Andrew Huberman· PhD
if we look at comparing it to a comp terrible molecule of saturated fat there's a much more compelling argument that saturated fat is bad for you versus seed oils
Loading…
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.
if we look at comparing it to a comp terrible molecule of saturated fat there's a much more compelling argument that saturated fat is bad for you versus seed oils
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.
they had 7 to 15 times more cardiovascular disease than the North that ate a significant more saturated fat
If you look at the best trials, in my opinion, I would argue they show things like this
This is what we're dealing with though. And I think it's why hopefully we'll get into this in a moment. We can also kind of step back, maybe look at some animal data and look at some mechanisms to try and guide us.
But on balance, there are more mechanisms that exist that show saturated fat to be a negative.
if you say seed oils are uniquely deleterious to health then you have to say saturated fat is uniquely deleterious to health because for every level of evidence for seeds there is stronger evidence for saturated fat to be dollarus on health
if you say seed oils are uniquely deleterious to health then you have to say saturated fat is uniquely deleterious to health because for every level of evidence for seeds there is stronger evidence for saturated fat to be dollarus on health