156 OLEOMAKGARINE. 



baked for a day or so. It produces violent illness, and it is simply out 

 of the question, although it has been tried numerous times. She can 

 not do that, but she can eat that very same bread taken and sliced into 

 thin slices and put in an oven at a low temperature of heat; that is, a 

 temperature too low to permit the change of starchy dextrine, which, 

 of course would promote digestion, but a simple drying out. That 

 she can eat in any quantity to satisfy her hunger and with perfect 

 comfort. 



A chemist will say that there is no difference between those two 

 substances, in an analytical point of view, except the loss of water. 

 There has been no chemical change, because the amount of heat sup- 

 plied was not sufficient to bring about a chemical change. He will 

 say that they are identical, and yet the effects that are produced upon 

 the same system are altogether opposite. To assert that substances 

 that are analyzed and shown in an analytical sense to be of similar 

 composition in fact, but which vary in other minor matters that to us 

 seem to be infinitesimal almost, yet which have a very important effect 

 upon the physiological organs and upon digestion, is to assert, as I 

 say, something that is not based upon reliable information. So that 

 it does not follow that because the things have the same amount of 

 heat-producing power and nourishment-producing power therefore 

 they are equally beneficial to health. 



I want to call attention to Professor Atwater's statement with regard 

 to that, if you will permit me. 



The CHAIRMAN. These hearings, I may say, are sandwiched in ahead 

 of the oleo people, and it was promised that they should be very short, 

 about fifteen minutes each. You have occupied nearly twenty-five min- 

 utes, but you have been interrupted somewhat and I do not want to 

 cut you off. 



Mr. HAMILTON. I will not refer, then, to these matters. I did want 

 to refer to them in substantiation of the position I have taken. 



Senator HANSBROUGH. 1 suggest that you put the statements you 

 desire in the record. 



Mr. HAMILTON. I will do so. I desire to refer to the article on the 

 u Digestibility of food," a statement by Prof. R. H. Chittenden, in 

 Bulletin No. 21 of the Department of Agriculture, page 72, and also 

 to a statement by Dr. W. O. Atwater in the same bulletin, on page 53. 



The statement of Professor Chittenden is as follows: 



"As to the reasons for the differences of digestibility but compara- 

 tively little is definitely known. There are, however, certain a priori 

 considerations which help toward explaining them. For example, the 

 digestibility of the proteids is discussed by Prof. R. H. Chittenden as 

 follows: 



" 'If of two foods possessing a like composition one be more easily 

 digestible, that one, though containing no more available nutriment 

 than the other, is in virtue of its easier digestibility more valuable as a 

 food stuff, and in one sense more nutritious, as well as more econom- 

 ical for the system."' 



Dr. Atwaters's statement is as follows: 



"The value of food for nutriment depends not only upon how much 

 of nutrients it contains, but also upon how much of these the body can 

 digest and use for its support. 



"The question of the digestibility of foods is very complex, and it is 

 noticeable that the men who know most about the subject are generally 



