Okay, I know that PUFA is more readily oxidized than MUFA, and MUFA more so than SFA. SFA is revered because it is stable (i.e. less prone to oxidation). IN my mind, this just means that it is harder for the body to burn SFA as energy as opposed to MUFA or PUFA- you are a better fat burner when the diet is composted of mostly MUFA/PUFA over SFA.
My own n=1 experimentation would show that I feel, perform, and look better with more MUFA emphasis as opposed to SFA emphasis. Also, several studies show you MUFA and PUFA are better used as fuel for the body than SFA, which is most readily partitioned into fat storage. For example, this one: http://www.nature.com/oby/journal/v11/n12/full/oby2003202a.html
I think people hear oxidation and they immediately think free radical damage. Of course you are going to generate free radicals, but those occur no matter what you're doing as long as you are burning some form of energy.
Could someone please tell me where my reasoning is going wrong?
Thanks for the help.
EDIT: don't get me wrong. I do eat saturated fat from what is in red meat, small amounts of coconut oil or butter to cook with, and the occasional bit of whipped cream. I just don't make it the majority of fat calories- which comes from beef and avocado and almonds + fish oil.
Well...one caveat, I HATE when someone states "several studies show"....then precede to list ONE citation. Just annoying. Beyond that if you really want to delve into FFA metabolism then your gonna have to go far deeper than those three classifications seeing as there are dozens of them that all seem to have somewhat different physiological response in some sense. I'll admit to not being well versed enough to expound on each one, but I've read enough to tell you that not all Saturated, mono, or pufas react the same.
As to where you are wrong I suppose is that all those things get broken down and run through beta oxidation for energy in the end, its just how much collateral damage occurs in between storing and in the breaking down process.
I don't think it's true that less prone to oxidation equals harder for the body to burn. I am not a biochemist, but I think beta oxidation of unsaturated fat requires additional enzymes which are not needed for beta oxidation of saturated fat. Can't argue with wikipedia. :)
Our bodies choose to store excess energy as SFA, so why wouldn't it be a good fuel source?
PUFA vs MUFA and SFA 5 Answers
Is CLA a SFA, MUFA, or PUFA? 2 Answers
Mixing Different Types of Fats? 1 Answer