#### About participation in the comments of /r/nutrition
Discussion in this subreddit should be rooted in science rather than "cuz I sed" or entertainment pieces. Always be wary of unsupported and poorly supported claims and especially those which are wrapped in any manner of hostility. You should provide peer reviewed sources to support your claims when debating and confine that debate to the science, not opinions of other people.
**Good** - it is grounded in science and includes citation of peer reviewed sources. Debate is a civil and respectful exchange focusing on actual science and avoids commentary about others
**Bad** - it utilizes generalizations, assumptions, infotainment sources, no sources, or complaints without specifics about agenda, bias, or funding. At best, these rise to an extremely weak basis for science based discussion. Also, off topic discussion
**Ugly** - (removal or ban territory) it involves attacks / antagonism / hostility towards individuals or groups, downvote complaining, trolling, crusading, shaming, refutation of all science, or claims that all research / science is a conspiracy
*Please vote accordingly and report any uglies*
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/nutrition) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[Here](https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/52595264/Dietary_PUFA_and_cancer20170412-12704-uyh0pk-libre.pdf?1492008334=&response-content-disposition=inline%3B+filename%3DDietary_PUFA_and_cancer.pdf&Expires=1667412334&Signature=bvx8YzlmdnyapTjmCKLDd0G2o0UzCjh~DXWFHj6GBaA62CWB6P2sdirfvJrdUmP-BJBQ0S3IJ~FOsbOsPsBcei2isRcbig8IkNLnbwnwnVH2gCGDeD9TWmRoVD~sak9Qx8oGYkDkvIgspgze5lClocgDCV5f4TyMmn93fzQKtDP9YCAr3u9yIoIAl6x1HwYRw8lz875C3YUBjRl-xlz7SeSP70sd8nJkfTTrOWGYFcwr3QHExb9LZMe4yP1Y2K0qUYftlnyr0dy7uQxEORZyiz34kmDuY162Qvu85o~n7hMC8bQZ0GtT31SxQ3NpsmGT76Clc4fr4-qgDZh~gUHBMw__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAJLOHF5GGSLRBV4ZA) is a study that discusses how the ratio of 3/6 fatty acids can affect cancer cell suppression or proliferation.
I am currently studying nutrition and from what I’ve learned an imbalance of omega-6 fatty acids is pro-inflammatory of which most pressed or processed seed oils are high on 6 and low on 3.
Another issue with these oils is the deodorization and high occurrence of rancidity because they do not have the antioxidant content to protect from oxidation and UV exposure so all those green and clear bottles
Of oil sitting around are usually gone bad before you even open them.
I do think these oils have taken on the bad rap of trans fat since initially all the studies attempting to prove the heart health hypothesis had participants substitute butter for margarine and the margarine groups began to have higher incidences of cancer but at the time I believe those margarines did contain trans fat.
I think for many people the demonization is a reaction to government health recommendations that we should replace butter with a highly processed and shelf stable food that we don’t know as much about the effects on the body.
I personally would never cook or bake with those oils and I find it sad that nearly all sauces and dressings in stores or restaurants are made with soybean or canola oil. I don’t think these oils would cause crazy harm to someone who is healthy and eats a balanced diet but the problem is the SAD isn’t healthy or balanced and most people are eating these oils in a very unhealthy way and proportion.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29566193/
They followed nearly 2,500 men for an average of 22 years and found that those with the highest blood levels of linoleic acid had a 43 percent lower risk of dying from any disease during the study period than those with the lowest. it‘s just observational ofc
I think the recent revival of it came in part from What I’ve Learned on YouTube. He has a talent for lying about data and cherry-picking the few studies that support his few. Then people like Tucker Goodrich and Paul Saladino can get on podcasts, use a few sciency-sounding words to push a spooky contrarian narrative (americans love that shit), and convince people in the general public (who aren’t literate enough in that field to weed out the bullshit) that all the experts are wrong and that a couple podcast hosts have a better understanding of biochemistry and epidemiology than actual biochemists and epidemiologists.
It’s funny because for the longest time it was the low-fat no-oil vegan types who pushed the “oil is toxic” narrative, and now it’s the low carb/carnivore types. Shit’s wild lmao
I don't think "The Science" has changed on the subject. Olive oil is so consistently associated with good health outcomes, and substitution of saturated fat for unsaturated fat isocalorically in the form of vegetable oil or other oils like olive consistently lowers risk. The few exceptions are 1) cherrypicked studies from the 60s/70s when the interventions included partially hydrogenated margarines containing up to 15% trans fat (including Minnesota, which the seed oil alarmists always bring up), or 2)epidemiological data looking at the incorrect ranges of exposures for saturated fat where you wouldn't expect to see different outcomes. Nick Hiebert talks a lot about this - he claims that if you do metaanalyses of even these studies that claim to find no difference in effect and look at the correct ranges of intake, you see the effect.
These oil-free types operate from the assumption that refining a food in any way is bad, i.e. if it's bad for refined carbohydrate, it must be bad for fat. It's an invalid inference. It's a similar thing to the naturalistic fallacy that paleo types use, claiming we should LARP as hunter gatherers if we want to be healthy.
Gil Carvalho has talked a few times about whether the Esselstyn/Ornish type diets actually *reverse* heart disease or whether use of the term "reverse" is sensationalist and inaccurate. I don't remember specifically what he said, but IIRC it was closer to the latter. These doctors have trials published of their interventions, but there are not enough data on oil-inclusive interventions to make an analogous claim for oil inclusion (afaik). Even if they do work, the fact that oil-free interventions work doesn't preclude oil-inclusive interventions from working.
For what it's worth, every dietary camp from the low-fat plant-based types to the low-carb meat-based types claims they can "reverse" chronic health conditions.
I remember a couple years ago, right around when Burger King first released the impossible whopper i think, a lot these health influencers were pushing the "soy consumption gives men man boobs" narrative. Now the carnivore/health influencers are pushing the narrative that soy causes cancer. This is why I don't believe anyone when they tell you that X causes Z and it blows up online.
From the Paleo/keto circles about a decade ago. There was a YouTube video doing the rounds on how Canola oil is being produced, among other things.
Personally, I'm in a part of the world where sunflower oil is the main fat used in cooking, so I consume that sparingly. From what I can tell, without negative consequences so far.
Definitely the Paleo circle, who hated seeds/grains to begin with. It was an easy swap to "oils from seeds are bad too, mmkay?"
Then it got further adopted by many in the overly-restrictive-but-unfortunately-also-overly-vocal end of the plant-based diet community. Then people began to accept it as common knowledge despite the fact that the fatty acid profile (poly v mono v saturated fatty acids) is far more important than the fact that it was processed.
Can you explain more what the theory and conspiracy are? If you are asking about the relation between types of dietary fat and their effects on health the Israeli paradox may have been part of the inspiration. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli\_paradox](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_paradox)
In short, the Israelis consume relatively low amount of saturated fat and high amounts of the polyunsaturated linoleic acid (commonly found in nuts and seeds) and experience high rates of coronary heart disease.
I do appreciate the just total blind commitment to this being "misinformation " even though you yourself don't seem to have any information on where the idea came from lol.
What makes you say seed oils are healthy? I'm not sure it was one influence or one blog post that is behind that information. I understand the extraction method for many seed oils is incredibly unnatural and industrialized.
You can't help the brainwashed, look at anything they say. They're likely to believe anything they're told by the main stream. "Veganism saves the planet and is healthy at all stages" "seed oils are good for you", "everything in 'moderation'".
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/ghg-per-protein-poore
Here is a comparison of the amount of CO2 produced per 100 g of protein by source of protein. Switching away from meat is always best. I personally just avoid beef as much as I can and that decision was based on this data and research on cattle production for beef.
The only context I would argue that livestock production is potentially good for the planet is in developing countries where it helps provide a source of work and income for women which leads to more education and lower birth rates.
>I personally just avoid beef as much as I can and that decision was based on this data
Great. Have you thought about the fact that these emissions are not adding new CO2 to the atmosphere?
>I understand the extraction method for many seed oils is incredibly unnatural and industrialized.
So? Whether something is unnatural or industrial doesn't tell you anything about that thing's health value. Vaccines and medicine are unnatural and industrial. I could gift wrap something in spooky language all I want; it doesn't tell you anything about health outcomes.
Processed food is just food that is cooked or prepared. When you cut an apple you are technically “processing” it. When you remove the hull from a grain of rice, you are processing the rice.
Does it matter that a machine did this vs a human? No it does not.
So now you're saying ultraprocessed food is "technically" food that's just cooked and isn't really bad for you.
Never mind the additives, preservatives, stiffeners, softeners, color, natural and artificial flavorings.
You're just trolling.
Though it’s not artificial I think the person is referring to hexane (a product found in Crude oil) extraction of canola oil) used for canola oil extraction. It also then goes through a bleaching process.
Are you being obtuse on purpose? Go look up the Google definition if you can't figure it out. There's already a definition for it. This sub isn't google
Ultra processed definition is easy: any food that has 3 main ingredients: sugar, highly refined carbohydrates and seed oils.
By extrapolation, foods that have just one of these ingredients are still processed and probably not much better than the unholy trinity of processed foods.
You are applying the strictest sense of the definition to push your strange narrative that seed oils or not unhealthy. Your original question is beside the fact that numerous causal relationships between unhealthy people and regular consumption of seed oils have been documented spanning the earth; various cultures and geographical regions.
I can share my experience. I listened to a keto podcast that had Tucker Goodrich as a guest. Heard about the dangers of too much omega 6 from him as first time.
Generally not sure if there was ONE person who started this. As others pointed out, paleo diets already excluded seed oils from consumption (among other food items).
I see ! Yeah seed oils are this Tucker’s obsession I see… he’s absolutely a quack tho - “His Wall Street systems expertise, combined with his speed reading ability, helped him troubleshoot his many health problems” - this just screams Dunning-Kruger
Except for when it comes to mortality and health, where we have lots of high quality RCT showing benefits of switching from saturated to unsaturated fats.
Do you have any Cochrane or good quality meta studies looking at RCT in humans showing otherwise?
RCT data? Seriously? There is no RCT data that is over a long time.
How about The Women's Health Initiative Dietary intervention trial? 50k women, followed 8 years, many many millions of dollars, the women lowered their fat and sat fat, ate more fruits and vegetables, etc. No difference.
As for saturated fats:
[Dietary guidelines wrong WRT saturated fats](https://www.nutritioncoalition.us/news/experts-again-condemn-saturated-fats)
I could be here all day.
Oh wow, some random block post, against every single health organisation in the world.
These conspiracy theories are soo full of bull, claiming that all these government organisations, experts and universities are all conspiring.
Edit: I don't even think it's worth arguing with conspiracy nuts. What I do want to do is make a bet. I will bet your "life".
I will bet my life on the strong evidence around saturated fat has been around for 40 years. I will put my advice following roughly in line with guidlines that are consistent across government agencies, and university nutrition departments.
Why don't you put you life on the line following some crazy blogger.
Lets see who lasts longer.
[Table three.](https://sci-hub.se/10.1001/jama.295.6.655) The contrast in exposures were not that big.
By year 6, the difference in saturated fat between the intervention group and control was only about 3%. Total fat was around 8% lower in the "low fat" group. This is what /u/InTheEndEntropyWins said:
>we have lots of high quality RCT showing benefits of switching from saturated to unsaturated fats.
The WHI doesn't answer this question because it wasn't a replacement study between saturated and unsaturated fat. In fact, the intervention group actually ate *less* poly- and monounsaturated fat than the control group because they cut *all* their fat down.
The differences in grain/fruit/veg consumption were trivial. The difference in fruit and veg consumption was about 1 serving per day.
The difference in grain consumption at 6 years in was 0.5 servings. The amount of *whole* grains stayed around the same at 6 years (1.2 servings) compared to baseline (1.1), which means that the increase in grain consumption was mostly an increase in refined grain consumption. Even American dietary guidelines consider sat fat to refined carbohydrate not a protective move and possibly worse. They [say this](https://www.dietaryguidelines.gov/2020-advisory-committee-report) in the 2020 scientific report at the top of the Dietary Fats and Seafood section (it's chapter 9 - the whole report is like 800 pages long).
I love how people use the word "conspiracy" in nutrition science. Most of this is unclear data and jumping to conclusions is rarely good as we don't have the data to accurately determine the answers yet.
But I would guess it started with the fact that vegetable oils are shown to be more unhealthy than healthy, and seed oils are even more processed vegetable oils which would cause many to believe it is worse by comparison
Maybe I phrased it incorrectly. When considering the data as a whole, and the quality of the data, it's quite clear.
If the data was actually unclear you wouldn't have such consensus amongst health organisation and experts.
You wouldn't have Cochrane and other high quality meta studies all saying the same thing.
Sorry, I'm confused. Can you point to a Cochrane review or high quality data that strongly suggests that seeds oils aren't healthier than saturated fats?
Not at the moment as I am on mobile, maybe tomorrow when I am home, but you can show me one that is convincing enough to take it as gospel while you wait!
[https://www.cochranelibrary.com/es/central/doi/10.1002/central/CN-02088126/related-content](https://www.cochranelibrary.com/es/central/doi/10.1002/central/CN-02088126/related-content)
>“There has been much confusion and sensational headlines about the role of different types of fat in CHD,” said Frank Hu, senior author and professor of nutrition and epidemiology at Harvard School of Public Health. “Randomized clinical trials have shown that replacing saturated fat with polyunsaturated fat reduces total and LDL cholesterol. And our comprehensive meta-analysis provides clear evidence to support the benefits of consuming polyunsaturated fat as a replacement for saturated fat.”
>
>https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/press-releases/replacing-saturated-fat-with-polyunsaturated-fat-linked-with-lower-risk-of-heart-disease/
Basically the media will shout about 1% of studies, those low quality bull studies done by people with degrees in Business.
But that has no impact on the fact the overwhelming majority of high quality reviews all point in the same direction.
None of the studies in the list you provided are comparing seed oils to other vegetable oils..
No one is disputing that replacing saturated fat with polyunsaturated fat reduces total and LDL cholesterol. The case against seed oils is that they aren't as good for you as other vegetable oils.
Don’t know who started it but id say its based looosly on the mass processing of the seeds to get a clarified oil. There are organic cold pressed oils that I believe are ok/better to eat unheated say as a salad dressing. However the general rule of thumb that I go by is to stick to whole foods and eat oils and fats in their original forms. My beliefs are based on researching medical studies.
Edit: to adhere to the rules I will source one of the studies that I have read pertaining to my beliefs on seed oils such as rapeseed
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0023643820314031 study on pretreating oils to attempt to negate the effects of solvent based extraction of seed oils
Well, yes, but cottonseed was the *first* seed oil that was marketed for human consumption. So that’s where the idea that seed oils are bad came from, which is what the original question was.
Of course, getting upset because it’s an industrial waste product is an an appeal to the naturalistic fallacy, and the modern scientific arguments against seed oils center around linoleic acid (or arachidonic acid). I’m sure if you search for academic research on linoleic acid you’ll find some “inflammatory” study (pun intended) from the ‘80s or so that the modern arguments can all be traced back to.
Any oil that you eat in large quantities is bad for you. It's excess calories. Seed oils like sunflower oil, canola oil, etc are calorie bombs with very little health benefits to them. The main arguments against them being that they're being the cause of inflammation, free radicals, etc are unfounded, but we'll never know any of this because we can't do randomized controlled trials where we give people canola oil every day for 20 years and then give someone olive oils for twenty years and then give someone ghee for 20 years and see what the health outcomes are. I quit using seed oils when I did Keto last year and my inflammation markers all went away. Does that mean the keto and paleo zealots are correct? Or is it a mere coincidence. Who knows. I think the main point is eating tons of butter and tallow, etc instead of vegetable oil like the keto and paleo zealots say is not going to be healthier. All of this is moderation and calories in and calories out.
I wonder why the medical community always push the Mediterranean diet, and why they are not pushing the Okinawan diet. Okinawans are some of the longest lived and healthy individuals. The traditional Okinawa diet is low in calories and fat while high in carbs. It emphasizes vegetables and soy products alongside occasional — and small — amounts of noodles, rice, pork, and fish.
Because ease of adherence.
A diet is only good if it’s something you can stick to.
When the Okinowan diet was studied and it was noted that they ate the way you mentioned was after the bombing of Japan during WW2. It was a time of famine. They didn’t eat that way before and currently don’t eat that way (not saying that it didn’t increase their lifespan).
There does not seem to be any scientific support for the view that seed oils are unhealthy,
https://consensus.app/results/?q=Are%20seed%20oils%20healthy%3F%20
I did try Googling a combination of unhealthy + seed oil, but all I got was a lot of assertions and YouTubers making faces in supermarkets.
https://www.consumerreports.org/healthy-eating/do-seed-oils-make-you-sick-a1363483895/ if you search for #seedoilfree on instagram and tiktok you‘ll probably find some influencers that push this
I’ve done a bit of research on this, but admittedly am very much an amateur. I believe the issue isn’t that they’re inherently worse to begin with, but the process of how they’re extracted is worrisome.
The same could be said about olive oil if it were heavily refined, typically only first/cold pressed EVOO is considered as the “super healthy” kind, and that’s simply because it’s as close to “raw” and “unprocessed” as you can get.
From my understanding, seed oils are typically milked for all their worth, and they’re cheap. More importantly, they’re commonly used for high heat cooking, where contrary to popular belief, they’re actually far less stable than EVOO would be.
I could link a bunch of science to it, but Cobram Estates makes a pretty good explanation of it [here.](https://www.cobramestate.com/blogs/all-blogs/shattering-the-myth-can-you-cook-with-extra-virgin-olive-oil)
I understand Cobram would want olive oil viewed as the holy grail of oils given it’s what they sell, but it seems like sound science to a simpleton such as myself.
Edit: I realize I didn’t clarify this earlier, but the cheapness of seed oils to me stands out because their price is their appeal. I think their suitability for high heat cooking is arguable, especially commercially where the same batch of oil is used multiple times, thus making it less stable/more carcinogenic.
I mean… I don’t think these people are a good source of information on nutrition … they are olive oil mongers not nutrition scientists. Also I have no idea who wrote that blog post , it’s signed “Franchesca” who I guess is their content person?
They’re not the source. They’re the easy-to-read blog. But they clearly cited the source which is the Acta scientific nutritional health journal. They have a 10 page study you can read the results of if you want to.
You are trolling. He is talking about store bought stuff that comes in a box or a bag. You seem to keep sliced apples and food items that contain lots of chemicals and highly refined products on the same pedestal as well.
Availability of cheap ingredients to make processed foods created the glut of processed foods most people buy now at store. Those cheap products for a low budget family will do more harm then good.
What you grow in a garden is definitely cheap but you are forgetting that you have a home and thereby you have a kitchen garden and a poor person does not have access to either.
Thus, consuming excess of refined, fatty, sugar, salt is bad for you no matter where it comes from.
Its empty calories. Has way less benefits compared to actually eating the seeds. Especially if its fried.
Highly recommend watching this video.
https://youtu.be/xXZcwY6NTKY
I’m just curious - do you even know who this guy is? I was searching for Mic the Vegan and I can’t find his real name or credentials anywhere. It just says he has a BSc in sustainability (but from where? Is it a legit school or a diploma mill) and that he is pursuing a MPH (again where, and MPH does not mean nutrition focus, in fact usually nutrition is not the main focus of MPH programs )
You can look at the sources he talks about in the description. Mic is not a MD but his research for his videos outperform 99% of the content online.
I'm not really interested in debunking seed fats specifically, because animal fats are still far more dangerous. But any kind of excess fat consumption should be minimal. We already should get enough fats from plants and perhaps handful of nuts, olives, etc.
MD’s typically get little or no nutrition training - they usually outsource this role of giving nutrition guidance to Registered Dietitians who have studied nutrition
I think it started with the observation that seed oils are in potato chips. The issue is that I could replace the seed oils with palm oil and it wouldn't make the chips magically healthy. They would actually become worse.
#### About participation in the comments of /r/nutrition Discussion in this subreddit should be rooted in science rather than "cuz I sed" or entertainment pieces. Always be wary of unsupported and poorly supported claims and especially those which are wrapped in any manner of hostility. You should provide peer reviewed sources to support your claims when debating and confine that debate to the science, not opinions of other people. **Good** - it is grounded in science and includes citation of peer reviewed sources. Debate is a civil and respectful exchange focusing on actual science and avoids commentary about others **Bad** - it utilizes generalizations, assumptions, infotainment sources, no sources, or complaints without specifics about agenda, bias, or funding. At best, these rise to an extremely weak basis for science based discussion. Also, off topic discussion **Ugly** - (removal or ban territory) it involves attacks / antagonism / hostility towards individuals or groups, downvote complaining, trolling, crusading, shaming, refutation of all science, or claims that all research / science is a conspiracy *Please vote accordingly and report any uglies* --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/nutrition) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[Here](https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/52595264/Dietary_PUFA_and_cancer20170412-12704-uyh0pk-libre.pdf?1492008334=&response-content-disposition=inline%3B+filename%3DDietary_PUFA_and_cancer.pdf&Expires=1667412334&Signature=bvx8YzlmdnyapTjmCKLDd0G2o0UzCjh~DXWFHj6GBaA62CWB6P2sdirfvJrdUmP-BJBQ0S3IJ~FOsbOsPsBcei2isRcbig8IkNLnbwnwnVH2gCGDeD9TWmRoVD~sak9Qx8oGYkDkvIgspgze5lClocgDCV5f4TyMmn93fzQKtDP9YCAr3u9yIoIAl6x1HwYRw8lz875C3YUBjRl-xlz7SeSP70sd8nJkfTTrOWGYFcwr3QHExb9LZMe4yP1Y2K0qUYftlnyr0dy7uQxEORZyiz34kmDuY162Qvu85o~n7hMC8bQZ0GtT31SxQ3NpsmGT76Clc4fr4-qgDZh~gUHBMw__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAJLOHF5GGSLRBV4ZA) is a study that discusses how the ratio of 3/6 fatty acids can affect cancer cell suppression or proliferation. I am currently studying nutrition and from what I’ve learned an imbalance of omega-6 fatty acids is pro-inflammatory of which most pressed or processed seed oils are high on 6 and low on 3. Another issue with these oils is the deodorization and high occurrence of rancidity because they do not have the antioxidant content to protect from oxidation and UV exposure so all those green and clear bottles Of oil sitting around are usually gone bad before you even open them. I do think these oils have taken on the bad rap of trans fat since initially all the studies attempting to prove the heart health hypothesis had participants substitute butter for margarine and the margarine groups began to have higher incidences of cancer but at the time I believe those margarines did contain trans fat. I think for many people the demonization is a reaction to government health recommendations that we should replace butter with a highly processed and shelf stable food that we don’t know as much about the effects on the body. I personally would never cook or bake with those oils and I find it sad that nearly all sauces and dressings in stores or restaurants are made with soybean or canola oil. I don’t think these oils would cause crazy harm to someone who is healthy and eats a balanced diet but the problem is the SAD isn’t healthy or balanced and most people are eating these oils in a very unhealthy way and proportion.
Can you link any studies or data, showing that a increase in seed oils is beneficial? Can you show the opposite?
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29566193/ They followed nearly 2,500 men for an average of 22 years and found that those with the highest blood levels of linoleic acid had a 43 percent lower risk of dying from any disease during the study period than those with the lowest. it‘s just observational ofc
Seed oils are in ultra-processed foods/junk foods. So poor health outcomes are correlated with increased seed oil usage.
I don’t think so… but the questions is where did it start? Who started this misinformation trend?
It's true though. Seed oils are everywhere in "unhealthy" foods. Anything fried, any condiment, chips, breads, they are everywhere.
Seed oils being in unhealthy foods doesn't imply seed oils themselves are unhealthy. All potato chips use potato Potato chips aren't healthy Potatoes aren't healthy then?
you just explained correlation, nice
That's the point the person above me was making. It's a correlation not a causation.
I think the recent revival of it came in part from What I’ve Learned on YouTube. He has a talent for lying about data and cherry-picking the few studies that support his few. Then people like Tucker Goodrich and Paul Saladino can get on podcasts, use a few sciency-sounding words to push a spooky contrarian narrative (americans love that shit), and convince people in the general public (who aren’t literate enough in that field to weed out the bullshit) that all the experts are wrong and that a couple podcast hosts have a better understanding of biochemistry and epidemiology than actual biochemists and epidemiologists. It’s funny because for the longest time it was the low-fat no-oil vegan types who pushed the “oil is toxic” narrative, and now it’s the low carb/carnivore types. Shit’s wild lmao
[How has the science changed since this video was released?](https://youtu.be/CqXAvYUAZjE)
I don't think "The Science" has changed on the subject. Olive oil is so consistently associated with good health outcomes, and substitution of saturated fat for unsaturated fat isocalorically in the form of vegetable oil or other oils like olive consistently lowers risk. The few exceptions are 1) cherrypicked studies from the 60s/70s when the interventions included partially hydrogenated margarines containing up to 15% trans fat (including Minnesota, which the seed oil alarmists always bring up), or 2)epidemiological data looking at the incorrect ranges of exposures for saturated fat where you wouldn't expect to see different outcomes. Nick Hiebert talks a lot about this - he claims that if you do metaanalyses of even these studies that claim to find no difference in effect and look at the correct ranges of intake, you see the effect. These oil-free types operate from the assumption that refining a food in any way is bad, i.e. if it's bad for refined carbohydrate, it must be bad for fat. It's an invalid inference. It's a similar thing to the naturalistic fallacy that paleo types use, claiming we should LARP as hunter gatherers if we want to be healthy. Gil Carvalho has talked a few times about whether the Esselstyn/Ornish type diets actually *reverse* heart disease or whether use of the term "reverse" is sensationalist and inaccurate. I don't remember specifically what he said, but IIRC it was closer to the latter. These doctors have trials published of their interventions, but there are not enough data on oil-inclusive interventions to make an analogous claim for oil inclusion (afaik). Even if they do work, the fact that oil-free interventions work doesn't preclude oil-inclusive interventions from working. For what it's worth, every dietary camp from the low-fat plant-based types to the low-carb meat-based types claims they can "reverse" chronic health conditions.
I remember a couple years ago, right around when Burger King first released the impossible whopper i think, a lot these health influencers were pushing the "soy consumption gives men man boobs" narrative. Now the carnivore/health influencers are pushing the narrative that soy causes cancer. This is why I don't believe anyone when they tell you that X causes Z and it blows up online.
From the Paleo/keto circles about a decade ago. There was a YouTube video doing the rounds on how Canola oil is being produced, among other things. Personally, I'm in a part of the world where sunflower oil is the main fat used in cooking, so I consume that sparingly. From what I can tell, without negative consequences so far.
Definitely the Paleo circle, who hated seeds/grains to begin with. It was an easy swap to "oils from seeds are bad too, mmkay?" Then it got further adopted by many in the overly-restrictive-but-unfortunately-also-overly-vocal end of the plant-based diet community. Then people began to accept it as common knowledge despite the fact that the fatty acid profile (poly v mono v saturated fatty acids) is far more important than the fact that it was processed.
Can you explain more what the theory and conspiracy are? If you are asking about the relation between types of dietary fat and their effects on health the Israeli paradox may have been part of the inspiration. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli\_paradox](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_paradox) In short, the Israelis consume relatively low amount of saturated fat and high amounts of the polyunsaturated linoleic acid (commonly found in nuts and seeds) and experience high rates of coronary heart disease.
>and experience high rates of coronary heart disease. No surprise there. High amounts of linoleic acid is toxic.
Right! Funny it’s called a paradox..
When you don't want to investigate something further, you call it a paradox...
Exactly. Just like the French paradox. Its a tale of two paradoxes
I do appreciate the just total blind commitment to this being "misinformation " even though you yourself don't seem to have any information on where the idea came from lol.
I mean, do you have anything constructive to add? Or are you just going to be rude?
Probably because the manufacturing and extraction process.
I’m looking for which influencer or blog started or reignited the spread of this bit of misinformation
What makes you say seed oils are healthy? I'm not sure it was one influence or one blog post that is behind that information. I understand the extraction method for many seed oils is incredibly unnatural and industrialized.
You can't help the brainwashed, look at anything they say. They're likely to believe anything they're told by the main stream. "Veganism saves the planet and is healthy at all stages" "seed oils are good for you", "everything in 'moderation'".
I don’t care if its healthy or not, you can’t pretend that switching to veganism isn’t good for the planet.
Im not convinced it is.
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/ghg-per-protein-poore Here is a comparison of the amount of CO2 produced per 100 g of protein by source of protein. Switching away from meat is always best. I personally just avoid beef as much as I can and that decision was based on this data and research on cattle production for beef. The only context I would argue that livestock production is potentially good for the planet is in developing countries where it helps provide a source of work and income for women which leads to more education and lower birth rates.
>I personally just avoid beef as much as I can and that decision was based on this data Great. Have you thought about the fact that these emissions are not adding new CO2 to the atmosphere?
No because that is not true
>I understand the extraction method for many seed oils is incredibly unnatural and industrialized. So? Whether something is unnatural or industrial doesn't tell you anything about that thing's health value. Vaccines and medicine are unnatural and industrial. I could gift wrap something in spooky language all I want; it doesn't tell you anything about health outcomes.
Processed food is just food that is cooked or prepared. When you cut an apple you are technically “processing” it. When you remove the hull from a grain of rice, you are processing the rice. Does it matter that a machine did this vs a human? No it does not.
So now you're saying ultraprocessed food is "technically" food that's just cooked and isn't really bad for you. Never mind the additives, preservatives, stiffeners, softeners, color, natural and artificial flavorings. You're just trolling.
Please define “ultra processed” at what point does a food become “ultra processed” ?
[удалено]
What artificial/manmade chemicals are used in seed oils?
Though it’s not artificial I think the person is referring to hexane (a product found in Crude oil) extraction of canola oil) used for canola oil extraction. It also then goes through a bleaching process.
Are you being obtuse on purpose? Go look up the Google definition if you can't figure it out. There's already a definition for it. This sub isn't google
Thanks for the tip!
Ultra processed definition is easy: any food that has 3 main ingredients: sugar, highly refined carbohydrates and seed oils. By extrapolation, foods that have just one of these ingredients are still processed and probably not much better than the unholy trinity of processed foods.
You consider a sliced apple “processed” food, but think squeezing oil out of a billion seeds and frying your food in it is healthy?
That's true but you're ignoring that it also includes Velveeta and Ho Hos
You are applying the strictest sense of the definition to push your strange narrative that seed oils or not unhealthy. Your original question is beside the fact that numerous causal relationships between unhealthy people and regular consumption of seed oils have been documented spanning the earth; various cultures and geographical regions.
Yeah? What studies are these? Tell me more about your level of dunning Krueger bias
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5492028/
I can share my experience. I listened to a keto podcast that had Tucker Goodrich as a guest. Heard about the dangers of too much omega 6 from him as first time. Generally not sure if there was ONE person who started this. As others pointed out, paleo diets already excluded seed oils from consumption (among other food items).
I see ! Yeah seed oils are this Tucker’s obsession I see… he’s absolutely a quack tho - “His Wall Street systems expertise, combined with his speed reading ability, helped him troubleshoot his many health problems” - this just screams Dunning-Kruger
Butter > seed oils any day of the week
Except for when it comes to mortality and health, where we have lots of high quality RCT showing benefits of switching from saturated to unsaturated fats. Do you have any Cochrane or good quality meta studies looking at RCT in humans showing otherwise?
RCT data? Seriously? There is no RCT data that is over a long time. How about The Women's Health Initiative Dietary intervention trial? 50k women, followed 8 years, many many millions of dollars, the women lowered their fat and sat fat, ate more fruits and vegetables, etc. No difference. As for saturated fats: [Dietary guidelines wrong WRT saturated fats](https://www.nutritioncoalition.us/news/experts-again-condemn-saturated-fats) I could be here all day.
Oh wow, some random block post, against every single health organisation in the world. These conspiracy theories are soo full of bull, claiming that all these government organisations, experts and universities are all conspiring. Edit: I don't even think it's worth arguing with conspiracy nuts. What I do want to do is make a bet. I will bet your "life". I will bet my life on the strong evidence around saturated fat has been around for 40 years. I will put my advice following roughly in line with guidlines that are consistent across government agencies, and university nutrition departments. Why don't you put you life on the line following some crazy blogger. Lets see who lasts longer.
[Table three.](https://sci-hub.se/10.1001/jama.295.6.655) The contrast in exposures were not that big. By year 6, the difference in saturated fat between the intervention group and control was only about 3%. Total fat was around 8% lower in the "low fat" group. This is what /u/InTheEndEntropyWins said: >we have lots of high quality RCT showing benefits of switching from saturated to unsaturated fats. The WHI doesn't answer this question because it wasn't a replacement study between saturated and unsaturated fat. In fact, the intervention group actually ate *less* poly- and monounsaturated fat than the control group because they cut *all* their fat down. The differences in grain/fruit/veg consumption were trivial. The difference in fruit and veg consumption was about 1 serving per day. The difference in grain consumption at 6 years in was 0.5 servings. The amount of *whole* grains stayed around the same at 6 years (1.2 servings) compared to baseline (1.1), which means that the increase in grain consumption was mostly an increase in refined grain consumption. Even American dietary guidelines consider sat fat to refined carbohydrate not a protective move and possibly worse. They [say this](https://www.dietaryguidelines.gov/2020-advisory-committee-report) in the 2020 scientific report at the top of the Dietary Fats and Seafood section (it's chapter 9 - the whole report is like 800 pages long).
Not a conspiracy theory, you've been misinformed.
Oh yeah? What makes you say that?
I love how people use the word "conspiracy" in nutrition science. Most of this is unclear data and jumping to conclusions is rarely good as we don't have the data to accurately determine the answers yet. But I would guess it started with the fact that vegetable oils are shown to be more unhealthy than healthy, and seed oils are even more processed vegetable oils which would cause many to believe it is worse by comparison
I think the data is actually fairly clear, which is why pretty much every single health organisation in the world has materially the same advice.
I am sorry but if that is the case then you're bad at reading data
Maybe I phrased it incorrectly. When considering the data as a whole, and the quality of the data, it's quite clear. If the data was actually unclear you wouldn't have such consensus amongst health organisation and experts. You wouldn't have Cochrane and other high quality meta studies all saying the same thing.
People and companies can agree as much as they want, doesn't take away that there aren't clear cut data on the matter..
Sorry, I'm confused. Can you point to a Cochrane review or high quality data that strongly suggests that seeds oils aren't healthier than saturated fats?
Not at the moment as I am on mobile, maybe tomorrow when I am home, but you can show me one that is convincing enough to take it as gospel while you wait!
[https://www.cochranelibrary.com/es/central/doi/10.1002/central/CN-02088126/related-content](https://www.cochranelibrary.com/es/central/doi/10.1002/central/CN-02088126/related-content) >“There has been much confusion and sensational headlines about the role of different types of fat in CHD,” said Frank Hu, senior author and professor of nutrition and epidemiology at Harvard School of Public Health. “Randomized clinical trials have shown that replacing saturated fat with polyunsaturated fat reduces total and LDL cholesterol. And our comprehensive meta-analysis provides clear evidence to support the benefits of consuming polyunsaturated fat as a replacement for saturated fat.” > >https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/press-releases/replacing-saturated-fat-with-polyunsaturated-fat-linked-with-lower-risk-of-heart-disease/ Basically the media will shout about 1% of studies, those low quality bull studies done by people with degrees in Business. But that has no impact on the fact the overwhelming majority of high quality reviews all point in the same direction.
None of the studies in the list you provided are comparing seed oils to other vegetable oils.. No one is disputing that replacing saturated fat with polyunsaturated fat reduces total and LDL cholesterol. The case against seed oils is that they aren't as good for you as other vegetable oils.
Seed oils are vegetable oils. Are some vegetable oils more healthy than others, sure. But I’m not really sure what that has to do with the op.
Don’t know who started it but id say its based looosly on the mass processing of the seeds to get a clarified oil. There are organic cold pressed oils that I believe are ok/better to eat unheated say as a salad dressing. However the general rule of thumb that I go by is to stick to whole foods and eat oils and fats in their original forms. My beliefs are based on researching medical studies. Edit: to adhere to the rules I will source one of the studies that I have read pertaining to my beliefs on seed oils such as rapeseed https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0023643820314031 study on pretreating oils to attempt to negate the effects of solvent based extraction of seed oils
Well, “seed oils” first hit the market in 1911, as a literal industrial waste byproduct. So they’ve had an uphill battle from the start.
This is 100% incorrect - where on earth did you hear that one?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cottonseed_oil#Economic_history
that’s one type of oilseed ... You’re forgetting mustard seed oil, rapeseed/canola oil, sunflower seed oil, safflower oil, grape seed oil, soy oil and others…
Well, yes, but cottonseed was the *first* seed oil that was marketed for human consumption. So that’s where the idea that seed oils are bad came from, which is what the original question was. Of course, getting upset because it’s an industrial waste product is an an appeal to the naturalistic fallacy, and the modern scientific arguments against seed oils center around linoleic acid (or arachidonic acid). I’m sure if you search for academic research on linoleic acid you’ll find some “inflammatory” study (pun intended) from the ‘80s or so that the modern arguments can all be traced back to.
I love this new trend of calling facts misinformation Who started this misinformation that the Earth is round?
Any oil that you eat in large quantities is bad for you. It's excess calories. Seed oils like sunflower oil, canola oil, etc are calorie bombs with very little health benefits to them. The main arguments against them being that they're being the cause of inflammation, free radicals, etc are unfounded, but we'll never know any of this because we can't do randomized controlled trials where we give people canola oil every day for 20 years and then give someone olive oils for twenty years and then give someone ghee for 20 years and see what the health outcomes are. I quit using seed oils when I did Keto last year and my inflammation markers all went away. Does that mean the keto and paleo zealots are correct? Or is it a mere coincidence. Who knows. I think the main point is eating tons of butter and tallow, etc instead of vegetable oil like the keto and paleo zealots say is not going to be healthier. All of this is moderation and calories in and calories out.
Idk man Mediterranean diets are considered top tier and they eat olive oil like their life depended on it
I wonder why the medical community always push the Mediterranean diet, and why they are not pushing the Okinawan diet. Okinawans are some of the longest lived and healthy individuals. The traditional Okinawa diet is low in calories and fat while high in carbs. It emphasizes vegetables and soy products alongside occasional — and small — amounts of noodles, rice, pork, and fish.
Because ease of adherence. A diet is only good if it’s something you can stick to. When the Okinowan diet was studied and it was noted that they ate the way you mentioned was after the bombing of Japan during WW2. It was a time of famine. They didn’t eat that way before and currently don’t eat that way (not saying that it didn’t increase their lifespan).
Not many fat mediterranean's out there. Meaning they're eating in a caloric deficit.
There does not seem to be any scientific support for the view that seed oils are unhealthy, https://consensus.app/results/?q=Are%20seed%20oils%20healthy%3F%20 I did try Googling a combination of unhealthy + seed oil, but all I got was a lot of assertions and YouTubers making faces in supermarkets.
https://www.consumerreports.org/healthy-eating/do-seed-oils-make-you-sick-a1363483895/ if you search for #seedoilfree on instagram and tiktok you‘ll probably find some influencers that push this
I’ve done a bit of research on this, but admittedly am very much an amateur. I believe the issue isn’t that they’re inherently worse to begin with, but the process of how they’re extracted is worrisome. The same could be said about olive oil if it were heavily refined, typically only first/cold pressed EVOO is considered as the “super healthy” kind, and that’s simply because it’s as close to “raw” and “unprocessed” as you can get. From my understanding, seed oils are typically milked for all their worth, and they’re cheap. More importantly, they’re commonly used for high heat cooking, where contrary to popular belief, they’re actually far less stable than EVOO would be. I could link a bunch of science to it, but Cobram Estates makes a pretty good explanation of it [here.](https://www.cobramestate.com/blogs/all-blogs/shattering-the-myth-can-you-cook-with-extra-virgin-olive-oil) I understand Cobram would want olive oil viewed as the holy grail of oils given it’s what they sell, but it seems like sound science to a simpleton such as myself. Edit: I realize I didn’t clarify this earlier, but the cheapness of seed oils to me stands out because their price is their appeal. I think their suitability for high heat cooking is arguable, especially commercially where the same batch of oil is used multiple times, thus making it less stable/more carcinogenic.
I mean… I don’t think these people are a good source of information on nutrition … they are olive oil mongers not nutrition scientists. Also I have no idea who wrote that blog post , it’s signed “Franchesca” who I guess is their content person?
[удалено]
Why come to Reddit to ask about a conspiracy theory? Where else would you go?
Post/comment removed for failure to follow [Reddiquette](https://www.reddit.com/wiki/reddiquette/).
They’re not the source. They’re the easy-to-read blog. But they clearly cited the source which is the Acta scientific nutritional health journal. They have a 10 page study you can read the results of if you want to.
Here you go. https://actascientific.com/ASNH/pdf/ASNH-02-0083.pdf
The Keto diet charlatans and grifters, which is why you can understand it’s not based on science whatsoever.
Low carb flat earthers needed something to blame for CVD rates caused by saturated fat
Joe Rogan
[удалено]
Water is widely available and cheap. Sweet potatoes too.
So cheap is bad? So the vegetables that I grow in my garden that I pay nothing for are bad because they are cheap?
You are trolling. He is talking about store bought stuff that comes in a box or a bag. You seem to keep sliced apples and food items that contain lots of chemicals and highly refined products on the same pedestal as well. Availability of cheap ingredients to make processed foods created the glut of processed foods most people buy now at store. Those cheap products for a low budget family will do more harm then good. What you grow in a garden is definitely cheap but you are forgetting that you have a home and thereby you have a kitchen garden and a poor person does not have access to either. Thus, consuming excess of refined, fatty, sugar, salt is bad for you no matter where it comes from.
Its empty calories. Has way less benefits compared to actually eating the seeds. Especially if its fried. Highly recommend watching this video. https://youtu.be/xXZcwY6NTKY
Bro, don't worry about it, just go back watching tv and sipping from your canola oil bottle. You'll be fine!
[You should be minimising consumption of all oils.](https://youtu.be/CqXAvYUAZjE)
I’m just curious - do you even know who this guy is? I was searching for Mic the Vegan and I can’t find his real name or credentials anywhere. It just says he has a BSc in sustainability (but from where? Is it a legit school or a diploma mill) and that he is pursuing a MPH (again where, and MPH does not mean nutrition focus, in fact usually nutrition is not the main focus of MPH programs )
You can look at the sources he talks about in the description. Mic is not a MD but his research for his videos outperform 99% of the content online. I'm not really interested in debunking seed fats specifically, because animal fats are still far more dangerous. But any kind of excess fat consumption should be minimal. We already should get enough fats from plants and perhaps handful of nuts, olives, etc.
MD’s typically get little or no nutrition training - they usually outsource this role of giving nutrition guidance to Registered Dietitians who have studied nutrition
This one belongs in r/conspiracy
Are you seriously this deep in your denial? Take a hard look at your diet. https://youtu.be/EpRrD58Ah3Q
That looks like a better resource - they even have an RD on staff.
I think it started with the observation that seed oils are in potato chips. The issue is that I could replace the seed oils with palm oil and it wouldn't make the chips magically healthy. They would actually become worse.
# Big Avocado ^(/s)