Seed oils not bad

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    maybe not for you but I get short of breath when I have them

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I remember being really autistic and cutting a lot of shit out just to try it. Nothing made a difference re-adding it. But readding Veggie oil made my stomach fucking rotten. Haven't been able to shake the hook again since bro. Same with added sugar, but it's not that much of an effect to me.

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    sneed oils

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >look at what dr shitskin says!
    shalom

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Reusing oils or using unsaturated oils.
    Both are terrible ideas.
    The unsaturated oil is oxidized and will not get properly absorbed in the liver, allowing the oil to become the free-floating triglycerides that wind up throughout your bloodstream and in random organs. They take days to metabolize, and most people who consume them never fast, so it can lead to health complications.
    Don't do it.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Unless what you're eating is blatantly rancid PUFAs are an incredibly minor threat. The oxygen solubility and water solubility of fatty acids is extremely low so the reaction rate between fatty acids to oxidize into hydroperoxides is exceptionally slow. Furthermore your body protects itself from the minute amount of hydroperoxides that you do ingest because of vitamin E and C which terminates it into either a vitamin radical or inert lipid alcohol. In fact, dietary omega 6/3s trigger anti-inflammatory cascades in the body which protect against effects of dietary oxidized lipids, aldehydes and on net reduce mortality risk even if a small amount oxidizes.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >drink a bit of gasoline your body has systems to take care of it
        no thanks

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Your systems don't take care of gasoline. Gasoline is majority paraffins and olefins, cooking oils are fatty acids. Obviously two different things.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            It's processed with hexane, which is used in gasoline.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            the hyperbole wasnt meant to be taken literally. the point was that just because your body has systems to deal with toxins and such doesnt mean they arent causing harm. multiple highly controlled, RCTs with hard endpoints have demonstrated poor outcomes from seed oils. thats the evidence nobody ever shows not some bullshit bio marker studies

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              RCTs have shown the opposite for PUFA consumption, I disagree. Briggs and Peterson did a huge analysis on meta-analyses on PUFA consumption and isocaloric PUFA-SFA substitution as well as MUFA-SFA substitution which constitutes the majority of the landscape of seed oils. No evidence suggests poor outcomes from seed oils in isolation, seed oils just happen to be used in calorically dense processed foods because it is easy to industrialize such a process from such abundant crops.

              It's processed with hexane, which is used in gasoline.

              Hexanes boil off at 70C which is well over the processing temperature and don't form either glycerol or fatty acid azeotropes. If you can demonstrate significant hexane concentration from GC that would prove a point but there's no reason to believe fractional distillation doesn't remove hexanes in cooking oils down to the ppm, typically around 20-40ug/kg and no one is eating 1kg of vegetable oil a day. You're exposed to more standing around the gas pump.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Briggs and Peterson did a huge analysis on meta-analyses on PUFA consumption and isocaloric PUFA-SFA
                not a single RCT on hard endpoints
                >No evidence suggests poor outcomes from seed oils in isolation
                demonstrably wrong
                https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(71)91086-5/fulltext
                https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27071971/
                https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23386268/

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                "Hard endpoints" include total mortality risk and biomarkers, which are the same endpoints measured in the studies you posted, which do not provide reproducible outcomes found by others as demonstrated by Hanson et. al. that there are conflicting reports about PUFAs and cancer risk.

                Br J Cancer 122, 1260–1270 (2020)
                (over 47 RCTs, no clear trend found, risk is extremely minor and only with total PUFA consumption which also does not always control calorie to calorie)

                Meanwhile CVD risk and inflammation studies typically lean in favor of PUFAs.
                Healthcare 2017, 5(2), 29
                JAMA Intern Med. 2016;176(8):1134-1145.
                Circulation. 2014;130:1245–1253

                You need to take a holistic approach to evidence, the link is pretty unclear for cancer, more so for prostate cancer, but for factors I mentioned there's reasonable confidence to suggest good outcomes.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Soft end points and short term studies are unreliable. There are no RCTs longer or more highly controlled than what I posted in

                https://i.imgur.com/13NWwnp.jpg

                >Briggs and Peterson did a huge analysis on meta-analyses on PUFA consumption and isocaloric PUFA-SFA
                not a single RCT on hard endpoints
                >No evidence suggests poor outcomes from seed oils in isolation
                demonstrably wrong
                https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(71)91086-5/fulltext
                https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27071971/
                https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23386268/

                but you are free the go with the weaker evidence

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                The cancer rates began to diverge at about 3 years. Is there a single RCT that long showing no change in risk?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Hanson et. al
                biased paper excluded multiple RCTs that fit their inclusion criteria. Conclusion unreliable

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Not eating something that was washed in bleach, simple as

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Any good arguments against lard? Sure too much of anything is bad but so far i know 2 cardiologists who say lard is demonised way too much and that as long as i dont eat a whole brick a day i should be fine

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    That's wonderful sweetie but I'm just not going to consume them anymore than I need to. They're in 90% of products anyway and I don't believe they're in there because they're good for you. So yes if I want to eat a chocolate bar I enjoy then I will eat ze seed oil. Even though the oil goes through a deodorization process it still tastes rancid. I'd rather continue to render tallow from leaf fat which has a pleasant taste an multiple uses. Logic check: capitalism owned.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Make some ghee as well

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >It's another Rightoids pretend to care about something they hate episode
    Wow u trell uz so gud.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The image is very onions by trying to paint "capitalism" as the bad guys instedd of garden gnomes.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I care about racism

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        no you dont

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Shut up you fucking Black.

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I only take nutritional advice from natties that have recorded evidence of lifting 1/2/3/4

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *