Tuesday, October 16, 2007

Margarine vs. Butter

The New York Times has an article in today’s on-line edition titled, “The Claim: Margarine Is Healthier Than Butter.” I am sure that it will generate no little discussion.

Cube of butter or oleo on open wrapper

Margarine proponents like to talk about its low cholesterol ratings and lack of saturated fats. Butter proponents like to talk about its lack of trans fats. I couldn't care less about those things. I use butter because it tastes better and it is natural. I figure, if God made it it cannot be all that bad. Margarine is made by chemists and mad scientists. That makes it suspect, in my book.

I am old enough to remember when margarine had no coloring and little flavor. It looked like grease and tasted like grease. Yuk! Little packages of food coloring were supplied because people did not like what they saw. Pennsylvania's pure food laws put a big crimp on margarine sales back in the forties and fifties, because long after other states allowed food coloring to be integrated into the margarine before sales, Pennsylvania did not.

Stuart Hill has an excellent blog entry on this very matter. I recommend your reading it. The gist of his article is that the food and drug industries are in cahoots to keep us dependent on them. There may be some merit to that. I believe the food and drug developers have bought out the Food and Drug Administration. Why else would the FDA allow rapeseed, a known carcinogen to be sold for human consumption in the form of Canola Oil? Why else would a known poison like Aspartame be allowed in products designed for human consumption?

If you eat a balanced diet, butter is not going to adversely affect your cholesterol levels. Eighty percent of the body's cholesterol is self-produced and does not come from ingested sources. I am going to die someday and cholesterol may be the cause, but at least I will die happy eating the things I like rather than some chemist's greasy paste.

No comments: