Not black/liquid gold. Cooking oil.

Cooking oil is essentially one of the major factors in poor diets. It's wretchedly bad for the body in high quantities. However, what if it wasn't?

About a decade ago, an oil substitute was invented. It had the same characteristics as cooking--even it's mouth feel--and it seemed like a good idea. What made it healthier? This pseudo-oil had a special molecular arrangement that made it unrecognizable by intestinal proteins as digestible. So you could have fried anything, and the oil would not be processed yet the flavor would be the same. However, this caused gastronomic discomfort in the intestines. Sometimes even severe discomfort. After all, it is an indigestible substance. Practically a greasy, liquid fiber.

So what if there was a way to produce a product of the same concept that actually didn't cause discomfort? One idea is making it partially digestible. That was reduce the discomfort a lot, but the problem would still be what to use that'd be digestible.

Any thoughts?

Oh it's possible. With more experimentation an even better substitute could be made.

I meant more so on thoughts of a possible substitute. More specifically it's composition.

But I agree with you.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't there olive oil? I'm not much of a cook, so I wouldn't really know, but I've often heard it referred to as a healthy alternative.

Aragorn said
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't there olive oil? I'm not much of a cook, so I wouldn't really know, but I've often heard it referred to as a healthy alternative.

Olive oil is cooking oil. Cooking oil essentially covers any oil used to cook with. By substitutes, it's for chemically engineered alternatives that act similar to oil and the failed substitute, but are successful.

If it's not digestible, it's going out the way it came in.

If it's partially digestible, we're still having issues with "bad" stuff being consumed/expelled.

The problem isn't cooking oil itself, the problem is the scale of its use/consumption.