Is Canola Colza?
Stan Hirson
Is there any difference between canola and colza? Am I correct in
assuming that they are both names for rapeseed?
Has anyone on the list had any experience expelling the oil from the
seed to make edible oil?
Thanks,
Stan Hirson
Lou
As I understand it, Canola is a trademarked name, owned by the Canadian
government (?) for Low Erucic Acid Rapeseed.
I am not sure what Colza.
Stan Hirson wrote in message <35295892...@tiac.net>...
Oz
In article <6gddjj$nro$1...@kiyoko.communique.net>, Lou <elouvierenospam@i-
55.com> writes
>I am not sure what Colza.
French for oilseed rape (typ as in the crop)
--
Oz
Sheane Meikle
nope Canola is no longer rapeseed. It has been geneticaly engineered to make
it edible to humans were as rape has a enzime in it that makes humans ill.
Being from the birth place of Canala (Canada) I am biased towards its
virtues, it's great
--
Sheane and Bonnie Meikle act...@telusplanet.net
http://www.freeyellow.com/members2/renpoultry
http://www.InsideTheWeb.com/messageboard/mbs.cgi/mb54969
Oz
In article <6gealn$k...@priv-sys04-le0.agt.net>, Sheane Meikle
<act...@telusplanet.net> writes
>nope Canola is no longer rapeseed. It has been geneticaly engineered to make
>it edible to humans were as rape has a enzime in it that makes humans ill.
Er, this was done by *conventional* breeding and NOT by genetic
engineering in the generally accepted use of the term.
--
Oz
Ian Mackay
In article <01pogdA9...@upthorpe.demon.co.uk>, Oz
<O...@upthorpe.demon.co.uk> writes
Some years ago I was told (by an oilseed rape breeder), that erucic acid
is not bad for human health. The evidence that showed erucic acid in the
diet was a bad thing came from experiments with rats, which have a
different way of metabolising erucic acid or fatty acids in general. In
fact erucic acid is an essential fatty acid: we need some in our diet.
So there was no reason to change to low erucic acid varieties of rape.
Since erucic is, I believe 'Lorenzo's Oil' - made famous in the film of
that name, I suppose there could be some truth in this tale. Have I got
the story right, does anyone have more accurate information?
--
Ian Mackay
Edward Apling
Oz wrote in message <01pogdA9...@upthorpe.demon.co.uk>...
>In article <6gealn$k...@priv-sys04-le0.agt.net>, Sheane Meikle
><act...@telusplanet.net> writes
>
>>nope Canola is no longer rapeseed. It has been geneticaly engineered to
make
>>it edible to humans were as rape has a enzime in it that makes humans ill.
>
>Er, this was done by *conventional* breeding and NOT by genetic
>engineering in the generally accepted use of the term.
>
>--
>Oz
Oz is right; Canola is the result of a long - traditional - breeding
process,
carried out before "molecular engineering" became possible.
However important difference between Canola and earlier varieties of rape or
colza (interchangeable names) is the much reduced content (in Canola)
of erucic acid; a fatty acid which is detrimental to humans (in excess).
So Canola oil can be used for cooking, but traditional rapeseed oil only
for lubricating engines or formulating paints!
Paddy
Oz
In article <PtS46DAs...@lionseed.demon.co.uk>, Ian Mackay
<m...@lionseed.demon.co.uk> writes
>The evidence that showed erucic acid in the
>diet was a bad thing came from experiments with rats, which have a
>different way of metabolising erucic acid or fatty acids in general. In
>fact erucic acid is an essential fatty acid: we need some in our diet.
>So there was no reason to change to low erucic acid varieties of rape.
As I understand it it was so that the meal formed after crushing could
be used for animal feed. It is very high (40%) in protein. Eructic acid
made it pretty well unusable for cattle and allowed only limited amounts
to be fed to pigs. The later breeding out of glucosinolates has allowed
it to be included at almost any sensible level in both ruminant and pig
feeds and has made it quite valuable. The only real problem is the
relatively high level of fibre that leads to a low energy compared to
soya.
I have no real information as to the effect on the palatability or other
characteristics on the oil for human consumption.
--
Oz
gri...@ensam.inra.fr
In article <V01wgaAM...@upthorpe.demon.co.uk>,
Right, (Brassica napus), but derived from a dutch word : kolzaat (litterally
:seeds
from cabbage).
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Lou
Ian Mackay wrote in message ...
>...erucic is, I believe 'Lorenzo's Oil' - made famous in the film of
>that name...
Erucic acid is a 22 carbon mono-unsaturated fatty acid. Actually, I think
"Lorenzo's Oil" is a tri-oleic fat, i.e.. a triglyceride (fat) with 3 oleic
acid molecules. Oleic acid is an 18 carbon mono-unsaturated fatty acid.
As I recall the movie, Lorenzo's disease (ALD) was either caused by a
deficiency of oleic acid, or responded to oleic acid supplementation.
Normal fats contain some oleic acid, but not in the quantity needed by
Lorenzo. Therefore, the trick was to provide a fat with exclusively oleic
acid.
Ian Mackay
In article <6gti6r$ena$1...@kiyoko.communique.net>, Lou <elouvierenospam@i-
55.com> writes
>
I've now looked this up. I have the proceedings of a conference 'New
Directions for Agriculture' held in Aberdeen (Scotland) in 1994. In a
presentation 'High Erucic Acid Rapeseed' by B T Hatton, of Croda, Hull
(England), it states:
'the answer which they (the Odones - Lorenzo's parents) arrived at with
Croda's assistance was to administer a substance called glyceryl
trierucate a triglyceride containing only erucic acid.'
I also found some references in Nature to the film and the science
involved:
FS Olsen Nature 1993 vol 361 p695 - which I don't have but which I
believe states the case for the oil in the treatment of ALD was
overstated.
ID Duncan Nature 1993 vol 364 p476, which I do have and which says it's
a good thing.
--
Ian Mackay