Substitution of the truth about the beneficial properties of fat - the food of the Slavs

2024 Author: Seth Attwood | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-16 15:55

For many decades we have been disoriented by the information about the foods we eat, pointing out which ones are healthy and which are not. For example, since the beginning of the twentieth century, we have been told that pork fat is an unhealthy substance that needs to be replaced with vegetable oils. Well, what really is?

Truth and lies are reversed

The truth is the opposite of what we were told. It is true that the consumption of lard should be limited, but frying foods with lard is a healthier approach than using most vegetable oils. This is evidenced by recent studies.

In fact, when heated to frying temperature, many vegetable oils release toxic substances that can cause a number of serious health problems, including cancer, dementia, and heart disease.

When frying, vegetable oils release poisons

Professor Martin Grothveld De Montfort of the University of Leicester, an expert in bioanalytical chemistry and chemical pathology, was recently asked to conduct a study to determine which cooking fats are healthy.

His findings challenged general wisdom regarding the use of saturated fat versus polyunsaturated fat. Although we have long been told that polyunsaturated fats, such as those found in sunflower oil, are healthier than saturated fats found in butter and lard.

From an article by De Montfort posted on the university website: “When fats and oils are heated, their molecular structure changes. As a result, chemicals called aldehydes are produced. They can cause heart disease and cancer."

Professor Grothveld found that sunflower and corn oil produce 20 times more dangerous aldehydes than the WHO recommends. Grottveld and his team found that foods cooked in rapeseed oil, butter, goose fat, or olive oil release significantly less toxic aldehydes than those found in sunflower oil, corn oil, and other commonly used vegetable oils.

But how did it happen that lard got a bad reputation?

Instructive story

Lard is just one of the products that we were asked to refuse. As with other supposedly "unhealthy" foods, the real reason is that someone wanted to cash in on a substitute.

In the case of lard, we were lied to by Procter & Gamble, which wanted to sell its new product, Crisco, invented in a laboratory back in 1907.

In 1906, Upton Sinclair's novel The Jungle was published. The book described the naturalistic details of the meat industry and the dark scenes at the Chicago slaughterhouses. It was fantastic, but the descriptions of workers falling into boiling vats of bacon were enough to make many people nauseous and resentful of the situation.

However, the public aversion to lard after reading the book may not have been enough to make a difference in the market until Procter & Gamble began selling a specialty margarine (tallow) made from vegetable oils.

The company was actively looking for ways to market cottonseed oil, of which it had a huge amount, as the market for candles shrank rapidly due to the invention of the electric lamp.

Who, how and why tarnished the reputation of lard

In 1907, the German chemist E. S. Kaiser showed his wonderful invention at the headquarters of Procter & Gamble in Cincinnati. It was a ball of fat. It looked like lard and was cooked like lard. But the pigs had nothing to do with it. The ball was hydrogenated cottonseed oil.

The company was able, through clever marketing, to convince the public, which was already "sick" by Sinclair's book, that a cleaner and healthier product was created in its laboratory.

Procter & Gamble launched an ad campaign that made people think there were horrible stories of counterfeit lard. Other promotional materials touted Crisco as clean and healthy food. The company wrapped the product in a white wrapper and launched the slogan “Stomach welcomes Crisco” to the masses.

The rest is history. In 1950, scientists once again tarnished the reputation of lard by claiming that saturated fat caused heart disease. By this time, the broad masses had already begun to avoid lard.

The moral of this whole story is as follows. Whenever you are told that laboratories have created a product of higher quality and more useful to you than a natural substance that your ancestors used for thousands of years, you can use healthy skepticism.

Think otherwise you will once again become a victim of deception. The fact that among these more than 90 percent of the world's population is not a reason for calm and not an excuse for gullibility.