Everybody just stop reposting that unsourced NY Times GIF-set about adulterated olive oil.

[snarp]

Stop it. Stop. The New York Times is not somebody's Tumblr, they don't get to get away with unsourced-GIF-set-based reporting.

I'm pretty sure the original source for their "69% of extra-virgin olive oil is adulterated" is this single 2010 study from UC Davis, which did not cover the entire country. I'm also pretty sure that the NYT doesn't know that this was the original source. Because there was a 2011 follow-up that gave even more alarmist numbers, which they (and everyone else writing panicked articles about olive oil) would doubtless prefer.

Also, apparently it is a Bad Thing that some olive oil comes from countries other than Italy? (Do we trust Italy to behave itself all of a sudden, is it a bastion of consumer faith now, when did that happen.) That big study about the effectiveness of a Mediterranean diet in preventing heart disease - the one that is the reason a lot of people care so much about this in the first place - used only Spanish olive oil.

And I'm going to stop researching olive oil now because I need to go to bed and it is a stupid thing to be mad about.

Comments

[starlady]

I actually think Greek and Spanish olive oils are better than Italian ones in general, and I try to buy them on the theory that a good chunk of Italian EVOO is probably adulterated, because the Italisn name does command that aura.

[nicki]

Oh, I remember that study. It should be noted, though, that that study was paid for by the California Olive Oil growers groups so it's an industry study, really and olive oil is becoming both a big industry and a big artisan niche product industry out here. I'm not saying that Davis isn't doing good science, because it does, but it's possible the, er, reporting might be a bit exaggerated.

[snarp]

Ahaha. That's perfect.