Talk:Oleic acid/Archive 1

correlation between oleic acid and reduced breast cancer risk?

[1] This article say there is a correlation between this acid and reducing the risk of breast cancer

boiling point

I found the boiling point listed as 360 C on a link from the American Chemical Society's webpage: http://membership.acs.org/c/ccs/pubs/CLIPS/JCE20020024.pdf

The boiling point temperature is listed here as 194-195 C.

Foods rich in oleic acid

Please add a list with foods containing oleic acid

Olive oil

Hear, hear. A dietary sources section is badly needed. Ocdnctx (talk) 15:28, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Now there is a short list but no % or source for olive oil. - Rod57 (talk) 23:22, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dead insects

I removed the comment on bees having to give consent before being removed from the hive, as it seems to be vandalism — it doesn't make sense. What kind of mental state would a bee have to be in to give consent to being dragged from the hive? (Oh, that's OK, I was feeling dead on my feet anyway. I'll be back once I have cleaned this smell of death off my thorax.) --Slashme 10:05, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

trans isomer

I think it's confusing to say stearic is a trans isomer of oleic. That makes it sound like stearic is a trans fat, which it's not. Might be more accurate to say oleic is a cis unsaturated fat and stearic is saturated. But why mention stearic at all? It's not usually considered an isomer of oleic because of the saturation. Rees11 (talk) 01:59, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it's just plain wrong. I think the trans isomer of oleic acid is elaidic acid.

Ben (talk) 08:07, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted the recent changes that created the incorrect statement, so it should make sense now. -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:43, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

misplaced content in Production and Chemical Behavior

This..."Chicken wings are so yummy! YUMMMMM :)". Should it be moved to Uses section? And it's missing a reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.74.46.246 (talk) 03:11, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

{{done} It's called vandalism. --Smokefoot (talk) 03:36, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

holi — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.192.78.72 (talk) 07:53, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sodium oleate

Oleic acid as its sodium salt

Say if you mean sodium oleate. ---- Jidanni (talk) 14:30, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

CAS report

From Chemical Abstracts Services: get references (138085)>refine "2000-" (99982)>refine "Review" (564). That's right: 564 reviews since the year 200 from which to pick.--Smokefoot (talk) 01:02, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

oleic acid in the olive oil may help reduce harmful meat lipid peroxidation

I added the following text:

If olive oil is consumed at the same time as red meat, the oleic acid in the olive oil may help reduce harmful meat lipid peroxidation.^[1]

User Zefr deleted this edition, saying "An in vitro study unlikely to represent in vivo conditions; primary research, speculative."

I think this was an unwarranted removal. I feel discouraged about contributing and editing Wikipedia pages when my considered addition is just summarily axed like this.

I recognize that Wikipedia for understandable reasons does lean towards preferring Review articles and the secondary scientific literature. However, I note that Wikipedia guidance emphasizes that "Secondary" does not mean "good" and "Primary" does not mean "bad". If statements based on the primary scientific literature were to be excluded, I think most of what is in this section (Health effects) would need to be deleted or wholly replaced and rewritten. I do not think that is justified or a good idea.

I will make further arguments.

1) The research article I cited did not just involve an experiment in isolation. The results were interpreted and discussed in the context of a broader literature, and other findings were brought to bear from previous research. In this sense, the distinction between primary and secondary scientific literature is not entirely categorical. In this specific case, there is evidence that this field was moving towards finding.

2) I understand the concern about this being an in vitro study, as opposed to in vivo. However, the chemical environment of the digestive system is simulated. Thus, the experiment is closer to in vivo than many in vitro cases.

3) Yes, the findings were not conclusive, but this was reflected in the statement I included in the article.

4) Importance. Lipid peroxidation is a significant health risk. Olive oil is known to be a food that can help mitigate the risks of this problem. Including a statement (with evidence) that this benefit may be due to oleic acid is definitely relevant information in the article on oleic acid! Pigkeeper (talk) 18:38, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Tirosh, Oren; Shpaizer, Adi; Kanner, Joseph (2015). "Lipid Peroxidation in a Stomach Medium Is Affected by Dietary Oils (Olive/Fish) and Antioxidants: The Mediterranean versus Western Diet". Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 63 (31): 7016–7023. doi:10.1021/acs.jafc.5b02149. ISSN 0021-8561.

The discussion concerns this edit. WP:MEDPRI states: "A reason to avoid primary sources in the biomedical field – especially papers reporting results of in vitro experiments – is that they are often not replicable." The MEDPRI guide exists to assure review information - not just any lab research - represents the best-defined facts for the encyclopedia. The cited source is not a review article, but rather is preliminary basic research in vitro reaching conclusions on in vivo mechanisms post-digestion that are speculative at best. There are too many variables of human digestion to allow a clear interpretation from that 2015 study, and the conclusion in the abstract, "inhibitory properties of oleic acid may play a key role in the health benefits of the Mediterranean diet," has no confirmation or extension from more recent research in the literature. It remains as unreasonable, overly simplistic, unencyclopedic conjecture. --Zefr (talk) 19:01, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The literature on oleic acid is so vast that Wikipedia does not often cite specialized studies. And as Zefr points out, the standards for references are particularly high for topics related to health. Re "I feel discouraged", Wikipedia has high standards and lots of us learned that the hard way, by others removing well-intentioned by shakey content. Most regular editors end up specializing for this reason. Drive-by editing is almost a waste of time.--Smokefoot (talk) 22:05, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

References

References 16 and up in the body don't lead anywhere, and references 6-15 seem to be missing entirely

2003:C3:973E:BC00:8D9C:6CE8:4802:CA31 (talk) 20:33, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[TiroshShpaizer2015-1] Tirosh, Oren; Shpaizer, Adi; Kanner, Joseph (2015). "Lipid Peroxidation in a Stomach Medium Is Affected by Dietary Oils (Olive/Fish) and Antioxidants: The Mediterranean versus Western Diet". Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 63 (31): 7016–7023. doi:10.1021/acs.jafc.5b02149. ISSN 0021-8561.

[1]