Is margarine really one molecule away from being plastic:?
549599
I wouldnt doubt it a bit
614121
Plastics last forever.  They are not biodegradable.
835421
I have found 1100 Kcal/Kg.\n\nBut I am looking for a better answer.\nFor people who had no idea about what we were speaking about:\nIts not about eating but energy valorisation.....\n\nWouldn't you be american guys?\nFor you and just for you: No, plastic is not very very good for environment and it takes a little time to be digested (400 years most of the time....)\nI am sure you don't care about it but it may help to change your mind (before it was too late).
169049
In a way, yes. \n\nZinc, as a metal, is actually one of the components of a dry cell/battery, along with lead (and, well...batteries are global sources of energy...in one sense). This supports the fact itself that all metals are potential energy providers...^_^\n\nZinc, as a mineral, is also taken by the body as, again, one of the components on milk and vitamins (you noticed commercials saying milk and vitamins contain Zinc? ^_^). These minerals do help in providing the body with optimum energy. The bodies of the people contributing to the "globalness" of our planet made Zinc a contributing factor in global energy... ^_^\n\nSo, either a mineral or a metal, Zinc has a contribution to global energy. Thank you. ^_^
728525
Margarine is artificial imitation butter, and contains artificial flavourings, or, in some of the best, some real dairy ingredients to simulate the taste. If you can't tell it from the real thing, then they have got the simulation right, so they will boast about it in their ads. Even if it tastes right, it is still industrially reprocessed fish or vegetable oil dyed yellow, and people who care what they put in their mouths might not want to bother with it.
1134842
a fat molecule triacylglycerol
385947
No that is not a stupid question because I didn't either until I looked it up check this out for your self\n\nBoth have the same amount of calories. Butter is slightly higher in \nsaturated fats at 8 grams compared to 5 grams. Eating margarine can \nincrease heart disease in women by 53% over eating the same amount of butter according to a recent Harvard Medical Study. \n\nEating butter increases the absorption of many other nutrients in other foods. \n\nButter has many nutritional benefits where margarine has a few only \nbecause they are added! \n\nButter tastes much better than margarine and it can enhance the flavors of other foods. \n\nButter has been around for centuries where margarine has been around for less than 100 years. \n\nNow for Margarine... \n\nVery high in Trans Fatty Acids... \n\nTriple risk of Coronary Heart Disease... \n\nIncreases total cholesterol and LDL (this is the bad cholesterol) \n\nLowers HDL cholesterol, (the good cholesterol) .... \n\nIncreases the risk of cancers by up to five fold... \n\nLowers quality of breast milk ... \n\nDecreases immune response... \n\nDecreases insulin response. \n\nAnd here is the most disturbing fact .... HERE IS THE PART THAT IS VERY INTERESTING! \n\nMargarine is but ONE MOLECULE away from being PLASTIC...This fact alone was enough to have me avoiding margarine for life and anything else that is hydrogenated (this means hydrogen is added, changing the molecular structure of the substance).\n\nYOU can try this yourself: purchase a tub of margarine and leave it in your garage or shaded area. Within a couple of days you will note a couple of things: no flies, not even those pesky fruit flies will go near it (that should tell you something) ... it does not rot or smell differently ... because it has no nutritional value, nothing will grow on it...even those teeny weeny microorganisms will not a find a home to grow. Why? Because it is nearly plastic. Would you melt your Tupperware and spread that on your toast?
281141
Well that is a loaded question. But I will try and simplify it as much as possible. A polymer is a molecule or compound whose intrinsic shape allows it to attach to others like itself.  ( it gets deeper than this but I am trying to keep it simple) polymers are common both in nature (Gaba Bean) and syntetically.  As amatter of fact you probabbly have several polymers in your place of residence at this moment.\n\nNow for some meat, Most Plastics are by definition polymers. for example PVC Pipe or poly Vinyl chloride is nothing more than a continuois linking of thsame molecule.  On another note Gelatin is a polymer that puts the jiggle in jello. when this polymer is combined with water and subjected to temperature a polymerization reaction occurs which is nothng more than the gelatin bonding to itself forming a latice network that "coagulates" the water into the desire of all children.  Polymerization goes much deeper than this but I hope you get the point.  If you dont then try this illistration. humans are basically identicle in shape. gather as many of your friends together as possible an hold hands. you have now demontrated the basic idea of polymerization.  I appreciate your interest in knowledge. How can anyone expect to gain knowledge if they never ask.
388804
Unfortunately both butter and margarine have their down sides..\n\nButter contains a lot of saturated fat which raises the bad cholesterol in your bloodstream.\n\nMargarine contains polyunsaturated fats, which are considered healthy fats. However.. when margarine is created it undergoes a hydrogenation process of fats. This turns some of the polyunsaturated fats in to saturated fats.\nAlso some of the polyunsaturated fat molecules are converted in to transfatty acids which also raise bad cholesterol in the bloodstream.\n\nAs an alternative you may consider using avocado as a spread. It contains lots of natural unsaturated fat which raises good scholesterol in the blood.\n\nOr you could drizzle some polyunsaturated oil over the bread like sunflower oil or fish oil.\n\nUnfortunately I don't like the alternatives and I just go with what I think is the lesser of the two evils.. margarine.\n\nHope I helped somehow.
743269
Yes.\nVSEPR was developed in 1957, while in 1940 Sidgwick and Powell reviewed the structures of molecules then known. They suggested that for molecules and ions that only contain single bonds, the approximate shape can be predicted from the number of the electron pairs in the outer or valence shell of the central atom. The outer shell contains one or more bond pairs of electrons but it may also contain unshared pairs of electrons (lone pairs). Bond pairs and lone pairs were taken as equivalent, since all electron pairs take up some space, and since all electron pairs repel each other. Repulsion is minimized if the electron pairs are orientated in space as far apart as possible.\n1. If there are two pairs of electrons in the valence shell of the central atom, hte orbital containing them will be oriented at 180<sup>o</sup> to each other. It follows that if these orbitals overlap with orbitals from other atoms to form bonds, then the molecule formed will be linear.\n2. If there are three electron pairs on the central atom, they will be at 120<sup>o</sup>  to each other, giving a plane triangular structure.\n3. For four electron pairs the angle is 109<sup>o</sup> 28', and the shape is tetrahedral.\n4. For five pairs, the shape is a trigonal bipyramid\n5. For six pairs, the angles are 90<sup>o</sup>  and the shape is octahedral.\n\n\nVSEPR was developed extensively by Gillespie and  Nyholm who improved the Sidgwick-Powell theory to predict and explain molecular shapes and bond angles more exactly. Gillespie summarized his theory in 4 points:\n1. The shape of the molecule is determined by repulsions between all of the electron pairs present in the valence shell. (This is the same as the Sidgwick-Powell theory).\n2. A lone pair of electrons takes up more space round the central atom then a bond pair, since the lone pair is attracted to one nucleus whilst the bond pair is shared by two nuclei. It follows that repulsion between two lone pairs is greater than repulsion between a lone pair and a bond pair, which in turn is greater than the repulsion between two bond pairs. Thus the presence of lon pairs on the central atom causes slight distortion of the bond angles from the ideal shape. If the angle between a lone pair, the central atom and a bond pair is increased, it follows that the actual bond angles between the atom must be decreased.\n3. The magnitude of repulsions between bonding pairs of electrons depends on the electronegativity difference between the central atom and the other atoms.\n4. Double bonds cause more repulsion than single bonds, and triple bonds cause more repulsion than a double bond.
971405
Hi Danette.  This would be a false statement.  Examples of lipids that do not contain fatty acids include cholesterol and vitamin E.  Fatty acids are lipids, but not all lipids are fatty acids.
262646
Glycerine. It is the end product of fat degradation or digestion and hence has no energy content.
125676
a fairly lengthy description can be found at\n\nhttp://apps3.fao.org/jecfa/additive_specs/docs/0/additive-0465.htm
494533
No.  There are plenty - sugar is a good example - no dissociation, but nicely polar and highly soluble in water.
1100300
The thing is that a cis touble bond (the kind where the two carbons are on the same side of the bond) creates a sort of a kink in the carbon chain.  In saturated fats, there are no double bonds, so the carbon chain is more or less a straight line, but in unsaturated fats, the carbon chain is bent in one or more location.  The straight molecules of the saturated fat can pile up into stacks with all the molecules lined up parallel to each other.  Unsaturated fats, on the other hand, can't do this.  Think about a bendy straw.  In the box, they can be packed together into a tight solid, but as soon as you bend the part at the top they can't be packed together nearly as neatly or closely.\n\nSaturated fats are less healthy not because they can't be broken down as easily, but because they are better able to form a tightly packed solids, so they tend to have higher melting points, and are therefore more likely to form solid masses in your arteries and elsewhere.  Unsaturated fats tend to be liquids, so they don't clog things up as much.\n\nIncidentally, in trans fats, the carbon atoms around the double bond are arranged across from each other so that the carbon chain is straight, like in saturated fats, so they behave similarly to saturated fats, which is why they are so much worse for you than naturally occuring unsaturated fats.
370419
Mostly they use Isoproyle butane... not harmful to plastic.
957221
The naming is correct. But the molecule can't exist as described. The Chlor-atom must be attached to the methyl-particle, which is attached to the 3-chloro pentane molecule at the 3rd Carbon-atom.