Talk:Polyunsaturated fat

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Molecular Biology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Molecular Biology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Molecular BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject Molecular BiologyTemplate:WikiProject Molecular BiologyMolecular Biology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Molecular and Cell Biology task force (assessed as Low-importance).

On 31 August 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved from Polyunsaturated fatty acid to Polyunsaturated fat. The result of the discussion was moved.

Untitled

The material on this page was partly covered by several lists, on

I suggest that List of omega-3 fatty acids be wholly merged into this page, and that the tables in the 3/6/9 articles be replaced with See... links. David.Throop 17:52, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. I think it should rather be merged with the omega-3, although adding the Ω-3/Ω-6/Ω-9 tables to the polyunsat article is not a bad idea either simply so that all relevant information is given to each page. However merging with polyunsat should only be done if it isn't already huge. If it's growing too large, they should only be stuck in with their respective type articles. -AeoniosHaplo 08:52, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep omega-3 section separate and cross reference

Many more people will look up omega-3 fatty acids than will look up polyunsaturated fatty acids. If there is cross referencing at the end of the article people will find more information by keeping the entries separate. Ed Dratz —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.210.85.25 (talk) 03:30, 29 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I have to agree. Keep it easy to Google or otherwise search for the specific reference. However, add the complete list of Omega 3 fatty acids to the main page -- it's not too long and it makes sense as clarifying detail. Cliff Bennett 16:16, 3 December 2007 (UTC)Cliff Bennett[reply]

I think you misunderstand. I wasn't suggesting merging Omega-3 fatty acid; it should certainly standalone. I suggested merging List of omega-3 fatty acids with this page. That page only has 1 table with 6 entries, and that information is completely duplicated on this current page. David.Throop 19:32, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Split

I really think these lists simply belong in the corresponding articles (omega-3 fatty acid, conjugated fatty acid, etc.). These lists are all very short, there is no substantial information aside from the lists, and the corresponding articles all link to this article for an underwhelming amount of information. It doesn't make sense, given how massive the omega-3 article is, to omit something so basic as a list of the nine or so acids that occur in nature. I think there are too many fatty acid articles as it is; it's all very uncoordinated. This article's existence makes especially little sense because the article polyunsaturated fat lists "polyunsaturated fatty acid" as a synonym, and so you have two articles with essentially the same name, and this article includes fatty acids that aren't polyunsaturated. If you want a list article, it should be "list of fatty acids" and be all-encompassing. This alone doesn't really work. —Werson (talk) 05:04, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, why are there monounsaturated fatty acids listed under the omega-9's on the Polyunsaturated fatty acid page? It seems confusing, and too spread out. Gthorne (talk) 18:51, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Other Polyunsaturates?

Hi, I'm a grad student in Nutrition Science, and came to Wikipedia looking for basic information about fats for a handout I'm putting together. I started poking around, and saw the list on this page. I was wondering why Pinolenic and Podocarpic acids are not listed among the Omega-6's, since they are n-6? On other [non-wikipedia] webpages, they are considered Omega-6, but even if Wikipedia has better information, it seems like it needs some sort of explaination. Gthorne (talk) 15:16, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Curious

so... do omega-12 fatty acids exist? just wondering. I'm a chemist not a biochemist... (Pelirojopajaro (talk) 20:21, 28 October 2008 (UTC))[reply]

LC-PUFAs

One sometimes reads references to long-chain PUFAs (which I've seen abbreviated both LC-PUFAs and as LCPUFAs). Could someone with the proper expertise add something about this category here, perhaps indicating which of the PUFAs listed fall into that category? Note also that the article on Essential_fatty_acid describes this categorization to some extent. --Ericjs (talk) 14:30, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"PCSO-524" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect PCSO-524 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 28 § PCSO-524 until a consensus is reached. Mdewman6 (talk) 23:27, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 31 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: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Zippybonzo | talk to me | what have I done (he|she|they) 18:46, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Polyunsaturated fatty acid → Polyunsaturated fat – Polyunsaturated fat is the WP:COMMONNAME used by the majority. Lead section can be altered accordingly. Also this will be in contrast with Monounsaturated fat article, where Monounsaturated fatty acid is a redirect to that page. Crashed greek (talk) 08:16, 31 August 2023 (UTC)— Relisting. —usernamekiran (talk) 03:39, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Chemistry has been notified of this discussion. Closer, Talk:Monounsaturated fat#Requested move 10 August 2023 brought up the move proposed above. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 02:58, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

People are welcome to move or rename or whatever. The contents may be rewritten by chemists after any shift. Its great to see people so interested. Please keep in mind that a fat is not a fatty acid, so an unsaturated fat is not an unsaturated fatty acid, etc. Good luck, --Smokefoot (talk) 03:21, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Common name is fairly evenly split, and Given that this article discusses the nutritional aspects, which rarely use the "fatty acid" nomenclature, the title is overall more accessible and also consistent withy the decision at monounsaturated fat. — Amakuru (talk) 07:26, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The fat and corresponding fatty acid terms are NOT synonymous. The fatty acid terms name specific categories of chemical compound, whereas the fat terms represent derived concepts, with compositional values calculated. The logical difference is well illustrated in the article on Triglyceride, where the structure of a "mixed triglyceride" shows a molecule that contributes (nearly) one-third each of saturated, mono-unsaturated and polyunsaturated fat. The "nearly" arises because the calculation excludes the weight contributed by the glycerol backbone. This is explained in more detail in Danish Food Informatics's description of Fatty acids in foods. Thus the relationships between the fat and corresponding fatty acid terms are See also ones, not See redirections. To avoid needless repetition, the description of the fat terms might be generalised in the Fat#Nutritional_and_health_aspects section or in a new, linked article on Types of fat. Douglian30 (talk) 11:58, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I know they're not synonymous, and that's why I considered the merge of the two articles performed earlier this year to be ill-advised and also lacking in any sort of consensus, as you'll see from the discussions in 2022 and recently at Talk:Polyunsaturated fat. I reverted that merge but was myself reverted, so here we are. But whichever way you look at it, in terms of nutrition, readers expect an article on polyunsaturated fat, a concept discussed at great length in the literature. Thus they will be WP:ASTONISHed to see a page about an acid when they type that into the search box, and this page would be better housed there. — Amakuru (talk) 08:58, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The article is about molecules, and the molecules are always described as acids. Just look at the listed types. More importantly, look at the references. The article fat is confused and misleading. Fat is Adipose tissue. SmokeyJoe (talk) 14:00, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Any misleading aspect can be fixed by editing the lead section accordingly. But overwhelmingly the WP:COMMONNAME is Polyunsaturated fat. After the move, in future, Polyunsaturated Fatty Acid article can be splinned off from this article. Crashed greek (talk) 11:06, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Molecular Biology has been notified of this discussion. —usernamekiran (talk) 03:39, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

note: RM discussion at Talk:Monounsaturated fat has been closed with title as "Monounsaturated fat" (result was "not moved"). —usernamekiran (talk) 03:39, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support, following from my comments at Talk:Monounsaturated_fat#Requested_move_10_August_2023. The merge has left us with a status quo of polyunsaturated fats and polyunsaturated fatty acids being covered in a single article. They are separate topics, but with having them both at the same page for the moment, I think it is less astonishing for the title to be about the fat, the more common term, and have the fatty acid term redirect here, than the other way around, and either way, per WP:TITLECON considerations, this title is in conflict with the consensus at the mono RM, so for now at least I think a move makes sense. The lede should then be modified to, at minimum, define the two terms and how they relate to each other. Going forward, there would be no prejudice against further discussion exploring splitting into two articles, or having articles at the fatty acid title, but probably both the mono- and poly- articles should be treated the same way, and discussed in a combined RM, if someone wants to go down that path. Mdewman6 (talk) 22:10, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Definitions for types of fat

Now that it seems decided, if not implemented, that information covering each type of Fat and the corresponding set of Fatty acids should form a single, combined article, named according to the Fat rather than the Fatty acids, it needs to be decided what editing of the articles is needed to describe the types of fat adequately. The starting point should be to describe the article subject correctly. For example, in MUF, the statement "Monounsaturated fats are triglycerides containing one unsaturated fatty acid." is wrong. Triglycerides with 1, 2 or 3 MUFAs all contribute to MUF, only in differing amounts. The articles on SF (Saturated fat), MUF and PUF make no mention at all of the legal definitions of the terms, as mandated for the nutritional labelling of foods, although these are precise. These have minor variations, for example between the US and Europe, but these definitions should be clear as they determine the information most seen by consumers. These defined terms also include Total fat (TF). TF redirects to Fat, an article that emphasises that Fat can have varying meanings. TF is mentioned several times in the article, but is undefined.

Apart from definitions, much further editing is needed in the articles relating to fats. For example, in PFA#Reactions, how many edits are required in the paragraph "Hydrogenation of PUFAs gives less saturated derivatives. For unsaturated products from partial hydrogenation often contain some trans isomers. The trans monounsaturated C20 species elaidic acid can be prepared in this way."? The articles in this area are important and do need further attention. Douglian30 (talk) 20:04, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You're correct, the first statement has a typo, it should read "Hydrogenation of PUFAs gives less unsaturated derivatives ..."

BTW, a common way to convert cis to trans olefins is by the action of a hydrogenation catalyst. In principle hydrogenation should convert cis to saturated but sometimes these catalysts just isomerize to double bond. Trans double bonds are less susceptible to hydrogenation so they would accumulate. --Smokefoot (talk) 12:21, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have just updated the lede at monounsaturated fats that was written as if monounsaturated fats and monounsaturated fatty acids are synonyms when they are not. A modest step in the right direction... Mdewman6 (talk) 21:57, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, a good step forward, but a little more is needed; it does not take account of the point that I made above about how 1, 2 or 3 MUFAs in a triglyceride contribute to the MUF total. Consider a hypothetical "pure" triglyceride in which only the same set of 3 fatty acids occur in the triglyceride molecules. If one of the three fatty acids is a MUFA, then 100g of the triglyceride will contribute 33g to the MUF total. However, if two of the three are MUFAs, then the contribution is 67g and if all three are MUFAs, the contribution is 100g. None of the existing articles on the types of fat make this clear, although it is key to any quantitative work using food composition data and to meeting food labelling regulations. I intend to draft an extra section, initially for the PUFA/PUF article, on "Analysis and quantification", which I will post for discussion. Hopefully a clear and concise description of the analysis of fatty acids in foods and the construction of the fatty acid/fat totals from these analytical results will improve the understandability (and accuracy) of the articles. Douglian30 (talk) 09:08, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

At risk of complicating this debate with nerdy info. Fats and fatty acid are important well beyond nutrition as suggested by 124 and 6 billion kg of fats and fatty acids processed annually (2012 numbers, Ullmann's Encyclopedia of Chem Tech.). So dont let nutrition guide this discussion alone. I do not have numbers on how much is eaten vs other apps. and my cursory reading suggests that most fats are used as food or in cooking. A lot, however, are used in coatings (linseed oil) and soaps and probably cosmetics. So we want nutritionist oriented editors to bear these other apps in mind.

Another factoidish thing is that while there are many fatty acids, about six really, really dominate in quantities (the saturated lauric, palmitic and stearic and the unsaturated oleic, linoleic, and linolenic). Sometimes I worry that editors are distracted by minor components. Now when it comes to fats, since they are triesters, many permutations exist. So, Wikipedia has separate articles on every fatty acid, but it would be difficult to have separate articles on each fat, unsaturated or otherwise. A few exist, like stearin and olein, which are symmetrical.--Smokefoot (talk) 12:13, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Section on Lipid Peroxidation

Since lipid peroxidation targets moreso polyunsaturated fatty acids and damages the cell membrane, while possibly producing mutagenic and carcinogenic end-products, it is a reasonable idea to add this to the section related to health. The already mentioned oxidative deterioration and the free radical chain reaction is very vague, and does not give a full picture. With a section on the pros, it is reasonable to have also a section on the cons. Brentleyland (talk) 14:24, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Created section Polyunsaturated_fat#Peroxidation Oitio (talk) 20:51, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]