Talk:Olestra

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Olestra.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

Food and drink Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Food and Drink task list:

To edit this page, select here

Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink:

Help bring these Top Importance articles currently B Status or below up to GA status: Agaricus bisporus (i.e. mushroom), Beef, Bread, Curry, Drink, Food, Ham and eggs, Soy sauce, Sushi, Yogurt
Bring these Top Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Beer, French cuisine, Sugar
Bring these High Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Apple, Burger King, Fish
Participate in project-related deletion discussions.
Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this.
Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here.
Provide photographs and images for Category:Wikipedia requested images of food
Consider joining this project's Assessment task force. List any project ideas in this section

Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages.

Chemistry Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemistry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of chemistry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChemistryWikipedia:WikiProject ChemistryTemplate:WikiProject ChemistryChemistry articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Medicine: Toxicology Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Toxicology task force (assessed as Low-importance).

This article was the subject of an educational assignment that ended on Spring 2007.

Untitled[edit]

This looks like it has been edited by P&G Public Relations. It has changed a lot since I last looked at it, and it's become something of an ad. Anyone want to volunteer to rewrite and monitor it?

I'll monitor it. Brad219 06:42, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citations for "fixed" side effects?[edit]

The claim the side effects have been mitigated is currently uncited in the article, does anyone know where that info came from? How did this stuff get approved by the FDA? Seems implausible to me. zen master T 02:44, 19 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see this in the article anywhere. Brad219 06:42, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The side effects known as anal leakage, was corrected and verified in clinical studies submitted to the FDA prior to the olestra's approveal for use by the FDA. This and all other clinical studies can be found in the Food Additive Petition for olestra to the FDA.

If the side effects of anal leakage were corrected, then why did the FDA require the label to inform of this side effect? This makes no sense. The side effect still exists and the molecule has not been remedied to fix this issue.Brad219 06:19, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, they weren't "corrected", but the side effects were significantly reduced by the introduction of a more saturated (i.e. solid) formulation of olestra. The FDA clearly chose to err on the side of caution with the labeling. The side effect does exist, but most studies have shown it's fairly uncommon in moderate consumption.--Soultaco 23:38, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citations for Animal Testing[edit]

The statement that animals could not be tested for long-term effects of olestra because they "physically could not eat the huge quantity," seems unplausible. Of course they can't eat the quantity that humans eat, but as in ALL animal testing of food and drugs, the dose can be scaled down according to the animal's weight, age, etc. I would like to see a citation for this, else have it removed.Brad219 06:19, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've actually removed this sentence until it can be cited, because I've found sources that claim P&G perform animal testing regularly (no pun intended).Brad219 06:25, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep away from pets[edit]

My ex's dog got into a bag of Wow chips one time, and of course it lost total control of his bowels. The dog otherwise had no long-term health effects, but keep Olestra food products away from Dogs, or you will have one heck of a mess. Joeylawn 03:05, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anal Leakage[edit]

The following sentence is incorrect: "The warning was popularly misquoted as containing the phrase “anal leakage”, which although not on the label, was indeed a problem with early formulations of olestra that were not marketed."

I know without a doubt that I have seen labels using "anal leakage" in the language. I don't have any citations other than the people I was with at the time who also read it. Anonymous 23:51 27 Apr 2006 (UTC)

I believe that phrase was used on some prescription meds, perhaps you saw it there ? I can personally attest to the fact that Olestra included in some fat-free ice cream caused me severe diarrhea, making it necessary to skip work for a two weeks (because I didn't figure out the cause until I had used up the ice cream and it went away). On the plus side, it did indeed help me rapidly lose weight, as nothing would stay in my digestive system long enough to be digested. StuRat 12:12, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How does your personal story help to clarify that "anal leakage" was not ever actually printed on labels? Brad219 06:42, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect that comment was a response to the "was indeed a problem with early formulations of olestra that were not marketed" part of the original claim. --Saforrest 23:19, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Anal leakage" is mentioned and ridiculed in the not-so-popular 2002 movie The Sweetest Thing." See http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0253867/quotes (near bottom of page) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.154.14.122 (talk) 03:53, 22 June 2009 (UTC) [reply]

I can attest that olean makes you buy a new pair of underwear after eating things made with it. Work lunches were never the same. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.239.18.50 (talk) 20:14, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm[edit]

Anal seepage rediects here. Shouldn't it redirect to anal leakage?

Done. -- Coneslayer 15:40, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Trans fat? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.59.109.121 (talk • contribs).

What would you mean by that? Olestra is not the same thing as transfat. WLU 22:36, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, this question isn't clear at all. Brad219 06:42, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No by the look of the model, non-transunsaurated —Preceding unsigned comment added by Phil Ian Manning (talk • contribs) 12:48, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Questionable insertion under "In Popular Culture"[edit]

There's a line under the last entry here (craig's list entry) that seems out of place and has nothing to do with the craig's list entry itself. I think it's vandalism because it sounds outragous. Can anybody clarify on this or should it just be removed? The quote is "Side effects include vomiting, severe cramping, passing out, drop in blood pressure." This is absolutely not true, but if it was a part of a comedy routine cited in the pop culture, it might make sense. However, it seems to be vandalism to me. Thx1200 14:01, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

the stereogram[edit]

that is cool, but the image is too big, we are forced to squint a huge amount for it to work--200.193.158.167 01:51, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

get a 2D picPhil Ian Manning (talk) 12:54, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Click on stereogram, it expands —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.154.14.122 (talk) 03:44, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Commercialization[edit]

From the dates given, it apparently took Proctor & Gamble about 28 years to get FDA approval for Olestra. That seems slow even allowing for the product having to be reformulated. Dick Kimball (talk) 17:24, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging[edit]

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . Maximum and carefull attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories , but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 17:43, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Industrial Uses, etc.[edit]

I added a section on the industrial uses of Olestra/Sefose, which is a noteworthy recent development. I will try to add more relevant information as it becomes available.

I also put the TV reference in a pop culture section, since that seemed to be appropriate.

Does anyone have more information about bans and approval for use? That section seems like it could be filled out a bit more, perhaps even with information from the Commercialization section.

Matthiashess (talk) 16:43, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Olean vs olein[edit]

I corrected this for capitalization and spelling. Olein is not a brand name -- it is a synonym for glycerol trioleate, a naturally occuring component of olive oil! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.33.230.200 (talk) 18:20, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources, UK ban[edit]

We lack a reliable source for this stuff being banned in the UK. The article currently used as a reference -- http://www.healthyandhot.com/everything_you_wanted_to_know_about_olestra.htm -- cites Wikipedia as one of its sources. As we can't tell what they got from wikipedia and what from their other source, which is no longer available, we really can't use any of the content on this page as a reference. JulesH (talk) 23:16, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, "banned" is perhaps a somewhat emotive word whereas "unapproved" is likely to more accurately reflect the reality: in the UK, all food products without a long history of use need approval before they can be sold. It is likely that P&G simply failed to acquire this approval, rather than the product being actively removed from sale. JulesH (talk) 23:22, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Side effects section[edit]

There should certainly be a separate "Side Effects" section as that is one of the most widely known facts about olestra. Bundling it in the history section doesn't seem to suffice since many people may only want to read about the side effects. 76.100.202.39 (talk) 23:19, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The statement "in spite of having received over 20,000 complaints" is cited with a quote from an individual who does not provide any support for the number. The footnote should link to official documentation of this count, or the statement should be flagged as an unsubstantiated claim. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.200.173.54 (talk) 23:35, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

current status- is it even still on the food market??[edit]

I cant find anything with olestra in it anywhere anymore, is it even still on the market? is it more of a regional thing or what? I personally liked this stuff alot and it never gave me any problems at all.. i hope its not off the market now because everyone was scared of anal leakage. can the article add something about current trends and market conditions for foods with this product in it please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gawdsmak (talk • contribs) 09:46, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

caps[edit]

This statement was stuck at the bottom of the article:

Throughout this article, the word 'olestra' has its first letter capitalized. I believe that olestra is not a brand name nor a trade mark nor a proper name, and thus the upper case beginning should be used only when the word is the first of a sentence. Someone else can verify this, and if my belief is correct, then the article should be corrected.

Since usually only trade names are capitalized, I made the changes. In the food industry, lower case is more often seen. Gigemag76 (talk) 21:33, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Losing weight by eating[edit]

I recently rewrote one of the paragraphs that reported a finding, citing Food Politics, to balance it with a claim from the manufacturer. In my opinion, any time you reduce calorie intake, your blood sugar will be lower later in the day and, if you don't resolve to resist that empty feeling and snack (that is, unless you seriously diet), your switch to fat-free will be ineffective. So, while I don't believe the manufacturer that olestra foods are so satisfying as to overcome this, neither do I believe that the tendency of consumers to compensate for calories "saved" says anything about olestra or any high-tech method to "save" calories.

Regarding the contributor above whom olestra-based ice cream sidelined from work for two weeks, I think simple lactose intolerance is a far better explanation than a new Frankenfood.

Now to the point: another contributor (who now edits only once a year) reported above that olestra was reformulated in a "more solid" form, perhaps leading to the withdrawal of the FDA warning requirement. For me, Pringles Light is now completely unremarkable, and this did not used to be the case. More information on this reformulation ought to be part of the article. Spike-from-NH (talk) 13:20, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

i do know a lot of things about chemistry and food and nutritional facts actually it was a big lie and only marketing !

Olestra was marketed in the US as fat free but i discovered a pack of olestra oil in europe and they had 9 calories per 1 gramm that means it has the same amount of calories like other oils

My relatives bought me a few bags of them and i was eating them and gain a lot of weight — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.189.28.120 (talk) 13:59, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Banned in some countries?[edit]

Does anybody have a way to check Olestra's current legal situation in other countries? I read it was banned years ago but don't know how to check for current status Frohike14 (talk) 06:48, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dead sources[edit]

An IP noted on the article that:

Sources 6, 11, 12, 13, 20, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, and 27 in this article have broken links or do not exist.

Of course I removed it, but I'm recording it here if anyone wants to fix the links. Galobtter (talk) 18:53, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Olestra is very similar to bile acid sequestrants, I am seriously tempted to add this[edit]

Olestra is extremly similar to bile acid sequestrants, I realized this simply as I was reading the article.

The bile acid sequestrants that I am most familiar with are ion exchange resins, similar to potassium sequestrants. This actually makes them safer than neutral lipids, such as olestra, because olestra will happily absorb neutral compounds. Positively charged bile acid sequestrants will tend not to absorb positively charged molecules, which is the majority of drugs, although the small intestine is often somewhat alkaline so the free base forms of these drugs is more prevalent. Potassium sequestrants, being negatively charged, have a rather vicious ability to absorb and incorporate positively charged drugs and thereby inhibit absorption. It is interesting to note that bile acid sequestrants are sometimes needed when the liver is diseased, and potassium sequestrants are almost universally needed because the kidneys are diseased. However, the liver does a lot of things, including synthesizing bile acids, so it depends on which liver functions are broken, and whether something harmful is occurring via a negative feedback or compensatory mechanism.

An even broader similar compound is activated carbon, although it is only used in emergencies as far as I know, and the extent to which it is useful is possibly limited compared to gastric lavage.

I am tempted to add a mention of bile acid sequestrants, I am not sure where. Also, I do not currently have any citations. I could look for some.

May the Fourth be with you. Tomorrow. Or already, in Sydney, Australia. Also in Perth, Australia. Okay, probably all of Australia is already in Force Day. Also, happy Madrid Community Elections, #4M #nopolitics. 209.94.144.13 (talk) 17:30, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]