Talk:Monounsaturated fat

Since the article on monounsaturated fat is quite short and there was already a vote to merge (but on the talk page instead of the main article) I think that it should be merged with unsaturated fat. I will change my mind if this article is expanded. Freddie 04:36, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

i vote to merge them

The pages regarding

Fats that are saturated, mono-unsaturated, poly-unsaturated and unsaturated are relatively short and are not all structured the same way or contain similar information and references.

I vote to merge them if only to structure the presentation of the data more clearly as well as add missing data such as a list of sourced of polyunsaturated fat.

re: merge

I agree. Monounsaturated should be merged into unsaturated.

vote against merge

The properties of monosaturated fats are quite different from those of unsaturated fats and I think that the distinction should be maintained and explained. I agree that this article is short and needs to be expanded, which means that if I am against the merger that I should take responsibility for adding material. I will try to do this, but it may take me a week to find the time. This "debate" has been going on in slow motion for nearly two months, so perhaps I will have a week to do the elaboration. --Ben Best 23:58, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

I fail to see how a monounsaturated fat's properties are all that much different than a polyunsaturated fat. If there is such a difference, perhaps pointing it out in the article would be a good idea. In any case, I'm for the merger, and I'll do it in a couple days if no one else has major objections. Isopropyl 05:36, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

The differences should now be more clear. I have just done a substantial re-write of this page, which emphasizes the differences between monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fats. From a catagorical point of view, it would be a mistake to merge the monounsaturated fats into unsaturated fats without also merging polyunsaturated fats into unsaturated fats. The category unsaturated fats includes both monounsaturated fats and polyunsaturated fats. I will now do some revision of the pages for unsaturated fats and polyunsaturated (fats) --Ben Best 18:27, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

The revisions on the page for unsaturated fat most strongly emphasizes differences between monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fat. --Ben Best 10:11, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Sweet. Isopropyl 18:20, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Actually, the differences are confined to one or two finer points, which may as well go into a general discussion of unsaturated fats. It's probably easier to have these three separate short descriptions on one page. Thank you for expanding the differences beyond "one has one double bond, the other has lots". Isopropyl 18:22, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

I still contend that merging only unsaturated fats with monosaturated fats makes no sense. Your argument only makes sense if you are going to merge the three pages, polyunsaturated fat, monounsaturated fat and unsaturated fat. But this was not the proposed discussed merger. I won't complain if you merge the three, but I do complain if you only merge the two. Either merge the three or leave them independent. I realize that your statement implies you will merge the three, but this was not discussed previously. --Ben Best 20:06, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Oppose merger. --Arcadian 20:52, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

The issue has been resolved. Monounsaturated Fat now has sufficient information to be a page on its own. Freddie 01:18, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Monounsaturated fat and insulin resistance

This article claimed that monounsaturated fat promotes insulin resistance while polyunsaturated fat reduces it. A source was cited but it does not seem to be making this claim or documenting research that supports it.

monounsatuated fatty acids may promote insulin resistance, whereas polyunsaturated fatty acids are protective against insulin resistance.

I am not a medic or biologist so I am not an expert in the field but to me the source cited seems to be saying that insulin resistance is accompanied by an increase in monounsaturated fat and a decrease in polyunsaturated fat in the blood stream of rats. This is not evidence for monounsaturated fat causing insulin resistance but evidence that insulin resistance causes higher levels of monounsaturated fat.

If you look at the bottom of the first paragraph of the introduction to that paper you will see the phrase "However, with all of these taken together, it can be concluded that MUFA may promote, whereas PUFA may protect against, the progression of insulin resistance", which is intended to summarize the first paragraph of the introduction. So the paper DOES support the original contention. --Ben Best 23:12, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I have done a limited search of medical papers and found no papers supporting the claim that monounsaturated fat causes greater insulin resistance than other types of fat. I have found a study that shows evidence that when saturated fat is replaced with monounsaturated fat as part of a low fat diet insulin resistance is reduced. This seems to be evidence that monounsaturated fat is better than saturated fat as far as insulin resistance is concerned.

The fact that saturated fat does more to impare insulin sensitivity than monosaturated fat says more about the harmful effects of saturated fat that about the "beneficial" effects of monosaturated fat -- ie, not being as bad as saturated fat is not proof of benefit of monosaturated fat. --Ben Best 23:12, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I did found a second article which shows evidence to support the claim that polyunsaturated fat reduces insulin resistance in rats compared to saturated fat.

Yes, this is well-known and supported by many papers. PUFAs increase membrane fluidity and this increases insulin sensitivity.--Ben Best 23:12, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Since the claim in the original article was not supported by the study it cited I removed it. I have not replaced it with any further comments on the effects of monounsaturated fat on insulin resistance because I feel that I do not know enough about this area to confidently comment on it. If someone else with a medical background reads this perhaps they could add something to the article about insulin resistance.

Sipos0 17:09, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

I have made my comments above, but will not immediately restore the reference (it is an EXCELLENT reference which deserves to be read carefully by anyone interested in insulin sensitivity or the metabolic syndrome) so as to allow time for further discussion, if that seems to be required. --Ben Best 23:12, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

In the absence of further discussion I have restored the reference. --Ben Best 07:40, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Monounsaturated Fats Examples Suspect

According to the American Heart Association page http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=532 Oils such as Sesame are listed as Polyunsaturated fats. This article lists them as Monounsaturated. Is this in error, or should the text be revised to be more explicit?

Check out Essential_fatty_acid#Food_sources for places you can go online to get the fatty acid composition of whatever. Following the first link [1], page 734, shows that safflower oil comes in at least two types - 'high linoleic', which is high in PUFA, and 'high oleic' which is high in MUFA. In general, all vegetable fats and all animal fats have some saturated fat, some MUFA and some PUFA. It's just a question of the proportions.

But yes, I'd agree that both the AHA and this article could use some revision. Be bold. David.Throop 21:53, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

The article mention "Oleic and monounsaturated fatty acids [omega-9...] were positively associated with breast cancer risk. The SI [saturation index...] was inversely associated with breast cancer risk [declining with saturation increase]. [...] monounsaturated fats and SI in erythrocyte membranes are predictors of postmenopausal breast cancer. Both of these variables depend on the activity of the enzyme 9-d [delta 9 desaturase].[5]"

This paragraph is not clear to me whether Oleic and monounsaturated fatty acids is good or no good for breast cancer. There is probably too much medical jargons that is not clear to man on the streets.

Trans fat is also classified as unsaturated fats. Trans fat are bad. So does it means monounsaturated fats has the same "bad" qualities as trans fat if it is attributed from nature of "unsaturated fats" ?

== Health Benefits??==

Nowhere in this article are the potential health benefits, such as a reduction in risk of cardiovascular diseases discussed. This information should easy double this article's length.

Merging this with unsaturated fats is a poor idea, given the distinction in structure/ nutritional properties of mono vs. poly unsaturated fats. -- Tymothy

I agree there needs to be more coverage of the health effects of SatFat/MUFA/PUFA. But I suggest that it would be best to start the discussion out in a single article. The benefit of MUFA or PUFA is only well-defined in comparison to some other nutrient. I.e, if 100 kcal/d of oleic acid is added to your diet, without anything being taken away, you're likely to start gaining about a pound a month. Not so good. If you add that oleic acid and take away 100 kcal/d of PUFA, that probably won't be so good for you.

If you instead take away 100 kcal/d of corn syrup, probably pretty good. Etc. But is the effect really due to the oleic acid? or the decrease in fructose? Further, since virtually all sources of MUFA also have some satfat and PUFA, most studies have confounded changes in all three at once. For that reason, I'd prefer to see an article that reviews all the fats together. And the first source to use is

G Taubes (2001-03-30). "The soft science of dietary fat". Science. l 291: 2536–2545. PMID 11286266. Retrieved 2007-01-16. {{cite journal}}: Text "issue 5513" ignored (help) (subscriber link)

There was a popular version of the same article in [The New York Times]. – David.Throop 22:53, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

After looking around, I realized there already is such an article at Diet and heart disease. I places a See.. link at the head of the article. David.Throop 00:16, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Butter

I see references where butter is listed as having more MUFA than corn oil.

• http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/03/12/FD87529.DTL&hw=trans+fats&sn=002&sc=699

Butter is relatively high in MUFA, but we tend to overlook this because of the even higher saturate content, whereas corn oil is chock-a-block with PUFAs, which carries its own set of issues concerning omega-3 / omega-6 dietary balance. MaxEnt 00:58, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Insulin resistance

In this study, palmitoleic acid and oleic acid were used. In terms of cholestrol, palmitoleic acid acts like a saturated fat. This may be true for insulin resistance, Oleic acid and other monounsaturated fats may actually prevent insulin resistance. Whatever it is, palmitoleic acid behaves like a saturated fat not a monounsaturated fat. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Press olive, win oil (talk • contribs) 20:57, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

hi

hi —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.49.171.50 (talk) 09:25, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Are the molecular images correct?

It looks like the molecule on the left is a trans configuration and the right a cis configuration. The left one looks nothing like the diagram at the top of the Oleic acid page. 72.49.69.30 (talk) 19:47, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Monounsaturated fat. 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/20020112024201/http://link.springer-ny.com/link/service/journals/00125/bibs/1044003/10440312.htm to http://link.springer-ny.com/link/service/journals/00125/bibs/1044003/10440312.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.mercksource.com/pp/us/cns/cns_krames_template.jspzQzpgzEzzSzppdocszSzuszSzcnszSzcontentzSzkrameszSz1292_01zPzhtm

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 19:27, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Lede, + excessive Jargon & Lazy Links

The lede section is totally out of spec. Example: "In biochemistry and nutrition, monounsaturated fatty acids (abbreviated MUFAs, or more plainly monounsaturated fats) are..." but not one word about nutrition. That section should be a free-standing summery. Please see: MOS:LEDE.

Also see MOS:JARGON. ...in particular: "Minimize jargon, or at least explain it or tag it..." and: "Avoid excessive wikilinking (linking within Wikipedia) as a substitute for parenthetic explanations such as the one in this sentence. Do not introduce new and specialized words simply to teach them to the reader when more common alternatives will do. When the notions named by jargon are too complex to explain concisely in a few parenthetical words, write one level down." For example, what is insulin resistance? And the red link? The list is long. — I'm thinking, "write one level down" is a snotty way of saying it might take more than parenthesis. Clear writing takes more effort.
--2602:306:CFCE:1EE0:8828:13F6:D568:E707 (talk) 07:56, 23 May 2020 (UTC) Just Saying

Molecular diagrams are misleading?

The molecular diagrams show the saturated parts of the chains as "straight zigzags" which look like straight knobby rods in the spacefilling versions. So, for example, the oleic acid molecule looks like two straight sticks with a sharp bend at the double bond.
Are these pictures correct? It is my understanding that the two parts of the chain connected by a single bond are free to rotate, with very small barrier due to H-H repulsion; so that, at ambient temperatures, each single bond will be twisted by a largely random angle.
If that is the case, at least a few ball-and-stick and space-filling images shuld show the molecule in a random conformation, to give the reader a slightly more accurate idea of the molecule's real shape.
--Jorge Stolfi (talk) 01:06, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 10 August 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Consensus that "monounsaturated fat" is the WP:COMMONNAME, especially given that the article focuses on the topic from a nutritional perspective above a chemical one. However, some support did emerge for splitting monounsaturated fatty acid into a separate article. (closed by non-admin page mover) ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 13:56, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

---

Monounsaturated fat → Monounsaturated fatty acid – Consensus at Talk:Polyunsaturated_fat#What_is_going_on_here?_Fats_and_Fatty_acids_are_distinct_concepts. Crashed greek (talk) 06:02, 10 August 2023 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). Crashed greek (talk) 08:48, 10 August 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 18:34, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

There is no Polyunsaturated fat article, instead there is Monounsaturated fatty acid. So this move would bring uniformity. Crashed greek (talk) 08:50, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose Stating "there is no polyunsaturated fat article" is misleading at best, since it existed up until early this year when it was merged by the very nominator of this move discussion - perhaps they should mention that fact. Now in terms of the name itself, I would oppose both of the articles being located at "fatty acid" solely per WP:COMMONNAME. Wikipedia has seen countless attempts to move articles to their scientific name but we don't have aspirin at acetylsalicylic acid, just to give an example. It may also be possible that two separate articles are necessary to talk about each concept - I'm not a scientist so I wouldn't know the specifics, but overall simply "fat" seems to be what it is commonly referred to as in reliable sources, even other enyclopedias. If this is wrong or false in your opinion, Wikipedia is not the place to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. WP:NOTRIGHT also goes into this in more detail, but ultimately, Wikipedia can be wrong if other sources are wrong, because it goes by verifiability over "truth". ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:09, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

  Then Polyunsaturated fatty acid article can be moved to Polyunsaturated fat as per WP:COMMONNAME. Crashed greek (talk) 03:54, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Chemistry has been notified of this discussion. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 22:31, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

• Weak oppose. Given that the article is focused more on the topic from a nutritional/biochemical point of view rather than an organic chemistry point of view, the current title seems more appropriate, even though the molecules being discussed are in fact fatty acids rather than fats. There could be articles about both topics, but currently there is not enough content to justify separate articles. I agree, then, that polyunsaturated fatty acid should be moved back to polyunsaturated fat since the former was merged there, and per WP:TITLECON considerations. I am unclear from the history of that page why it exists at the fatty acid title. I would also be okay with a consensus that these should all be at the fatty acid versions, but that does not seem to be the current consensus, and would need to be established via RM. Mdewman6 (talk) 23:40, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose given the health and food sections. However I would support a split / fork off article on Monounsaturated fatty acid. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:55, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
• Support. I dont think that monounsaturated fat is a "thing". If it is a thing (i.e., there is significant secondary content on this specific topic), then Graeme Bartlett's idea is good one. What is a monounsaturated fat"? I guess 99.9% would be fats with one oleic acid substituent and two saturated substituents. That topic would be covered in unsaturated fat. --Smokefoot (talk) 02:49, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Definition of MUF

The existing definition of MUF is somewhat inaccurate and misleading. An improved text for the lead section might read:

On the basis of this definition, the opening sentence of the Molecular description section is incorrect, as is the caption of the molecular structure diagram. Certainly this shows a monounsaturated triglyceride, but it is not a MUF. It contains two saturated fatty acids and one MUFA. Thus it contributes two parts saturated fat and one part MUF.

Also, the statement "Almost invariably that fatty acid is oleic acid (18:1 n−9)" may apply in some cases, but is wide of the mark for many foods. For example, using data from the UK tables, 100g of raw herring contains 1.06g 16:1, 1.50g 18:1, 1.26g 20:1 and 2.01g 22:1. Further, highlighting the values for MUF in red and green (why the difference?) in the table risks carrying an implication that is not intended. Douglian30 (talk) 13:13, 14 October 2023 (UTC)