Modern Diet Myth No. 3: Seed oils cause heart disease

[barbwirehouse]

LOL

http://scepticalnutritionist.com.au/?p=1738

 

[Spokey]

 

[nikotrope]

During the 1990s a natural experiment occurred in Poland. Following major political changes some government subsidies were removed raising the prices on saturated animal fats; less expensive seed oils like canola and soybean oils flooded into Poland. But was this sudden rush of seed oils bad news for heart health?

On the contrary, between 1990 and 2002 rates of heart disease in Poland fell by about 40% in both men and women, a remarkable change in such a short period.

LOL

 

[Waremu]

I can't even take this guy serious. He can ignore all of the evidence that has been coming out showing how toxic PUFA's (which are in large amounts in seed oils) are to healthy metabolism, but I think we will keep seeing more evidence inevitably until it gets too hard even for many of the mainstream guys to deny it. But then again there will always be those who don't get it.

 

[Westside PUFAs]

Well, no, it's not the seed oils themselves, it's the products they breakdown to:

PUFA Breakdown Products - acrolein, malondialdehyde, hydroxynonenal, crotonaldehyde, lipid peroxides, isoprostanes, prostaglandins, neuroprostanes, eicosanoids, leukotrienes.

 

[Waremu]

Well, no, it's not the seed oils themselves, it's the products they breakdown to:

PUFA Breakdown Products - acrolein, malondialdehyde, hydroxynonenal, crotonaldehyde, lipid peroxides, isoprostanes, prostaglandins, neuroprostanes, eicosanoids, leukotrienes.

All food is broken down into substances. Of course it is the seed oils because of what they are broken down into.

 

[schultz]

"Supposedly the biggest threat that seed oils pose to heart health is inflammation caused by omega 6 polyunsaturated fats. This is a myth..."

It's a myth that omega-6 causes inflammation? I wonder if he's ever heard of cyclooxygenase or NSAIDs?

 

[SaltGirl]

I have a rule never to listen to anyone who uses the word "skeptic" anywhere in his name/website. Usually these are people who would rather maintain the status quo rather than look at the evidence and check why it is conflicting. These people are literally just trying to earn money by riding the "popular choice" crowd rather than look at data. Sadly it is, like religion, a very profitable business.

 

[answersfound]

Well, no, it's not the seed oils themselves, it's the products they breakdown to:

PUFA Breakdown Products - acrolein, malondialdehyde, hydroxynonenal, crotonaldehyde, lipid peroxides, isoprostanes, prostaglandins, neuroprostanes, eicosanoids, leukotrienes.

Ha thank you for clarifying.

 

[answersfound]

I have a rule never to listen to anyone who uses the word "skeptic" anywhere in his name/website. Usually these are people who would rather maintain the status quo rather than look at the evidence and check why it is conflicting. These people are literally just trying to earn money by riding the "popular choice" crowd rather than look at data. Sadly it is, like religion, a very profitable business.

Really because most people around here would be considered skeptics for following a peatarian diet compared to what is typically recommended as "healthy."

 

[Sheik]

I confess I don't actually know who is more correct, RP or this guy.

 

[Such_Saturation]

I have a rule never to listen to anyone who uses the word "skeptic" anywhere in his name/website. Usually these are people who would rather maintain the status quo rather than look at the evidence and check why it is conflicting. These people are literally just trying to earn money by riding the "popular choice" crowd rather than look at data. Sadly it is, like religion, a very profitable business.

Really because most people around here would be considered skeptics for following a peatarian diet compared to what is typically recommended as "healthy."

I think you will find one of the first things Ray Peat usually says is that to be intellectually honest you must not only take a stance, but admit that it's impossible not to "sail your boat" one way or another. Now I'd personally cut this person some slack since he seems genuinely uninterested in reaching any amount of conclusions apart from getting consulting contracts, and you can also see him going against all kinds of fads on the blog.

 

[SaltGirl]

I have a rule never to listen to anyone who uses the word "skeptic" anywhere in his name/website. Usually these are people who would rather maintain the status quo rather than look at the evidence and check why it is conflicting. These people are literally just trying to earn money by riding the "popular choice" crowd rather than look at data. Sadly it is, like religion, a very profitable business.

Really because most people around here would be considered skeptics for following a peatarian diet compared to what is typically recommended as "healthy."

Then you misunderstood my post altogether. I don't mind people who are skeptical. Hell, I am skeptical myself of a great many things. My point, however, was that anyone who uses the word in his name or website are usually doing a business and don't care about finding the actual truth. In fact, promoting the status quo is usually more in their favour. For me, what these people practice is just pseudoskepticism.

 

[answersfound]

I have a rule never to listen to anyone who uses the word "skeptic" anywhere in his name/website. Usually these are people who would rather maintain the status quo rather than look at the evidence and check why it is conflicting. These people are literally just trying to earn money by riding the "popular choice" crowd rather than look at data. Sadly it is, like religion, a very profitable business.

Really because most people around here would be considered skeptics for following a peatarian diet compared to what is typically recommended as "healthy."

Touché salt girl.

Then you misunderstood my post altogether. I don't mind people who are skeptical. Hell, I am skeptical myself of a great many things. My point, however, was that anyone who uses the word in his name or website are usually doing a business and don't care about finding the actual truth. In fact, promoting the status quo is usually more in their favour. For me, what these people practice is just pseudoskepticism.

 

[SQu]

There are many sites like this on the internet but since I've been reading peat I find them unbearably patronizing, lightweight, and often scathing. And usually sceptical just means scornful. Sheik it's up to you who you believe but I'd suggest comparing depth of argument, and whether you as the reader are addressed with respect or whether you feel belittled.

 

[tara]

There are many sites like this on the internet but since I've been reading peat I find them unbearably patronizing, lightweight, and often scathing. And usually sceptical just means scornful. Sheik it's up to you who you believe but I'd suggest comparing depth of argument, and whether you as the reader are addressed with respect or whether you feel belittled.

Yes, and whether they actually provide any evidence, and how it compares to the evidence and explanation Peat provides. This guy seems to mostly just say there is evidence, but not actually point to much.

 

[SaltGirl]

The usual approach of these websites/skeptics is to not use data to prove their point but refer to what they refer to "mainstream". So if majority of people believe something, and those same people are experts, then it follows it must be true, regardless of evidence.

These are people who take a religious approach to science(which is why they believe the mainstream is always right) instead of realizing that science is a valuable tool to explore the universe.

 

[tara]

The usual approach of these websites/skeptics is to not use data to prove their point but refer to what they refer to "mainstream". So if majority of people believe something, and those same people are experts, then it follows it must be true, regardless of evidence.

These are people who take a religious approach to science(which is why they believe the mainstream is always right) instead of realizing that science is a valuable tool to explore the universe.

Yes. And maybe incorporates an assumption of "I'm sure those expert have done the research properly".

And I recognise the phenomenon that people who proclaim themselves to be sceptical often aren't very. Especially not of the mainstream/dominant culture.
We had a leading figure in a sceptics society here who used to routinely reassure about the safety of GMO food, and the necessity of cooperating with US capitalism and imperialism. With sceptics like that, who needs sycophants.

 

[Such_Saturation]

It Gets Much, Much Worse

 

[Waremu]

"Supposedly the biggest threat that seed oils pose to heart health is inflammation caused by omega 6 polyunsaturated fats. This is a myth..."

It's a myth that omega-6 causes inflammation? I wonder if he's ever heard of cyclooxygenase or NSAIDs?

Sadly, this is usually what happens when everyone becomes a so-called "expert" in nutrition and biochemistry/health and writes blogs. One reason why there is so much misinformation out there.