I am extremely confused by this article.
Rancid oil of any kind is foul and disgusting. You'd gag if you tried to eat something made with it.
Yet this article says things like:
> Rancidity, for example, isn’t generally a sought after quality in edible products. And yet, when it comes to olive oil in the U.S., people like it. Why? Partly, because rancid olive oil is less bitter than the good stuff.
Is this article using some definition of "rancid" different from the rest of us?
I totally get that some people don't like really fruity flavorful spicy olive oil. They want something more neutral. And that's fine.
But nobody in their right mind is picking something rancid. Nor would a supermarket ever sell it.
So I can't tell if the author doesn't know what rancid actually means, or if there's some separate food science definition of rancid that is different from everyday use -- but that the article doesn't bother to acknowledge or explain.
Rancid oil of any kind is foul and disgusting. You'd gag if you tried to eat something made with it.
Yet this article says things like:
> Rancidity, for example, isn’t generally a sought after quality in edible products. And yet, when it comes to olive oil in the U.S., people like it. Why? Partly, because rancid olive oil is less bitter than the good stuff.
Is this article using some definition of "rancid" different from the rest of us?
I totally get that some people don't like really fruity flavorful spicy olive oil. They want something more neutral. And that's fine.
But nobody in their right mind is picking something rancid. Nor would a supermarket ever sell it.
So I can't tell if the author doesn't know what rancid actually means, or if there's some separate food science definition of rancid that is different from everyday use -- but that the article doesn't bother to acknowledge or explain.