Quandary About Fats in the Diet

It's consideration if you are saying canola oil gets a bad rap. Not necessarily. Rapeseed has a toxic acid in it that is quite nasty. Canola oil is a Canadian cultivar that allegedly has a reduced level of the toxic acid. You are Canadian and it is a major Canadian crop. Just doing a full disclosure.

Almost all canola oil is GMO as well. Not an issue for me but it is for many these days. Especially the health food crowd. Let each decide.

 

So you're suggesting that maybe the scientist who wrote the piece is bought and paid for? I think you're trading up the wrong tree, froggie. Did you read the piece?

 

The scientist is at McGill right. I wonder if McGill gets any public funds related to Canadian agriculture or private funds from major American and Canadian agribusiness firms to promote or counter negative views of major Canadian crops.

Not saying he is or is not. That is why studies and commentary from alleged scientists require full disclosure or any affiliations. If I am a scientist for example, and allege that pacific salmon are safe and that their mercury and arsenic levels are safe, etc. Then fine. Might want to disclose though if the scientist is from the University of Alaska. though. That's all.

 

The article clearly discloses the author and his affiliation. In any event, consider the department that he heads and what it would do to its reputation if he could be bought. Is that how you would bet?

 

No. But as in any industry or field, professors and scientists who receive funding from various sources are always influenced to some degree by that. Nothing new under the sun there.

Just sayin, a Canadian "scientist" saying canola oil is groovy and having a Canadian such as yourself vouching for it is fine but not enough. There are biases there.

Freddy, you protesteth too much. Put your clutch in and idle a little.

 

The mandate of the department he heads at McGill is to separate the sense from the nonsense in science, since there is so much of the latter, especially online. That is the very basis for his funding. If he were caught fudging, it would not just be an embarrassment, it would be a career and department killer. So while I can imagine that he, like anyone else, could be wrong about something, I cannot imagine that it would be intentional. And since he knows more about this stuff than you or I, you know how I would bet about his being right or wrong.

So, yeah, I doth protest. But just enough.

 

Well then, given his background and purpose then most likely he supports people being more questioning of sources, which is all that I am doing. I have not reached any conclusions, only identifying biases that require more disclosure for me along the way. This is the basis of good science and research. Not as sure as you are that he would have issue with me.

Big hug in any case.

 

Point taken. It’s good to question the source and check for bias. I’m just informing you that he’s one of the good guys.

 

and the Ultraprocessed Palm Oil.