

I actually had it backwards, unsaturated fats are horrendously bad.
Their molecular shape makes them more grabby than saturated fats.
This grabbyness makes them clog your arteries faster than saturated fats.
It has to do with the availability of hydrogen binding spots, unsaturated fats have room for more hydrogen bonds, saturated fats don’t.



My problem is that these labels don’t differentiate the levels at which demonstrable harm occurs. I’m not against labels, I’m against bad labels
Putting something that’s harmful at the parts per million(ppm) level in the exact same category as something that’s harmful in the parts per billion(ppb) level is counterproductive.
This results in people treating incredibly harmful compounds that are dangerous in the ppb range the same as compounds that are dangerous in the ppm or even ppt(thousand) range.
Including minor and major carcinogens in the same label makes people think they’re safer than they are.
It’s why prop65 warnings are a joke and ignored by almost all consumers.
If we’re going to use a single label that doesn’t differentiate the level of harm then we need to save it for the most harmful compounds only.
Tldr: Without more information on the label putting nitrates in the same category as asbestos or lead is counterproductive via implied false equivalence.