How can Butterfingers have 0g trans fat when the 4th ingredient is hydrogenated palm kernel oil?

[newParadigm]

Originally posted by: SagaLore
The difference is between "partially hydrogenated oil" and "hydrogenated oil". A full hydrogenation basically creates a saturated fat.

tone, meaning there would be no trans or as isomers (no folding)

 

[karlchad]

shens

 

[foghorn67]

It bypasses digestion and has a one way ticket to the escape chute.

 

[mb]

Originally posted by: Toastedlightly

Originally posted by: tk109
Dont kid yourselves. You're still going to be fat arse if you are eating butterfingers anyway. I hate these dumb trends. Now every product in the planet has to make sure it has no trans fat. Like I didn't hear enough about the lame "no carbs" trend. Drove me nuts. I just want my normal good tasting food I eat stop changing it on me!!

There are reasons trans fat is even worse. Best to avoid as much fat as possible (while still have the amount your body needs consumed).

Um, that wasn't his point. The lack of trans fat in a Butterfinger doesn't suddenly mean it's good for you. They're still high in fat (especially saturated), sugar, and calories.

 

[mercanucaribe]

Originally posted by: supafly

Originally posted by: Toastedlightly

Originally posted by: tk109
Dont kid yourselves. You're still going to be fat arse if you are eating butterfingers anyway. I hate these dumb trends. Now every product in the planet has to make sure it has no trans fat. Like I didn't hear enough about the lame "no carbs" trend. Drove me nuts. I just want my normal good tasting food I eat stop changing it on me!!

There are reasons trans fat is even worse. Best to avoid as much fat as possible (while still have the amount your body needs consumed).

Um, that wasn't his point. The lack of trans fat in a Butterfinger doesn't suddenly mean it's good for you. They're still high in fat (especially saturated), sugar, and calories.

Yeah... real logical. Because a food is unhealthy, it shouldn't be made any less healthy, or in the case of Butterfinger, we should add trans fat to make it even worse! Let's add nuclear waste while we're at it-- after all it's unhealthy anyway.

 

[mb]

Originally posted by: mercanucaribe

Originally posted by: supafly

Originally posted by: Toastedlightly

Originally posted by: tk109
Dont kid yourselves. You're still going to be fat arse if you are eating butterfingers anyway. I hate these dumb trends. Now every product in the planet has to make sure it has no trans fat. Like I didn't hear enough about the lame "no carbs" trend. Drove me nuts. I just want my normal good tasting food I eat stop changing it on me!!

There are reasons trans fat is even worse. Best to avoid as much fat as possible (while still have the amount your body needs consumed).

Um, that wasn't his point. The lack of trans fat in a Butterfinger doesn't suddenly mean it's good for you. They're still high in fat (especially saturated), sugar, and calories.

Yeah... real logical. Because a food is unhealthy, it shouldn't be made any less healthy, or in the case of Butterfinger, we should add trans fat to make it even worse! Let's add nuclear waste while we're at it-- after all it's unhealthy anyway.

:roll:

WTF? I can't tell if you're seriously trying to argue against me or not.. and if you are you're the one with the flawed logic.

Consumer before trans fat trend: Butterfingers are bad!
Consumer after trans fat trend: Butterfingers aren't too bad, they have no trans fat! Weee!

No where did I say anything about that they had to add it or make it more unhealthy I was just showing that Toastedlightly did not understand tk109's point.

And since the OP is probably thinking that I'm talking about him: no, this may not apply to you.

 

[eits]

Originally posted by: ballmode
payday and snickers > butterfinger

HAHAHAHAHA

wrong.

that's like saying m&m's are better than reese's pieces.

 

[eits]

Originally posted by: DarkKnight69

Originally posted by: rnp614

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
They actually use a product called

"I can't believe it's not hydrogenated palm kernal oil!"

hahaha I actually Lol'd at that.

Me too, for close to 2 minutes straight.

why? it wasn't really that funny.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: newParadigm

Originally posted by: Gibsons
They might have a way to remove the trans fat, leaving the cis fat.

Bingo. Thats absolutley correct.

Wrongo. That's absolutely incorrect.


The people who mentioned the bit about the < 0.5g = 0g Trans Fat are correct. Food manufacturers are allowed to round down to 0 in those cases (which is BULLSH*T).

 

[newParadigm]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: newParadigm

Originally posted by: Gibsons
They might have a way to remove the trans fat, leaving the cis fat.

Bingo. Thats absolutley correct.

Wrongo. That's absolutely incorrect.


The people who mentioned the bit about the < 0.5g = 0g Trans Fat are correct. Food manufacturers are allowed to round down to 0 in those cases (which is BULLSH*T).

Ok, they remove MOST of the Trans fat, leaving MOSTLY the Cis fat. I don't believe they just changed the label, and left the candy bar the same.