According to the nutrition database (http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/fats-and-oils/7186/2 vs http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/pork-products/7358/2) and/or cronometer.com there's a pretty significant difference between the two. The weird thing is that nutritiondata and cronometer both say very different things, too.
Any idea what the real difference is nutritionally?
What's the difference in preparation?
Maybe I don't really understand the "rendering" process because I could swear my bacon this morning "rendered" a bunch of delicious fat... Does the true rendering process destroy a bunch of vitamin D?
asked byMethodician (624)
Get FREE instant access to our Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!
on December 17, 2013
at 05:32 PM
I believe that traditional rendering of pork would include other parts of the animal, therefore you would be getting more than just fat (Jimmy Hoffa parts). This is for a commercially prepared product. If you are just taking bacon drippings it is almost all fat.