digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About

Trans fat adds more pounds than other fat

usatoday.com — Trans fat, which is used in many fried and processed foods, may contribute more to weight gain than other types of fat, suggests a new study presented here Saturday at the annual meeting of the Obesity Society, an organization of weight-loss professionals.

Who dugg this? Made popular Oct 24, 2006

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

55 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • cyn0sure, on 10/12/2007, -6/+24this is news?





    and in other news, soda will give you cavities!!!11||;
  • TheBarge, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16Running isn't going to clean that massively clogged artery in your heart caused by trans-fat. Sure, you'll be skinny, but getting way skinnier as they drop the casket into the ground.
  • TheBarge, on 10/12/2007, -3/+18The sun is hot.
  • MaddDog, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10David Letterman is skinny too. Didn't stop him from having heart disease and requiring triple bypass surgery.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11What are you even saying? Carbohydrates, amino acids, and fats are the caloric substances in our food. Carbohydrates, proteins, saturated fats, and cis-unsaturated fats are all naturally found in the diet. Trans fats are not generally found in nature.

    Without even having read the article, one possible reason for weight gain due to trans fats is the lack of trans-processing enzymes in the body. There is no mechanistic data yet, so this is nothing but a hypothesis. Nevertheless, the point is that trans-fats are unlike anything that your body expects to encounter.
  • TheBarge, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7@themarkshow

    Actually, it's mostly because it's really bad for your heart, not necessarily because it makes you fat.
  • therernospoons, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Aside from "no trans fat" labeling, it is important to note this little known fact that food manufacturers heavily exploit for marketing their products:

    If a serving contains less than 0.5 gram, the content, when declared, must be expressed as "0 g."

    http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/transgui.html
  • ReqX, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Except all that means is they lowered the trans-fat and serving size JUST ENOUGH to get it under 0.5 mg/serving. Check the ingredients: yup! That's partially-hydrogenated soybean oil you see there. Not trans-fat free. Just under lobbied-FDA levels.

    I read somewhere that you can't buy a single cracker at Wal-Mart that's 100% trans-fat free.
  • waynechng, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I love the "No Carbs" labelling on pork rinds ...
  • fronkman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@zizzybaloba:

    incorrect. the amount of energy in a "fat" in related to the length of the fatty acid chains making it up. by using the term "fat" most people mean triglycerides which is, in fact, three fatty acid chains bound together by a glycerol molecule.

    when you body "burns fat" it unhooks the fatty acids from the glycerol and starts breaking the bonds in the chain via beta-oxidation. energy is released from the act of the bond being broken. unfortunately for your argument, not all fatty acid chains are the same length. they can range anywhere from 6-24 carbons. obviously breaking 24 bonds would release more energy than one with 6 bonds. thus, not all fatty acids are the same.

    similarly, triglycerides do not all have the same fatty acids, in theory they can be any three fatty acids found in nature.

    the title of this post is unfortunate. like some posters have said, trans fat is terrible for you because your body lacks the enzymes to remove it from your body. therefore it sits in your bloodstream and significantly advances atherosclerosis and the host of associated health risks. it is a similar situation to fiber. the human body lacks an enzyme to degrade fiber, thus it pass through your GI tract unchanged. unfortunately, the circulatory system is a closed system and the trans fat can not escape. it is taken up by macrophages, which become foamy, adhere to the side of blood vessels, cause the release of numerous cytokines. this triggers an inflammatory response leading the degradation of the arterial intima and smooth muscle proliferation triggering thrombosis. ultimately it leads to massive infarction and death

    ahh...science.
  • nwnissen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Where I live (Denmark) we have laws that limit the amount trans fat allowed in foods (max 2%).
    Even McDonald's adheres to this, so a happy meal is healthier here than places where they have no regulation.

    Demand regulation where you live - the industry can make healthier food if forced by law.
  • themarkshow, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7No ***** sherlock. Why do you think everything is labelled "no trans fats" now.
  • dodoporridge, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4It seems to me that the point of this story is that trans fats may cause more weight gain than regular fats, IN ADDITION to adversely affecting cholesterol. That is, we knew they affected cholesterol and were bad for your heard, but now we think that they may increase weight gain more than regular fats. Trans fats aren't being removed from foods because they cause weight gain; they're being removed because of adverse cardiovascular effects. It's not a diet fad.
  • jon3k, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@volcomjerk - You're an idiot. You have no idea what you're talking about.

    You'll just blindly throw away countless of peer reviewed medical tests that prove trans fats are ***** TERRIBLE for you? Maybe this whole cancer thing is just voodoo witch doctor ***** too, huh?

    Let me guess, you're somewhere between 18-26, right? Enjoy it now, because by the time you're 30, it'll catch up to you. You'll have a disdended stomach from all the trans fats, which like to settle around your abdomen. You'll have an absurd cholestoral level and be at a huge risk for heart disease (the number one killer in the good 'ol USA).
  • MaddDog, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I think the issue of trans fat is important enough that it deserves repeating as often as possible. Companies who still produce this killer should be made public and pressure placed on them until they remove them from their foods. The United States has to be one of the worst offenders. Denmark is by far the best - they banned trans fats in all of their foods years ago. Even McDonalds in Denmark are trans fat free. (the only country in the world where that is the case)
  • jon3k, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4It's kinda sad, you're really just clueless, so let me explain it very simply.

    Calories come from "macro-nutrients". That's fat, carbs and protein. Those are the only places you get calories from, period. Not sodium, not Vitamin C - fat/carbs/protein - the big 3.

    Now, calories are what cause you to gain weight. You see, your body has what's called a BMR, or a "Basal Metabolic Rate" (we discoverd this amazing piece of science like 40 years ago by the way). Simply put, that is, the amount of calories your body will burn a day.

    If you eat more than that you gain weight, if you eat less, you lose weight (we'll disregard exercise just for the sake of discussion).

    Carbs don't make you fat, FAT doesn't even make you fat - CALORIES MAKE YOU FAT, irregardless of the source.

    Did you miss health class in middle school or something?
  • GurnBlanston, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3You know I have put on 60 pounds since I got married. I am sure I can find a scientist who will state that Marriage causes obesity.

    I know what causes obesity. Its called eating too much. The problem is we live in a "it's not your fault" society so we blame Trans-Fat or sue McDonalds.

    I know why I weigh too much - and its my fault.
  • jon3k, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Exactly. Weight is dictated by total caloric intake versus the amount of calories your body burns, be it sedentary or actively. Just breathing you burn calories. Every person has a basal metabolic rate, that is the amount of calories they burn in a day while entirely sedentary. As long as you take in less calories than you burn, you lose weight. Take in more than you burn, you gain weight. It's pretty simple. And the fundamental lack of understanding of even the most basic principles of diet in this country explains it's obesiety problem.
  • tont0r, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6I also heard a crazy rumor that cigarettes may cause cancer.
  • MaddDog, on 10/12/2007, -0/+22% is a common measure for banning transfats - but its not 2% of volume, its 2% of specifically the fat volume, which is dramatically less in almost all cases.
  • EricAnderton, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Digg because it needs to be said: old news or not. We've also been lacking in the "scientific rigor and research dept." on this one, so it's nice to see some evidence for all this.

    When I first learned about this, I was stunned by the amazing dietary left-hand-turn us Americans made, when we took up the crusade to use margarine and eliminate our use of butter and lard. Oops. The other thing was how it crept into our diet of manufactured food: it's cheap and easy to make and it keeps forever - it's almost not even food.

    On a personal note, I happen to dislike the taste of trans-fat laden products, and I certainly don't feel well after eating them. Compare a simple milk chocolate to it's cheaper counterpart, and you'll see what I mean. IMO, the less of this stuff there is out there, the better.
  • cyn0sure, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Yup. I lost 30lbs sitting on my ass at a computer all day just by cutting my caloric intake.
  • davymac, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4This should have a "NO ***** DUH!" on the title... anybody could have told you that... digg anyway for those who didnt know
  • bowels, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Thank you! It is very refreshing to hear a porker take full responsibility for their mammoth girth. However, I can't imagine lugging around 60lbs of blubber everywhere I went. I once was 11 lbs overweight and it was so uncomfortable. I'm currently about 6 lbs overweight (191, should be about 185) and even that is uncomfortable.
  • jon3k, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@waynechng

    Um, do you know how pork rinds are made? They don't contain any carbs, just tons of fat. It's just deep fried pig skin.
  • zizzybaloobah, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I don't doubt that at all, but in numerous classes I've attended, nutrition labels, the FDA, the Mayo clinic, etc. etc. all stated that fat, any fat, is 9 cal/gm (just google 'fat calories gram'). God knows the government and our educational institutions are never wrong! ;-)

    Probably the same argument could be made for complex vs simple carbs (widely reported as 4 cal/gm). If there's that much of a difference, than can any measurement of the nutritional value of the food we eat be reliable?
  • zizzybaloobah, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Fat has 9 calories per gram, regardless of whether it's olive oil, butter, lard, or partially-hydrogenated vegetable oil (aka transfat). The headline is misleading as it seems to imply that transfats are even more calorie-dense than than their saturated and unsaturated counterparts.

    The article notes an increased weight gain corresponding with a percentage increase in trans-fat consumption. What is the weight gain when other types of fat consumption increase? Would be nice to see those numbers for comparison. It also compares weight gained consuming trans-fat vs not consuming trans-fat. Does 'not consuming' mean fat-free or substituting other types of fats? There is no nutritional need or benefit derived from trans-fats, and obviously there are health risks associated with it -- just would have been nice to see a little more detail in the article, but this is USA Today, not JAMA, so the lack of detail and catchy headline is expected.

    Too bad that many readers will go away thinking that if they don't consume trans-fats, they won't gain weight. Probably the same people who buy the pork rinds because they're carb-free or eat gigantic carbo-loaded bagels because they're fat-free (or like my mom who fries my dad's Egg Beaters in a skillet full of bacon grease)


  • BlackCow, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Or you could just not eat at McDonalds.
  • bowels, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Sorry.. what label did I use improperly? Whatever it was, I didn't intend any offense. I'm a solid five pounds overweight myself. So, if I kid around with other chubbos, it seems more acceptable since I am one myself.
  • bowels, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Dammit, trans fat is my favorite kind of fat. I suppose I can go back to all saturated fat. Lard is pretty tasty.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Oink! I am a former porker who took juice and ephedrine to get in good shape. Next up, washboard abs.

    I will always be a porker on the inside though.
  • tastypastry, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Holy *****!
    *shakes head in disbelief*
  • soseasy, on 03/13/2008, -0/+1It seems to me that the point of this story is that trans fats may cause more weight gain than regular fats, IN ADDITION to adversely affecting cholesterol. That is, we knew they affected [url=http://www.mustweightloss.com/search/cholesterol]c ... [/url]and were bad for your heard, but now we think that they may increase weight gain more than regular[url=http://www.mustweightloss.com/tag/fat-loss]fat loss[/url] tips"". Trans fats aren't being removed from [url=http://www.mustweightloss.com/search/foods]foods[/ ... because they cause "many [url=http://www.mustweightloss.com]weight loss[/url] tips"; they're being removed because of adverse cardiovascular effects. It's not a diet fad.
  • zephc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1a little info on how trans-fats are made:
    "Trans fats are soft fats that are made solid by a process called partial hydrogenization. The manufacturers take pure, fresh vegetable oils and refine them with chemical solvents to get them ready for hydrogenation. They use deodorizing agents and bleaches, beginning the destruction of any healthful properties in the original oil (in canola oil, the deodorizing process itself creates trans-fats). A metal catalyst like nickel is then added to the oil, followed by hydrogen gas under high pressure and heat. This changes the molecular configuration of the once healthy vegetable oil, creating a substance that is plastic and thick and can hold a shape."*

    Crisco is a good example

    *from http://www.atkins.com/research-library/nutrition-articles/trans-fats-the-truth-in-labeling
  • BigBoogie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Trans fat adds more pounds than other fat"
    That's a rather broad statement. what "other" fat are we talking about here. It has long been know that saturated fats add more pounds than say monounsaturated fats. Trans fats are no different. This is not news.
  • pevail, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I think that the headline is slightly misleading,but......trans fats are deadly and should be avoided like the plague.
    Your health is at risk if you consume any sizeable amount of it.
    Canadians are lucky because pretty well all our food is labelled and the labels indicate
    nutrition facts.The amount of trans fats is indicated and,unlike some Diggers who have a death wish,a smart person can easily avoid it.
  • fronkman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@ zizzy:

    you are right, the nutrition labels are often wildly wrong on products. for example, the college i graduated from (which will remain un-named) used to post the nutrition facts for the food in the dining halls. quickly looking at them though, the kcal count of all of the food seemed extremely high.

    after calling them up, i found out that they did all of the research themselves. their approach was to burn food and measure the amount of heat produced. while this may sound about right it depends on #1: complete and total combustion of the food item (and no loss of heat before it is measured) and #2 that humans get energy from food by literally burning them inside our bodies. obviously we are not coal furnaces, and our body metabolizes food in a very different way and not nearly as completely as combustion. thus to a human the actual calorie content was far lower.

    we are reminded everyday that a certain portion of the food we ingest is not metabolized. it is commonly referred to as poop.
  • burnnbuild, on 11/24/2008, -0/+1You can also visit http://burnfatnbuildmuscle.blogspot.com for excellent advice
  • MrTea, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1BURRY IT WITH FIRE!
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Why is it that when some health article is published and they mention some dip ***** at Harvard has put together this new test it seems to be breaking news? Someone really turned the light bulb on with this one.
  • cyn0sure, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1@nwnissen

    No thanks, I don't need a nanny government telling me what I can or cannot put into my body.
  • Bossakungen, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Not really news if you ask me.. But still an interesting read. Thanks for sharing!
    http://www.webwarehouse.info/burn_fat.html
    http://www.webwarehouse.info/fat_loss.html
  • justjayce, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Bowels,

    For someone who has a nickname that sounds like a piece of S#$% moves through it you should perhaps use a bit of tact on how you label people.

    I'm fat - and it seems like your ugly on the inside - at least I can lose the weight.
  • GotGold, on 05/21/2008, -0/+0Good to refresh on some worthy news, Super Sized any one? more weight loss tips at http://weightlosssuccessblog.com
  • EmmaGiraldi, on 08/19/2008, -0/+0Duh thanks for letting everyone know

    There are many ways to lose belly fat http://www.2losebellyfat.com/
  • jlwhelchel, on 01/22/2009, -0/+0Yes trans fats may cause more weight gain than "other" fats, but the truth of the matter is that they are all still fats and will all still cause you to gain weight if you don't burn them. If you are struggling with weight loss then you should try the CombatTheFat system. At first I was pretty skeptical about this system but I tried it and got outstanding results. You can read about my results and why I liked this system at:

    www.combatingfat.blogspot.com

    or

    www.combatingfat.com
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 60 of 60 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.