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.
No, we don’t have perfect randomized, controlled trials with seed oils vs saturated fat in humans, but the BEST trials we have (Minnesota Coronary, Rose Corn Oil, Sydney Diet Heart), all point to increased cardiovascular risk with seed oils… (see my tweet thread on human RCTs for more details).
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.
findings from the minnesota coronary experiment add to growing evidence that incomplete publication has contributed to overestimation of the benefits of replacing saturated fat with vegetable oils rich in linoleic acid
this is in a meta analysis of the linoleic acid interventions and what you can see is that the selective linoleic acid polyunsaturated fat interventions minnesota coronary men minnesota coronary women sydney diet heart the rose corn oil study all show a trend a trend toward very clear trend toward worsening outcomes with polyunsaturated fat
inclusion of these recovered data in an updated meta-analysis of linoleic acid intervention trials showed non-significant Trends toward increased risks of death from coronary heart disease and cardiovascular disease