Mysterious explosion of a deadly plague may come down to a sugar in ice cream

What a great study! A reminder to seek out food as uncontaminated by industrial processing as possible.

And of course real icecream has no need for trehalose - it's just cream, egg yolk, sugar and fruit (or other flavouring).

Industrial processes substitute cheap ingredients which can't reproduce the texture and mouthfeel. Hence the need for additives.
 
Last edited:
I know, why not something unpopular that no one would miss
Yes! Grits!

And of course real icecream has no need for trehalose - it's just cream, egg yolk, sugar and fruit (or other flavouring).
I think it should be illegal to call anything without eggs 'ice cream'. And of course cream. Low fat ice cream should not even be a thing. :grumpy:
 
Does non low fat yogurt in fact contain significant amounts of fat? i.e. much above the 4% which is normally in the milk it's made from?

I have to wonder why they bothered, unless it's simply an excuse to get more refined sugars into our diets without many people noticing.

According to this link :

https://www.ocado.com/webshop/produ...gclsrc=aw.ds&dclid=CL7dhruy2tgCFUS0UQodzA8G2A

Yeo Valley Yoghurt (the full fat version) contains 4.5 grams of fat per 100g of product, which isn't a million miles from what you mentioned, Wonko.
 
Wonko said:
Does non low fat yogurt in fact contain significant amounts of fat?

I'm not convinced it makes much difference. Regular (organic) yoghurt has around 4.5% fat, low fat (organic) around 1.8%. One would have to eat a lot for that to matter.

Greek yogurt can be around 10% fat, but also has less sugar and more protein than non-Greek yoghurt.

I suspect 'low fat' is mostly about marketing, especially as the fat is often replaced with various forms of sugar, so it's not about the calories.
 
....and, doesn't "low" in this nutritional context typically mean, less than 5% ;)

(sorry, somewhat limited ATM and find the whole idea of them creating low fat yoghurt, by removing fat and adding shed loads of refined sugars, allegedly for health reasons, out of an already "low fat" product, bizarre, and highly amusing)
 
Actually it appears that 'low fat' does mean something, in Europe at least,
A claim that a food is low in fat, and any claim likely to have the same meaning for the consumer, may only be made where the product contains no more than 3 g of fat per 100 g for solids or 1,5 g of fat per 100 ml for liquids (1,8 g of fat per 100 ml for semi-skimmed milk).

https://ec.europa.eu/food/safety/labelling_nutrition/claims/nutrition_claims_en.

Personally I'm in favour of natural fats in meat and dairy (in moderation, evidently) - we evolved with them, and even developed new capacities to be able to digest raw milk, after all, so they can't be that bad for us,
During the most recent ice age, milk was essentially a toxin to adults because — unlike children — they could not produce the lactase enzyme required to break down lactose, the main sugar in milk. But as farming started to replace hunting and gathering in the Middle East around 11,000 years ago, cattle herders learned how to reduce lactose in dairy products to tolerable levels by fermenting milk to make cheese or yogurt. Several thousand years later, a genetic mutation spread through Europe that gave people the ability to produce lactase — and drink milk — throughout their lives. That adaptation opened up a rich new source of nutrition that could have sustained communities when harvests failed.
https://www.nature.com/news/archaeology-the-milk-revolution-1.13471

It's quite an interesting article, if anyone wants a diversion.
 
Personally I'm in favour of natural fats in meat and dairy (in moderation, evidently)

I'm pretty sure that farmers and breeders of farm animals have deliberately increased the leanness and reduced the fat of their animals to fit in with the "low-fat" dogma that has been spread over the last 50 years or so. Animals that humans ate as they were evolving were far fattier than modern animals.
 
Most "unfarmed" animal meat has a lower fat content than "farmed" meat - at least in the cases of ostrich, bison, erm...struggling to think of another animal here. It's apparently a thing for US farmers to deliberately "bulk" up their cattle for a few weeks before sale/slaughtering, rapid weight gain in the absence of exercise tends to go on as fat.

So I'm not convinced. ;)
 
Most "unfarmed" animal meat has a lower fat content than "farmed" meat - at least in the cases of ostrich, bison, erm...struggling to think of another animal here. It's apparently a thing for US farmers to deliberately "bulk" up their cattle for a few weeks before sale/slaughtering, rapid weight gain in the absence of exercise tends to go on as fat.

So I'm not convinced. ;)

I don't know anything about ostrich and bison. I was thinking of cows, sheep and pigs. But I'm happy to be corrected. :)
 
Animals that humans ate as they were evolving were far fattier than modern animals.
This confused me as to your posts intent, based on your reply, to my reply, it appears you were mainly talking about modern farmed animals, and not the animals we ate, a "while" ago.

:hug:
 
This confused me as to your posts intent, based on your reply, to my reply, it appears you were mainly talking about modern farmed animals, and not the animals we ate, a "while" ago.

:hug:

I've got confused and muddled now. Ignore my posts on the subject. ;)
 
I have to wonder why they bothered, unless it's simply an excuse to get more refined sugars into our diets without many people noticing.
They don't seem to require any excuse to add more refined sugar. I read that people who are trying to lose weight could use vanilla as a flavoring because it adds sweetness without calories. Yet vanilla yogurt has the same amount of sugar (too much) as lemon. :arghh:

Most "unfarmed" animal meat has a lower fat content than "farmed" meat
"Unfarmed" (and grass-fed) animals have mostly omega-3 fatty acids in their fat. Grain-fed animals have more onega-6 fatty acids from the grain.
 
Back
Top Bottom