Countering selective 'facts' and bias against Malaysian palm oil


Wong Ang Peng

Critics appear purposely blind to the facts on deforestation and the superiority of palm oil produced in the East over the vegetable oils of the West – The Malaysian Insight file pic, November 22, 2018.

RANG-TAN, the anti-palm oil video advert, has caused a storm in the West and the ripple is felt here in the East. The Rang-Tan Christmas advert by British supermarket chain, Iceland, has been banned for being too political. Yet, the turbulence created through social media has stirred more than five million views to date.

The one and only criticism towards palm oil in the video is widespread deforestation endangering the orangutan species. While it has some truth that the orangutan population decline in Malaysia especially in the low lying rainforest in Sabah and Sarawak has to do with habitat loss to plantations and El Niño forest fires, the rate of habitat loss has been at a low level due to efforts of natural forest management in recent years.

Malaysia’s protected rainforest is more than 54%, which is more than sufficient for a safe sanctuary to the more than 100,000-estimated population of Borneo orangutan today.

Criticism of Malaysia’s fast deforestation has been unfair and spiked with a hidden agenda. According to a World Bank report in 2018, Malaysia has 67.6% forest of the total land area. In contrast, UK 13%, France 31%, Germany 32.7%, Italy 31.6%, US 33.9%, and Canada 38.2% of their respective total land area.

Livestock and soy farming causes more deforestation than oil palm cultivation. Canola, soy and corn plants use much more pesticides and herbicides than oil palm. These are facts easily available in the public search engine domain.

The leading edible oils produced in the West are canola, soybean, corn, olive, sunflower and peanut oils. While olive, sunflower and peanut oils are non-GMO (genetically modified organism), canola, soy and corn oils are. Canola, or rapeseed plant, is one of the most heavily-used GM crops. These GM crops are genetically engineered to resist the Roundup herbicide. Glyphosate, which is a main chemical in Roundup, has been linked to disruption of sex hormones, infertility, miscarriages, neurological problems, and cancer.

Toxins from glyphosate and the pulps of GMO crops go into animal feed meals once the oil has been extracted, which potentially contaminates the meat, milk, cheese, and eggs. Environmentalists and activists against palm oil and in favour of western edible oils should take heed of these facts.

A study published in the Environmental Sciences Europe in 2016, the author Charles Benbrook stated that globally glyphosate use has risen almost 15-fold since the “Roundup Ready’“genetically engineered glyphosate-tolerant crops were introduced in 1996, of which two thirds was used in the US. Globally, genetically engineered herbicide-tolerant crops account for about 56% of glyphosate use. Activists against palm oil should not be blind to this fact, and of utmost importance is that oil palm is not a GM crop.

Canola, a genetic variation of rapeseed plant, was first created in Canada in the 1960s. It is rich in monounsaturated fat, while soybean and corn oils are rich in polyunsaturated fat. Low in saturated fat, these oils are promoted as beneficial and able to reduce risk of heart disease. Palm and coconut oils high in saturated fat are targeted as bad for health.

The scientific community has been wrong about the cause of heart attack with regards to fats and saturated fats, and the lipid theory of heart disease. Since the 1950s the hypothesis has shifted about every ten years from fats, to saturated fats, to LDL cholesterol, to oxidised cholesterol, to homocysteine and C-reactive protein. This imprecision and shifting uncertainty in the cause of heart attack, along with observations from the Framingham studies in the 1970s, resulted in managing risk factors for heart disease as treatment protocols today.

In 2015 the US and British governments lifted food with saturated fats like butter, eggs, meat, etc, from the ‘naughty food list’. In 2017, the British Royal Pharmaceutical Society pronounced the cholesterol theory of heart disease dead, reopening the debate for the cause of heart attack. Rath and Pauling in 1996 had proposed their unified theory for the cause of heart disease, hypothesising that deficiency of vitamin C was the root cause of the problem. For reasons that are obvious, and for business expediency, mainstream finds the alternative hypothesis too threatening to explore.

Canola and other oils with fats, although claimed to be healthy, have no support from any proper study. In fact, the Lauretti and Pratico study in 2017 published in the Journal of Scientific Reports associated consumption of canola oil with worsening memory, worsening learning ability and weight gain in an animal model study. Another study in 2014 by Marchese and colleagues found vitamin E in canola, soybean and corn oils associated with rising incidences of lung infection and asthma. However, vitamin E from olive and sunflower oils (both non-GMO) improves lungs functions.

Palm oil has the best source of vitamin E because it consists of tocotrienols and tocopeherols. Corn oil has small amount of tocotrienols while canola and soybean oils have none, but only tocopherols, making the quality of vitamin E in these oils of inferior quality. Incidentally, Malaysia’s vitamin E, extracted from palm oil, is the best in the world.

Proponents of the Rang-Tan palm oil-bashing video are blind to the facts on deforestation, biased towards the inferiority of western edible oils, and blind to the health benefits of palm oil. – November 22, 2018.

* Captain Dr Wong Ang Peng is a researcher with an interest in economics, politics, and health issues. He has a burning desire to do anything within his means to promote national harmony. Captain Wong is also a member of the National Patriots Association.

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.


Sign up or sign in here to comment.


Comments


  • This is a blatant ad in favour of palm oil. The piece mixes fact and fiction to cover for the destruction of the unique flora and fauna of Borneo and west Malaysias rainforest. Clearcast has stated publicly that they have no power to ban ads. The ad in question had previously been used in Greenpeace campaigns using their logo. Iceland asked Greenpeace to use their video as it supports Icelands company policy to eliminate oalm oil from all its products. The ad was shown without Greenpeaces logo, however, Clearcast stated the ad was recognised as that of Greenpeace. Greenpeace is a political organisation and therefore the ad contravened UK advertising laws which does not allow ads by political organisations other than party political broadcasts identified as such. The ad therefore contravened the rules governing ads. It is not banned.

    Posted 7 years ago by Malaysia New hope · Reply