We can't find evidence that holds up here. Proponents are reasoning from mechanism or analogy rather than direct human data, and the most credible skeptics raise objections we can't dismiss.
these are clear flaws in many of these trials and yet they are included in Forest plots that are used to substantiate The Narrative that seed oils are neutral or benign for you mozafarian meta analysis is even worse than this his Forest plot includes many of the studies that Hamley considers to be inadequately controlled
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.
because of a 2022 AFP blog post that says that they're they're okay for humans that's the consensus science has been settled they're not bad for humans but that is based on poorly done meta analyses that include BS trials where the control group with saturated fat was contaminated with trans fats