Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 197
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once
98%
921
2 minutes
20
The nutritional benefits of Extra Virgin Olive Oils (EVOOs) depend on their chemical composition. Currently, there is no simple way to compare the health benefits of different EVOOs based on their fat profiles. Samples from Australia and four Mediterranean countries (N = 423) were analyzed using proton nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy to screen for six quality parameters (free acidity, peroxides, K270, K232, Delta K, wax) and to measure fat compositions. These fat compositions were compared against healthy eating guidelines to produce five binary descriptors, which were weighted by evidence to create an accessible Fatty Acid based Nutrition Index (FNI). EVOOs were differentiated by saturated fat and balance between monounsaturated (MUFA) and polyunsaturated fat (PUFA). Most samples (56.4 %) showed poor SFA, poor PUFA and good MUFA (NI = 56), 21 % had good SFA, poor PUFA and good MUFA (NI = 81), and 19.4 % exhibited poor SFA, good PUFA and poor MUFA (NI = 64). The FNI identifies EVOOs with superior nutritional value, enabling informed consumer choices.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2025.144241 | DOI Listing |