Talk:Diacylglycerol oil

Moved from article space

This comment was moved from within the article...I am not the author.

where is the reference for this!!! looks like "enova" wrote this... because DAG, just like TAG, is broken into glycerol and fatty acids upon entering the brush border of the intestine.

JodyB _{Roll, Tide, Roll} 13:00, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

That angry anonymous comment placed within the article was definitely inappropriate, but the point it raised makes sense. The article does not make clear how diglycerides would have a different metabolism from triglycerides when ingested. They do have the same theoretical digestion products (albeit in different proportions), and it should also be noted that the human body can easily convert DAG into TAG and vice versa.

If Kao Corporation and ADM want to sell their product (which appears to be the purpose of this article - see below), they had better be more convincing by explaining this and other mysterious issues...

--UrsoBR (talk) 07:54, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . Maximum and carefull attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories , but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 18:03, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Neutrality and conflict of interest issues

When I found this article, its tone sounded strange to me - it talks as if DAG oil were the ultimate panacea for obesity and dyslipidemia, all good and no side effects or contraindications (in fact, a considerable portion of the article is dedicated solely to assert that DAG oil has been approved by American FDA and Japanese FOSHU, and that studies have confirmed that DAG oil is safe). This is, by itself, suspicious. And there were many other subtle signs in the article's wording and structure that, together, made some bells ring here. For example, the absence of more scientific information about the product's properties, the way DAG oil is mostly treated as if it were a commodity rather than a proprietary product (other than brief mentions en passant to the patented process and the Enova brand), and the strange inexistence of equivalent articles in other languages' Wikipedia - virtually all other cooking oils have theirs.

And I could name a few other such issues, but so far, so good: it could mean just that the article is bad and its subject is an exotic niche product. Unfortunately, it gets worse.

The article has references, but one of them is Health Canada's approval of DAG oil, and another one is an abstract of a definitely not neutral article written by authors affiliated to Japan's Kao Corporation (owner of the DAG oil patent and the Enova trademark) and its American partner, Archer Daniels Midland (I learned about both companies on that Health Canada page). All other references are to printed articles by Japanese authors - why all from the same country as Kao Corporation?

Then I decided to check the article's revision history. It was created on June 1, 2007 by a user called "Tizil." His or her contribution record is definitely suspicious: all of his or her recorded contributions to Wikipedia happened within an hour on that single day, and consisted of creating this article and two redirects to it, editing the cooking oil article adding a link to the DAG oil one (the strategy worked: this was how I found it), and editing the Kao Corporation article (sounds familiar?) to add the "External links" section (which currently lists their corporate Web sites in Japan and the U.S.).

Tizil's talk page contains further evidence of conflict of interest. It contains a notice issued on October 26, 2007 that the fair-use rationale of an image he or she uploaded (file name: "Enova oil bottle.jpg") had been contested and nominated for speedy deletion. A year later, on November 17, 2008, Tizil was notified that another article he or she had created did not meet Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and had been nominated for deletion (which is probably why it does not appear on Tizil's Contributions page). The article was about a certain "Chicago Creative Partnership." I Googled it and found CCP's Web site. It is a small advertising agency whose portfolio features a redesign job of the EnovaOil.com Web site. Do I need to say more?

So, I have labeled this article with the COI-check tag and am bringing the issue for discussion. My personal opinion is that since the product exists and people may look for information about it, it's OK for the article to be in Wikipedia, but with a more neutral perspective and some information of real scientific value, if it can be provided. What do you think? --UrsoBR (talk) 07:31, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

since the tag is more than 2 years old now, and this is still the last comment here, Im going to go ahead and take down the tag. I dont really care who tizil is, but if you have concerns about specific claims or references in the article, I suggest you do what Im going to do and edit them or add requests for clarification or sources. --— robbie ^{page talk} 20:54, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Diacylglycerol oil. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090924191643/http://online.wsj.com:80/article/BT-CO-20090916-701464.html to http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20090916-701464.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:08, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Diacylglycerol oil. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070914181254/http://ift.confex.com/ift/2004/techprogram/paper_21728.htm to http://ift.confex.com/ift/2004/techprogram/paper_21728.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110722094723/http://www.satonoyuki.co.jp/new/ekona/hanbaikyuusi.pdf to http://www.satonoyuki.co.jp/new/ekona/hanbaikyuusi.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:47, 10 September 2017 (UTC)