[Sirenos]

I'm not trying to be snarky here, but why is the saturated fat in regular whipped cream bad, assuming it is not consumed in excess? This seems to be the main selling point in the article, so I'm genuinely curious.

Any experts wanna chime in?

[blamazon]

Perhaps it is a bit like setting your mobile phone to grayscale, to try to make it less addictive.

Less charitably, you can't patent the saturated fat in regular whipped cream, but you can patent a lack of it, and make a lifetime of rewards licensing the process to do so. That's why the saturated fat is bad.

It's a well trod business formula - demonize a certain common nutrient and sell the alternative. First it was fats, then it was sugars, now there's a bitter war amongst alternative sweeteners to prove the other ones cause cancer, since they're not even a nutrient and can't be demonized with the 'you'll get fat!' play. Of course there's all the tangent battlegrounds like the aluminum in baking powders meme. I actually think that one predates the fat-free obsession.

I think we're all worse off from these nested cycles of chicanery.

[colechristensen]

There seems to be no reason to try to reach 0 dietary saturated fats. If whipped cream is making up enough of your diet to have any measurable negative health consequences, eat less whipped cream (but my god, you'd have to be eating a lot for it to matter), otherwise, live a little.

If you feel the need to make some kind of "fake" food to be healthy, just eat something else. If you feel like the occasional lump of whipped cream on a dessert is going to ruin your life or really have any negative consequence at all, reevaluate your base assumptions.

[jonwinstanley]

Personally, I’d say it seems like neither standard whipped cream or this artificial substitute are going to be particularly good for a person to eat a lot of.

[HKH2]

Combining saturated fat and sugar is unhealthy. Also, the sugar industry has been very successful in convincing people that any fat, including the fat from animals, is bad for you.

[erybodyknows]

The calorie density, for one. Four calories per gram of carbohydrates vs the nine calories per gram of fats.

[kcplate]

Except, at least in my case as discovered on an HFLC diet, the sated effect from fats is far far greater. You simply eat much much less, so if it takes unit of fat to satisfy me vs 5-6 units carbs, any caloric benefit that carbohydrates cause on a per unit basis gets erased quickly.