Also see:
“Curing” a High Metabolic Rate with Unsaturated Fats
Fat Deficient Animals – Activity of Cytochrome Oxidase
Metabolism, Brain Size, and Lifespan in Mammals
Unsaturated Fats and Longevity
Ray Peat, PhD Quotes on Coconut Oil
Dietary PUFA Reflected in Human Subcutaneous Fat Tissue
Toxicity of Stored PUFA
Israeli Paradox: High Omega -6 Diet Promotes Disease
PUFA Accumulation and Aging
Arch Tierernahr. 1984 Jan;34(1):19-33.
[Nutritional-physiological effects of dietary fats in rations for growing pigs. 4. Effects of sunflower oil and coconut oil on protein and fat retention, fatty acid pattern of back fat and blood parameters in piglets].
[Article in German]
Berschauer F, Rupp J, Ehrensvärd U.
Rations containing 12% sunflower oil (Ration II) and 12% coconut fat (Ration III) were compared with a control ration (Ration I) in a 34 day experiment with growing boars of the German Landrace breed (12-30 kg body weight). The relationships between DP and ME were held constant for all 3 rations, and because of the higher ME contents of the two fat rations, this was achieved by reducing the feed intake, relative to that of the control ration. Parameters measured were growth, composition at slaughter, the apparent digestibility of the crude nutrients and energy, the N-balance and the concentrations of urea, insulin, glucose, triglyceride and cholesterol in the blood. In comparison to Ration I, the apparent digestibilities of crude protein in Rations II and III were 5 and 4% (p less than 0,05) higher, respectively. There was little difference in the apparent digestibility of crude fat between the Rations II and III. However, large differences in the values were determined depending upon method of extraction. There were little differences in the productive performance of the animals fed the fat diets. The control animals had, however, a 13% lower growth rate (p less than 0,05) when compared at similar ME-intakes. As the energy concentration and the growth rate were higher in groups II and III, the feed conversion efficiency and the ME required per kg growth were approximately 30 and 13% lower than that of the control animals. The efficiency of protein utilization of the animals in group III was 4% higher (p greater than 0.05) and the blood urea concentration 20% lower (p less than 0.05) than that in group II. The values for the control animals were intermediate. A similar result was obtained concerning the fat content of the animals. The fat content of the animals in group III was 15.9% and this was significantly lower (p less than 0.001) than that of 21.1% measured in group II. That of the control animals, 18.6%, was not significantly different from the above values. The differences in feeding over the relatively short period of 34 days lead to marked differences in the fatty acid pattern of the backfat. The contents of myristic acid and linoleic acid were significantly different between group II and III; for the former values of 0.8% and 16.9% were determined, respectively, with corresponding values of 48.7 and 11.3% for the latter.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)
