
> > Saturated fats like those in coconut oil contribute to
> > cardiovascular disease. Few associations between
> > harmful behaviors and adverse health consequences
> > are as well-documented as this one.
> >
> > For more information, see:
> >
> > http://www.webdietitian.com/document...aturatedfattya
> > cids
> >
> > http://www.ianr.unl.edu/pubs/foods/nf61.htm
> > http://www.diet-and-health.net/Disea...ovascular.html
> >
> > Coconut oil is even worse than beef fat or lard.
> >
> How do you feel about palm oil (dende)? Equally saturated but
> unreplaceable in Brazilian and and almost all African cuisines. It
> doesn't seem to be killing THEM.

they don't live long enough to tell

In article >, Mark Thorson > wrote:
>Emma Thackery wrote:
>
>> I recently read that, depending on the recipe, coconut oil
>> is a decent substitute for hydrogenated shortening (for baking)
>> and allegedly a lot healthier.
>
>Saturated fats like those in coconut oil contribute to
>cardiovascular disease. Few associations between
>harmful behaviors and adverse health consequences
>are as well-documented as this one.
>
>For more information, see:
>
>http://www.webdietitian.com/document...atedfattyacids
>
>http://www.ianr.unl.edu/pubs/foods/nf61.htm
>http://www.diet-and-health.net/Disea...ovascular.html
>
>Coconut oil is even worse than beef fat or lard.

Well, beef fat and lard are now considered very friendly.
Vegetable oils CAUSE CANCER. Yipes! Help!
[Responding to USENET CAUSES CANCER TOO!
Bugger! So does NOT responding! We are doomed.]


Cheers, Phred.

--
LID

I was overjoyed to read that Monsur Fromage du Pollet
> posted:

>Damsel in dis Dress wrote on 06 Apr 2005 in rec.food.cooking
>
>> Isn't coconut oil the standard oil used to make movie theater
>> popcorn? Or have they been pressure to change to another oil?
>
>They changed over to Canola oil in either the late 80's or early 90's

It's a good thing I'm up on current events, huh?

>Weight from 265 down to 219 lbs. and dropping.

I just checked for the first time in a couple of weeks, and I'm down 5.5
pounds. Gives me incentive to keep going. <GRIN>

Carol, fellow diabetic who's starting to act like one again
--
Coming at you live, from beautiful Lake Woebegon

>Coconut oil is even worse than beef fat or lard.

Someone better tell that to all the people who use this type of fat
culturally to cook with. They must be dropping like flies. And tell
the author of this book:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...glance&s=books
"Low-carb diets like Atkins and South Beach are the hottest weight
loss programs on the market, but they could work faster and more
effectively with the addition of one ingredient: coconut oil. Not only
does it boost metabolism and speed weight loss, there is evidence that
suggests that adding a small amount of coconut oil into ones daily diet
can help lower cholesterol; improve conditions such as diabetes,
chronic fatigue syndrome, IBS, Crohns, and other digestive disorders;
enhance thyroid production; and increase overall energy" I did
purchase some coconut oil--which resembles crisco or petroleum jelly)
and tried it for sauteeing. It's a pretty tasteless, odorless fat. I
didn't try the diet. But I might. In the meantime, coconut oil
slathered on my feet makes them really soft. lol

In article >,
Mark Thorson > wrote:

> Emma Thackery wrote:
>
> > I recently read that, depending on the recipe, coconut oil
> > is a decent substitute for hydrogenated shortening (for baking)
> > and allegedly a lot healthier.
>
> Saturated fats like those in coconut oil contribute to
> cardiovascular disease. Few associations between
> harmful behaviors and adverse health consequences
> are as well-documented as this one...


Yes of course everyone knows that--- or should. It is better to avoid
saturated fats. But that is not the question I am asking. The
question is: Among saturated fats, which are the least offensive---
those with trans-fatty acids or those without? Crisco or lard? Crisco
or coconut oil? What are the options?

Food For Thought wrote:
>> Coconut oil is even worse than beef fat or lard.
>
> Someone better tell that to all the people who use this type of fat
> culturally to cook with. They must be dropping like flies. And tell
> the author of this book:
> http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-
> /0446577162/ref=pd_sxp_f/103-3772469-2167822?v=glance&s=books "Low-
> carb diets like Atkins and South Beach are the hottest weight loss
> programs on the market, but they could work faster and more
> effectively with the addition of one ingredient: coconut oil. Not
> only does it boost metabolism and speed weight loss, there is
> evidence that suggests that adding a small amount of coconut oil into
> ones daily diet can help lower cholesterol; improve conditions such
> as diabetes, chronic fatigue syndrome, IBS, Crohns, and other
> digestive disorders; enhance thyroid production; and increase overall
> energy" I did purchase some coconut oil--which resembles crisco or
> petroleum jelly) and tried it for sauteeing. It's a pretty
> tasteless, odorless fat. I didn't try the diet. But I might. In
> the meantime, coconut oil slathered on my feet makes them really
> soft. lol
Geez; don't let the voice of reason pollute this thread. I am thoroughly
enjoying it. As coconut oil is my favorite oil any (mis)information that
tends to put downward pressure on the price is a good thing.

Ken.

Sheldon wrote:
> Sheldon wrote:
>> Damsel in dis Dress wrote:
>>> "Sheldon" >, if that's their real name, wrote:
>>>
>>>> Bob wrote:

<snip a bunch of irrelevant punctuation rants>

>>>>> Sheldon wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Of course,(2) since that site SELLS coconut oil,(3) I'm not so
>>>>>>> sure
>>>> sure
>>>>>>> that Ken didn't fall for marketing hype. I'm not going to load
>>>>>>> up
>> up
>>>>>>> on coconut oil,(4) in any case.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> B,B,B,B,ob
> -------------
> Bob Apr 6, 3:26 am
> Newsgroups: rec.food.cooking
> From: "Bob" >
> Date: 6 Apr 2005 05:26:05 -0500
> Local: Wed, Apr 6 2005 3:26 am
> Subject: Coconut oil for baking?
>
> Nancree wrote:
>> Coconut oil is NOT one of the healthy oils.
>
> At the end of January, "Ken Davey" posted:
>
> "Recent thinking has it that coconut oil is one of the healthiest
> available.
> http://www.mercola.com/2003/se**p/13/coconut_oil.htm"
>
> Of course, since that site SELLS coconut oil, I'm not so sure that Ken
> didn't fall for marketing hype. I'm not going to load up on coconut
> oil, in any case.
>
> Bob
> ------------
>
>
> Sheldon
Well since my olde post has been dragged into this;
The site I originally pointed out was not alone in praising coconut oil. A
Google search returns some 1.2 million results.
Here is one that isn't selling anything.
http://www.thaifoodandtravel.com/features/cocgood.html
that says (in part)

"Why are we misinformed?
In one word: economics. Beginning with a flawed study four decades ago,
continuing through the 1950s, intensifying in the 1980s, and again in the
1990s, the misinformation about coconut oil has been promulgated by such
economically motivated organizations as the American Soybean Association
(ASA), the Corn Products Company (CPC International) and the Center for
Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). They are aided by the United States
Food and Drug Administration (FDA), many of whose key personnel are
recruited from and return to the vegetable oil industry. Previously, coconut
oil was widely used in baked goods and fried goods until their publicity
campaigns, based on erroneous information, totally discredited coconut oil
and caused its nearly complete elimination from the American diet."

Your serve Sheldon.



Ken.

--
http://www.rupert.net/~solar
Return address supplied by 'spammotel'
http://www.spammotel.com

Ken Davey wrote:
> "Why are we misinformed? [snip the rest]

Nowadays it's left to the individual to pick and choose and make
judgments about the information that pops up at the push of a Google
button. In the case of coconut oil, the sources that promote coconut
oil overwhelmingly come from people who are involved with selling it,
while the sources that caution against it come from the Food and Drug
Administration and other health science-related people. Laypeople like
me have to draw our own conclusions. I ain't gonna use it, either for
cooking or for any of the other claimed benefits from its purveyors.
-aem

zxcvbob wrote:
> BOB wrote:
>> Mark Thorson wrote:
>>
>>> Emma Thackery wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> I recently read that, depending on the recipe, coconut oil
>>>> is a decent substitute for hydrogenated shortening (for baking)
>>>> and allegedly a lot healthier.
>>>
>>> Saturated fats like those in coconut oil contribute to
>>> cardiovascular disease. Few associations between
>>> harmful behaviors and adverse health consequences
>>> are as well-documented as this one.
>>>
>>> For more information, see:
>>>
>>
>> http://zapatopi.net/afdb.html
>>
>> since you seem to be overly parinoid
>>
>>
>
> I prefer this one (alas, the original web site is no more):
> <http://web.archive.org/web/20021203031802/www.hatsofmeat.com/HatsofMeat/index.html>
>
> Best regards,
> Bob

Yes. That's a good one. I haven't seen it in a while, (yes, the
originsl website was priceless) but I think that some people need the
added protection that the foil provides. Maybe a lead-lined meat hat
for some overly suspicious persons?

BOB

>How do you feel about palm oil (dende)? Equally saturated but
>unreplaceable in Brazilian and and almost all African cuisines. It
>doesn't seem to be killing THEM.

Only 'cause a lot of other maladies get there first. The big deal in
Black Africa is still getting enough calories, not moderating fat
intake.