LONGECITY

I know most will probably say just to avoid deep frying... but, sometimes it's just irresistable. After searching around, the research and information about the healthiest oils to use is very conflicting at times. Rice Bran Oil? Virgin Coconut Oil? Can anyone give any recommendations on what oil(s) would be healthiest to use for deep frying and stir frying? Thanks.

Josh

I use always extra virgin olive oil . It is the oil that better resists the high temperatures without being degraded. Never use polyunsaturated oils (seeds mainly) because they become "trans" fats when you fry them.

See this link: http://www.bantransf...fatsinoils.html

In the table you can see the percent of polyunsaturated oil of different sources of fat. If polyunsaturated oils don´t resist high temperatures...olive oil and coconut oil will be the best option, because they have the smaller rate ( 8 olive oil and 2 coconut oil)

But Coconut oil is rich in saturated fats and can enlarge the levels of cholesterol, so my recommendation is without doubt the olive oil.
Edited by glexia, 18 June 2006 - 10:01 PM.

Edit: add oil and fat table.

Actually, olive oil isn't that great for cooking.

If you use olive oil, it would be best to avoid extra virgin for fying. Get a mixed oil, or use a second press oil. Extra virgin olive oil has a low smoke point, and it would suck if you set the whole thing on fire. JMHO.

When price comes into play, peanut and canola are great. Peanut oil has a great flavor for deep frying as well. Many restaurants use canola or peanut, the high end restaurants using the latter.

Edit: Clarified info on Virgin and non-virgin oil
Edited by cnorwood19, 19 June 2006 - 04:12 PM.

Actually, olive oil isn't that great for cooking.

Shepard, you should try cooking tomato or garlic confit with olive oil n herbs....YUM!

I use always extra virgin olive oil . It is the oil that better resists the high temperatures without being degraded.  Never use  polyunsaturated oils (seeds mainly) because they become  "trans" fats when you fry them. 

See this link: http://www.bantransf...fatsinoils.html

In the table you can see the percent of polyunsaturated oil of different sources of fat. If polyunsaturated oils don´t resist high temperatures...olive oil and coconut oil will be the best option, because they have the smaller rate ( 8 olive oil and 2 coconut oil)

But Coconut oil is rich in saturated fats and can enlarge the levels of  cholesterol, so my recommendation is without doubt the olive oil. 

Your last statement is highly arguable. I agree with Sheppard that olive oil isn't that great considering that it's not very stable with high heat. It's probably next best to coconut oil.

Coconut oil, without a doubt is the most saturated (92%) and stable of all and thus this is the only oil that can withstand high temp's.

Your last statement is highly arguable.

But Coconut oil is rich in saturated fats and can enlarge the levels of  cholesterol

How is that arguable? According to the Hegsted equation, it'll raise your cholesterol more than just about any other natural oil available, save perhaps butter:
http://www.scientifi...2.html#cholest1

Unless you're arguing with whether the degree to which coconut oil can raise cholesterol is not sufficient reason not to use it (i.e., weighed against the lower heat tolerance of olive oil).

At any rate, I've personally cut coconut oil some slack, assuming it's used in small doses, since its very high lauric acid content partially offsets its cholesterol issues. I'm not sure where the diminishing returns makes it a "bad" oil. A teaspoon a day seems safe enough; two tablespoons a day seems excessive (unless you're fighting an illness or infection and need the extra lauric acid). But there's a big grey area in between.

Let's not forget:

Coconut oil makes you burn fat like mad, yo. I mean, we all know Trudeau had to change his pant size within three days of taking 2 Tbs/day. Better than DNP.


Please don't take the above seriously.

Not sure about deep frying, but Macadamia nut oilis very high in monounsaturated fat(higher than extra virgin olive oil) It also has a significantly higher smoking point. I use it daily and really like the taste of it! Ben

I always use crude oil. Now that it is above $70 a barrel, though, it is really hitting my pocket book.

I always use crude oil. Now that it is above $70 a barrel, though, it is really hitting my pocket book.

[lol]

How is that arguable? According to the Hegsted equation, it'll raise your cholesterol more than just about any other natural oil available, save perhaps butter:
http://www.scientifi...2.html#cholest1

Unless you're arguing with whether the degree to which coconut oil can raise cholesterol is not sufficient reason not to use it (i.e., weighed against the lower heat tolerance of olive oil).

At any rate, I've personally cut coconut oil some slack, assuming it's used in small doses, since its very high lauric acid content partially offsets its cholesterol issues. I'm not sure where the diminishing returns makes it a "bad" oil. A teaspoon a day seems safe enough; two tablespoons a day seems excessive (unless you're fighting an illness or infection and need the extra lauric acid). But there's a big grey area in between.

Oh brother, I read the first 2 sentences and nearly had a heart attack (must be from my high saturated fat intake including much more than 2 tablespoons of coconut fat/day). Since I refuse to read the rest of it (since this is based on data that is out of date in my opinion and based on the fear mongering that saturated fat is poison) I will note that the first sentence is irrelevant and the 2nd is absurd -- polyunsaturated fats are highly unstable and extremely pro-oxidative.

I just don't buy into all the cholesterol hype. Check out www.theomnivore.com for facts with science backing up all his statements. Furthermore read Eat Fat Lose Fat by Dr. Enig to dispell myths surrounding coconut and saturated fats.

Let's not forget:

Coconut oil makes you burn fat like mad, yo. I mean, we all know Trudeau had to change his pant size within three days of taking 2 Tbs/day. Better than DNP.


Please don't take the above seriously.

Actually, in my personal experience it is helping me with body composition. 4 weeks ago my waist was a 34" and now it's 32 3/4".....and this is on a high fat diet. I still eat carbs (but only from fruits/veggies) but not more than 80-100grams/day. I use tonnes of coconut fat....every morning in my shake I add 1 tblspn good quality coconut oil, 1/4 coconut milk, and 1 small cube of creamed coconut. I will also cook with the coconut milk during the day and probably eat some more creamed coconut and maybe another spoon of the oil (eat it or cook on it).

Interesting how some of these cultures that base their diets around coconut and fat have ZERO health problems.

I always use crude oil. Now that it is above $70 a barrel, though, it is really hitting my pocket book.

Are you kidding, macadamia nut oil is priced higher than gold!

(i'm just guessing as i've never seen it but based on the price of the nuts, it's gotta be!)

Macadamia nut oil is more expensive, but not that much more than high quality extra virgin olive oil - (meaning italian imported brands.) I live in Australia and a lot of Macadamia nut is grown here, would keep the cost down compared to the US or Europe?
Try cooking a few omega 3 eggs sunny side up with macadamia nut oil! Taste's a lot better than olive oil!

I agree that peanut oil is the best tasting oil for cooking. Deep fried foods that are done in peanut oil seem to have a very light flavor (I have tasted it at friend's houses and at restaurants). They do not seem so heavy and oily. That being I said, I use olive oil almost exclusively, but I have never deep fried anything with it. If I pan fry food, I do it at a low heat.

Let's not forget:

Coconut oil makes you burn fat like mad, yo. I mean, we all know Trudeau had to change his pant size within three days of taking 2 Tbs/day. Better than DNP.


Please don't take the above seriously.

Actually, in my personal experience it is helping me with body composition. 4 weeks ago my waist was a 34" and now it's 32 3/4".....and this is on a high fat diet. I still eat carbs (but only from fruits/veggies) but not more than 80-100grams/day. I use tonnes of coconut fat....every morning in my shake I add 1 tblspn good quality coconut oil, 1/4 coconut milk, and 1 small cube of creamed coconut. I will also cook with the coconut milk during the day and probably eat some more creamed coconut and maybe another spoon of the oil (eat it or cook on it).

Interesting how some of these cultures that base their diets around coconut and fat have ZERO health problems.

If you could keep your caloric value at maintenance, and replace a lot of your fats with MCTs, you could possibly notice a nice change over time. But, certainly not to the extent some of these people try to push on you.

Macadamia nut oil is more expensive, but not that much more than high quality extra virgin olive oil - (meaning italian imported brands.) I live in Australia and a lot of Macadamia nut is grown here, would keep the cost down compared to the US or Europe?
Try cooking a few omega 3 eggs sunny side up with macadamia nut oil!  Taste's a lot better than olive oil!

You're lucky that macadamias grow down under and aren't terribly expensive. I live in Canada and can't even find unsalted sources of these nuts. I've never even seen the oil (although there is quite a bit in my nut butter).

I never cook my eggs with olive oil...always coconut oil or butter...both are delicious.

Interesting how some of these cultures that base their diets around coconut and fat have ZERO health problems.

Back that statement up or retract it.

Interesting how some of these cultures that base their diets around coconut and fat have ZERO health problems.

Back that statement up or retract it.

By the way, as a matter of a technicality, I've posed a challenge you can't actually meet. I suppose this was a bit unfair of me.

Unless you know of a population of humans that doesn't age, and essentially only dies of accidents and other extrinsics causes, then you can't say that a group has "zero" health problems. Dying of age-related diseases is a health problem. Old people don't just "die", they die from something, be it a heart attack, stroke, pneumonia, liver failure, kidney failure, etc. The primary cause is sometimes, perhaps even often the result of a secondary problem such as diabetes, atherosclerosis, crippled immune system, etc.

These are health problems. You either die from an accident, murder, suicide, etc., or you die from a health problem.

However, perhaps what you meant was that these people live without health problems until the last few years of their lives. While doubtful, I admit it's possible, though I've never heard of such a population. So please substantiate this claim, or admit that you're just being dramatic to make a point.

I was being dramatic to prove a point. What I probably meant to say was compared to western countries, their health problems are CLOSER to zero.

Regardless, you probably know my point. I realize that there are even healthy cultures that die in old age and have plaques in their arteries. Aging is aging, but i'm just getting really tired of fat and primarily saturated fat being pointed as the "bad guy" that increases cholesterol and causes heart disease which is absolutely false.

Hey Paleo, it's nice to have someone here who dosen't buy into the seed oil industry propaganda. I only cook with highly saturated fats. Butter, coconut oil and beef tallow. Olive and mac nut oil are great cold over salads and veggies but I would never heat them.

Aging is aging, but i'm just getting really tired of fat and primarily saturated fat being pointed as the "bad guy" that increases cholesterol and causes heart disease which is absolutely false.

Not "absolutely false": there's plenty of evidence that some saturated fats dramatically increase blood choleterol levels. Whether that necessarily means that saturated fats increase arterial plaques, you might have some wiggle room to debate. But don't try to pretend like there's no proof that some saturated fats increase cholesterol and some polyunsaturated fats decrease cholesterol.

At any rate, is saturated fat "unfairly" blamed for more than it should reasonably be blamed for? I'd agree to that: there's tremendous marketable appeal to being able to make saturated fat a scapegoat. But recognizing that saturated fat isn't "all" bad doesn't automatically make it "all" good. You're being just as disingenuous as those you disagree with, if not more so.

Edit: I say "some" saturated fats, because the evidence for oils like lauric acid is, so far, overwhelmingly positive.

It is absolutely true that polyunsaturated oils will lower your serum cholesterol levels......the question is how do they do it? When you build your cell walls(phospholipid membrane) with excessive unsaturated fatty acids the membrane is weak and must be stiffened up by cholesterol that the body pulls out of the blood. If I am way off with my cell biology, someone please square me away.

Hey Paleo, it's nice to have someone here who dosen't buy into the seed oil industry propaganda. I only cook with highly saturated fats. Butter, coconut oil and beef tallow. Olive and mac nut oil are great cold over salads and veggies but I would never heat them.

Agreed. Although I don't think olive olive is too bad if the crap isn't heated out of it. Beef tallow....good stuff....can never find it myself...have a hard enough time finding nitrate free bacon/lard.

I haven't touched any veggie or seed oils in a long time as well as products that contain them.

Not "absolutely false": there's plenty of evidence that some saturated fats dramatically increase blood choleterol levels. Whether that necessarily means that saturated fats increase arterial plaques, you might have some wiggle room to debate. But don't try to pretend like there's no proof that some saturated fats increase cholesterol and some polyunsaturated fats decrease cholesterol.

At any rate, is saturated fat "unfairly" blamed for more than it should reasonably be blamed for? I'd agree to that: there's tremendous marketable appeal to being able to make saturated fat a scapegoat. But recognizing that saturated fat isn't "all" bad doesn't automatically make it "all" good. You're being just as disingenuous as those you disagree with, if not more so.

Edit: I say "some" saturated fats, because the evidence for oils like lauric acid is, so far, overwhelmingly positive.

Disingenuous or not, I believe that saturated fats are like a higher type of octane fuel. I will not go near polyunsat's except for those unavoidable in food (fish, etc) but will continue to enjoy fatty cuts of meat, eggs, and coconut products without fear that it will somehow raise my cholesterol and I will get heart disease.

It is absolutely true that polyunsaturated oils will lower your serum cholesterol levels......the question is how do they do it? When you build your cell walls(phospholipid membrane) with excessive unsaturated fatty acids the membrane is weak and must be stiffened up by cholesterol that the body pulls out of the blood. If I am way off with my cell biology, someone please square me away.

No, you are bang on. But I still don't realize all the hype with cholesterol levels. I mean it has been found that cholesterol has a weak correlation with heart disease anyway AND those with the lowest levels live the shortest (from longitudinal studies).

will continue to enjoy fatty cuts of meat, eggs, and coconut products without fear that it will somehow raise my cholesterol

"somehow" raise your cholesterol? That's like saying "I will continue to smoke without fear that it will somehow damage my lungs and greatly increase my chances of getting lung, throat, or mouth cancer".

I mean, I guess it's possible that smoking is good for you, and the whole cancer thing is just a fluke, but...

I mean it has been found that cholesterol has a weak correlation with heart disease anyway AND those with the lowest levels live the shortest (from longitudinal studies).

What, because extremely low levels of cholesterol correlate with death, that means high levels are called for?

Look at calorie restriction. In rodents, lifespan increases very predictably with decreased calorie content. But cut a rodent's calories 60% and it'll die. Does that mean that CR is bunk?

No, it means there is a minimum necessary level. I'm not denying that there is a minimum necessary level of cholesterol, but the evidence is overwhelming that that minimum level is well below the average for Americans, and the diet you propose would push a typical person's cholesterol above that average.

I mean it has been found that cholesterol has a weak correlation with heart disease

Weak?