why don’t we have a good choice in the nutritional lists for regular butter versus grass fed butter? Yes, there is choice for “Kiwi grass fed unsalted butter”, but it does not show omega 3/6 content, nor any micronutrients… the only entry that includes that seems to be just “butter/unsalted” which has like 76 nutrients (compared to 14 nutrients in the Kiwi entry)!? This seems highly unusual for a service that is supposed to be so concerned about omega 3 to 6 ratio, right?
Cronometer does not test foods, we purchase databases for you to use with Cronometer. Testing foods is an expensive and monumental task. There are tens of thousands of foods to test, stay current with and then you have foods that are being added. It is crazy to say the least.
We hear what you are saying, but we are all at the mercy of the data and what it includes. I would think that in the next few years omega 3’s and 6’s should be standard in testing for foods. They weren’t in the past and that is why you don’t see much on them. That holds true for “grass fed” “free range” and the likes.
I hope that gives you some insight on things.
The topic ‘Butter and omegas’ is closed to new replies.