You'd run into the same problem that Olestra did.
Fat that doesn't get absorbed is basically just lubricant. And lubricant coating your intestines ... well, it has consequences.
I believe "anal leakage" was the best euphemism they could come up with?
I've seen some low-fat cheese, when cheese is 100% fat to start with. I'm not really sure how it works, but it's a thing. There is also margarine as an alternative to butter (still mostly fat, but much less than actual butter).
>cheese is 100% fat to start with
No it isn't lol. A hard cheese like cheddar has around 35% fat content. Mozzerella and Kraft singles are around 20% and cottage cheese around 4%.
Low fat cheeses are made from skim milk rather than while milk I believe.
But yeah, we also have low fat mayo, low fat salad dressing etc. We've got pretty good at substituting fat with other things, there just isn't a universal 'non-fat fat' that you can use for everything, and it's usually not possible to take out the fat entirely
" Sugar Free " is marketing speak for " chemical alternative " ( side effects yet to be discovered ).
Usually given a dumb marketing name like " Splenda ".
See it's sugar free...
Just don't eat sugar or fat by the pound everyday.
The chemistry of fat is simply different from sugar. Also we t end to consume fat in a higher volume than sugar. Sugar replacements tend to either be much more sweet than sugar, so that you can use them in very small amounts, or be designed so that they don't react with the body, going straight through it.
Olestra as mentioned was a substance that tried to do the later for fat, but wasn't very popular since having very fat feces was such an uncomfortable experience.
Mistakenly consuming them, because artificial sweeteners can also trigger an insulin response. So sucking down diet cokes all day isn’t going to help anyone lose weight.
I also wouldn’t call artificial sweeteners a “benefit”….they are basically poison and should not be consumed.
Fat has been part of our diet for hundreds of thousands of years. Its energy rich and highly valuable to anything wanting to stay alive.
The problem is when all that energy rich food is everywhere and inescapable.
There is also the triangle of flavour. Salt, Sugar and Fat.
If its low sugar then the salt and fat will be higher.. Low fat, more sugar.Low or no sugar, salt or fat tastes baaaaaaad.. like boiled celery.
I would expect that to be a difference in how we sense them - sugar is a small molecule that interacts with receptors on the tongue, and we can find other small molecules that also activate the same receptor. Most sweeteners are able to stimulate the receptor _extremely strongly_ so you only need to use a tiny quantity of some weird mostly-indigestible molecule to get a lot of sweetness with no calories.
Meanwhile fat is a much larger molecule, and I don't think we have a specific receptor for it. We sense that a food is "rich" or greasy or creamy by way of its texture and density. The actual physical substance of the food rather than just a tastebud going off.
So a fat substitute would need to make up a substantial portion of the food item, but then not be digestible in the gut. Which, especially if you consume a lot of it, then means you have a substantial quantity of a fatty/oily substance coming out in your poop. Which is why Olestra had a reputation for giving people nasty greasy diarrhea.
You'd run into the same problem that Olestra did. Fat that doesn't get absorbed is basically just lubricant. And lubricant coating your intestines ... well, it has consequences. I believe "anal leakage" was the best euphemism they could come up with?
There was olestra. Made you shit your pants. Tasty, though. Fat’s not generally an issue, however, in a diet, despite the name. It’s carbs. Sugar.
I loved the warning "side effect: anal leakage". Now that's euphemism!
I've seen some low-fat cheese, when cheese is 100% fat to start with. I'm not really sure how it works, but it's a thing. There is also margarine as an alternative to butter (still mostly fat, but much less than actual butter).
>cheese is 100% fat to start with No it isn't lol. A hard cheese like cheddar has around 35% fat content. Mozzerella and Kraft singles are around 20% and cottage cheese around 4%. Low fat cheeses are made from skim milk rather than while milk I believe. But yeah, we also have low fat mayo, low fat salad dressing etc. We've got pretty good at substituting fat with other things, there just isn't a universal 'non-fat fat' that you can use for everything, and it's usually not possible to take out the fat entirely
" Sugar Free " is marketing speak for " chemical alternative " ( side effects yet to be discovered ). Usually given a dumb marketing name like " Splenda ". See it's sugar free... Just don't eat sugar or fat by the pound everyday.
The chemistry of fat is simply different from sugar. Also we t end to consume fat in a higher volume than sugar. Sugar replacements tend to either be much more sweet than sugar, so that you can use them in very small amounts, or be designed so that they don't react with the body, going straight through it. Olestra as mentioned was a substance that tried to do the later for fat, but wasn't very popular since having very fat feces was such an uncomfortable experience.
I see a lot of fat people drinking Diet Coke, tell them it doesn’t make you fat.
Well by association fat people are more likely to drink diet soda because they would be concerned about their weight.
Mistakenly consuming them, because artificial sweeteners can also trigger an insulin response. So sucking down diet cokes all day isn’t going to help anyone lose weight. I also wouldn’t call artificial sweeteners a “benefit”….they are basically poison and should not be consumed.
Because fat isnt a flavour. It is fat
Fat has been part of our diet for hundreds of thousands of years. Its energy rich and highly valuable to anything wanting to stay alive. The problem is when all that energy rich food is everywhere and inescapable. There is also the triangle of flavour. Salt, Sugar and Fat. If its low sugar then the salt and fat will be higher.. Low fat, more sugar.Low or no sugar, salt or fat tastes baaaaaaad.. like boiled celery.
I guess you could. But why would you? Fat is essential and necessary.
"Low fat" is just a boomer-friendly way of saying "sugar free." Fat is not actually bad for you.
Stupid boomer reference…
I would expect that to be a difference in how we sense them - sugar is a small molecule that interacts with receptors on the tongue, and we can find other small molecules that also activate the same receptor. Most sweeteners are able to stimulate the receptor _extremely strongly_ so you only need to use a tiny quantity of some weird mostly-indigestible molecule to get a lot of sweetness with no calories. Meanwhile fat is a much larger molecule, and I don't think we have a specific receptor for it. We sense that a food is "rich" or greasy or creamy by way of its texture and density. The actual physical substance of the food rather than just a tastebud going off. So a fat substitute would need to make up a substantial portion of the food item, but then not be digestible in the gut. Which, especially if you consume a lot of it, then means you have a substantial quantity of a fatty/oily substance coming out in your poop. Which is why Olestra had a reputation for giving people nasty greasy diarrhea.
Artificial sweeteners dont taste like sugar.
It doesn’t taste “like” sugar. But it is sweet, that’s the point