Mmmm… Hog Fat
Aug 27
UPDATE: I found it. Behold the power of Google.
Are you eating your lard? Contrary to conventional wisdom, it may just be a healthy alternative:
But now that New York’s restaurant owners are being encouraged to face health facts and stop using hydrogenated oils, what oil should they use instead?
This is where Corby Kummer jumped in with a suggestion: lard.
Mr. Kummer, a senior editor at US magazine The Atlantic Monthly, penned a recent New York Times op-ed piece in which he sang the praises of lard (rendered and clarified pig fat). And if that sounds less than appetising, Mr. Kummer points out that every baker knows that there is no oil that produces a flakier or tastier pie crust. Lard also produces delicious fried chicken and fish.
Obviously, a healthy diet would not include large amounts of pies and fried foods, but lard can be used in any number of ways. And for those who think that “pure lard” means “pure danger,” Mr. Kummer offers this breakdown of lard’s fat profile:
- Lard is 40 percent saturated fat (compared to coconut oil’s 85 percent and palm kernel oil’s 80 percent)
- Lard contains “a very respectable” 45 percent monounsaturated fat (for more on the benefits of monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFAs) see the e-alert “Change your diet to avoid Parkinson’s disease” – 21/7/05)
Now, in spite of the MUFA content of lard, the medical mainstream might swoon at the thought of 40 percent saturated fat. After all, saturated fats will kill you, right? They’ll clog your arteries and stop your heart, correct?
Answers: No and No.
In a review of saturated fat studies that appeared last year in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, the authors (from the Department of Food Science and Technology at the University of California) noted that many mainstream researchers have narrowly focused on the hypothesis that saturated fat raises LDL cholesterol and the risk of coronary artery disease (CAD).
The UC authors write: “The evidence is not strong, and, overall, dietary intervention by lowering saturated fat intake does not lower the incidence of nonfatal CAD; nor does such dietary intervention lower coronary disease or total mortality.”
Elsewhere in their review they state: “The conclusion of an analysis of the history and politics behind the diet-heart hypothesis was that after 50 years of research, there was no evidence that a diet low in saturated fat prolongs life.”
And similar observations have been voiced many times by US physician Dr William Campbell Douglass II. Late last year Dr. Douglass wrote: “Countless studies show that the MORE animal fats people eat, the better their heart health. Need some proof from the real world? The African Masai, North American Eskimos, Japanese, Greeks, Okinawans, and our good friends the French all consume diets that are extremely high (by mainstream American standards) in saturated animal fats. Yet these people enjoy astonishingly low rates of heart disease, hypertension, and coronary events.”
So don’t fear the lard. Or - as Dr. Douglass puts it in his typically direct style: “Eat your animal fats!”
Of course, this shouldn’t be viewed as an invitation to eat lardsicles with a side order of lard at every meal. And as to the last part, the plural of anecdote is not data. But as I’ve been cooking with lard lately (Mexican mole cannot be made properly without it), you can bet your bottom I’ll be passing this along to my soon-to-be-dietitian wife. Anecdotally, at least, I’ve noticed that because animal fats (e.g., lard, butter, and God’s gift to mankind, bacon grease) are more flavorful, I tend to use considerably less of them when cooking than if I were using, say, vegetable oil.
Important note: If you’re going to use lard, as I do, you’re going to have to make it yourself. The stuff you can buy in a tub almost always contains hydrogenated lard, which is Very Bad for you. Fortunately, it’s actually pretty easy to make. Just ask your butcher or supermarket meat department for their unsmoked, uncured pork scraps — bacon’s no good here — and then put them in a 325 degree oven for about an hour. You’ll get liquid love, and some cracklins, to boot!
#1 by Rachel I. at August 27th, 2007
| Quote
Hahaha! Dan will be happy to hear this. We’ve got a box of lard he was using, but I just checked and it does indeed say “with hydrogenated lard” on it. Seeing as we haven’t found a source for more yet, the guide on making one’s own lard is much appreciated.
#2 by gattsuru at August 27th, 2007
| Quote
I’ve seen some CostCos that carry the stuff in non-hydrogenated versions, if you don’t mind purchasing in lots of 5 gallons. It tends to keep well, thankfully.
Another advantage to the stuff it that it works at high temperatures that other oils don’t tend to like. This means you can cook much, much faster than you can with vegetable oils. This doesn’t seem like too much an advantage — cooking most fried foods tends to be the fast part compared to the prep time — but you don’t end up with nearly as much oil on or inside the breading, and the food tastes much less greasy as a result.
Unless you can get your hands on some of the commercial trans-fat free fry oils out there, which are a real pain to deal with, lard is a remarkably good choice.
You still have to keep an eye on the quantity of fried foods you take in, but that goes without saying.
#3 by tgirsch at August 27th, 2007
| Quote
gattsuru:
I’m glad you mentioned that. A common mistake is to think that less is better when it comes to frying in oil. The opposite is actually true. You’re better off using more oil when frying, because as you say, there’s less temperature drop when the food meets the oil, and the pressure keeps the oil out.
Of course, this only holds true for deep frying. If you’re doing a sauté or something like that, where you’re actually going to eat the oil rather than use it as a cooking medium, then yeah, less is better.
#4 by Stormy Dragon at August 27th, 2007
| Quote
I knew the vegetarians were secretly trying to kill me. ;P