On Oct 12, 5:20 am, Bobo Bonobo® <[email hidden]> wrote
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.food.cooking/msg/3acb9bdd50e7e149 :
Quoted message said:Unfortunately, hydrogenated oils have none of those five
characteristics. Otherwise, nearly everyone would avoid them. What
they DO do, is have a horrible effect on blood lipids, and lead to
heart disease and stroke. In fact, I bet that most of us--myself
included--would probably choose chicken fried in Crisco over chicken
fried in pure soybean oil in a blind test.
So hydrogenated oils are far worse for health than butter and they don't
taste as good as butter. So why not switch to butter?
Quoted message said:Sure non-dairy products
are aesthetically lacking (creamer, whipped topping, margarine), but
that's not because hydrogenated oils themselves have any kind of
repulsive taste.
So why not use real cream instead of the kakaa-stinky non-dairy whipped
topping?!
Whenever I am about to buy some dessert, I always check the ingredients.
If it has any non-dairy substitutes for butter/cream, then I just toss
it back to where I got it from. I am not spending $$$$$$$ on [censored] that
tastes bad and is bad for my coronaries. I am not giving those stinky
companies my money. F--k them.
If any dessert company wants my money, they'd better use real
butter/cream. They also better not use any non-dairy substitutes for
butter/cream. Desserts/sweet need real butter/cream. Desserts/sweets are
totally destroyed by non-dairy substitutes for butter/cream. Sugar and
non-dairy substitutes for butter/cream are simply not compatible with
each other.
Non-dairy fats are bad enough for non-sweet foods. For sweets, words
can't describe how much damage they cause.
Quoted message said:"Silent-but-deadly" to be sure, but the farts are probably coming from
whatever carby things you fried in the stuff.
Probably both. If butter were used instead, the results wouldn't be so
stinky and messy.