The evidence is convergent. Multiple independent sources reach the same conclusion, the underlying mechanism is well-characterized, and even the field's most cautious voices treat it as worth doing.
on one of those white papers I also found a bunch of literature you guys had had noted on on seed oils or at least linoleic acid and age-related macular degeneration that case is very strong if people are not aware of the connections between seed oil consumption and the you know by proxy linolic acid and age-related macular degeneration or ophthalmologic eye problems that case is very strong and there's lots of evidence for that on the Zero acre website too
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
if you look at macular degeneration there's no epidemiology that says seed oils are protective for macular all the epidemiology says more seed oils more macular generation
there are multiple not just one but multiple studies they're observational epidemiology but they strongly associate the consumption of vegetable oil with macular degeneration and when it happens over and over and over in the literature and then it's supported by animal models you have a conciliency of the evidence you have a convergence of the evidence
this correlation between seed oil consumption and macular degeneration is very strong and is compelling
also I want people to know that seed oils have been linked to age related macular degeneration in multiple studies think it's it's called the Blue Mountain study