Opinion SEVEN REASONS YOU NEED TO QUIT SEED OILS

Link (Archive)

SEVEN REASONS YOU NEED TO QUIT SEED OILS​

A hundred years ago, fewer than 1 in 10 people had a chronic disease.

But today, it’s 6 in 10.

And today, 3 in 4 Americans are overweight or obese, and 1 in 3 are diabetic or pre-diabetic.

It’s fair to say that as a species, we are very, very sick.

We may be living longer, but we sure are NOT living well.

Now the CDC blames the rapid rise of chronic disease on 4 things:

Smoking tobacco

A lack of exercise

Excessive alcohol

Poor nutrition – specifically, “diets low in fruits and vegetables and high in sodium and saturated fats”

But if you take a look at the data, apparently we are also eating “healthier” than ever, smoking and drinking less, and exercising more.

So chronic diseases are increasing at insane rates, yet the very things they blame chronic disease on are decreasing? 🧐

Makes no sense!

But guess what has risen in tandem with chronic disease?

SEED OILS.

And the purpose of this newsletter is to convince you to join the anti-seed oil movement.

Because we believe the single biggest thing you can do to radically transform your health is to eliminate seed oils.

But nobody in the mainstream health scene is talking about this. It’s the elephant in the room.

7 reasons you need to quit seed oils

#1 Seed oils violate the laws of nature

Seed oils are modern-day industrial Frankenfoods.

Only introduced to our diet about 120 years ago, they were originally invented to lubricate machines…

And before then, your ancestors would have needed to eat nearly 3000 sunflower seeds to get the equivalent of 5 tablespoons of sunflower oil.

Seed oils include soybean oil, corn oil, sunflower oil, safflower oil, canola oil, peanut oil, rice bran oil, grape seed oil, and cottonseed oil…

And they are all industrially processed, poisonous garbage.

#2 Seed oils are everywhere

Since coming on the scene, seed oils have spread as fast as a weed.

To put it into context, from 1909 to 1999, soybean oil consumption increased 1000x.

We really mean it when we say they are everywhere.

Almost all restaurants cook in them, and practically all processed foods, including so-called “healthy” processed foods contain them.

The average American now consumes 5-10 tablespoons of seed oils each DAY.

#3 Seed oils stay in your body for years

Seed oils contain unnaturally high amounts of polyunsaturated omega-6 fatty acids, primarily in the form of linoleic acid.

A healthy and evolutionarily appropriate omega-6: omega-3 ratio is 1:1, but it’s now up to levels of 20:1. Not good. 🤦‍♀️

Our physiology is unable to efficiently process such high levels of omega-6 fats. They are stored in our fat tissue, where they take many years to break down.

#4 Seed oils are highly unstable

Polyunsaturated omega-6 fatty acids in seed oils are highly unstable, especially when heated (hello, deep fat fryer).

And from inside our fat cells, they break down into OXLAMS (oxidative by-products of linoleic acid metabolism).

The two main ones are 4-Hydroxynonenal (4-HNE) and 13-Hydroxyoctadecadienoic acid (13-HODE), and yes, they are as horrible as they sound. 🤓

These byproducts lead to mitochondrial dysfunction – death and damage to our cells, and a cascade of effects that eventually lead to metabolic dysfunction and disease.

#5 Seed oils are directly linked to all chronic diseases 💀

Remember how we just told you that the byproducts of seed oils lead to mitochondrial dysfunction and DNA damage via OXLAMs?

Well, this damage at the cellular level is a signature of all chronic diseases and metabolic dysfunction.

The best data is currently in animals because we can measure the effects over their entire lifetime.

For example, this 2020 study showed that feeding mice soybean oil not only led to obesity, but also gene dysregulation that could cause higher rates of neurological conditions like anxiety, depression, autism and dementia.

The author concluded:

“If there’s one message I want people to take away, it’s this: reduce consumption of soybean oil”.

There was even one study where high omega-6 fats were required in order to induce tumor growth in rats.

There are also many shorter-duration studies in humans that link increased seed oil consumption with chronic diseases like cancers, heart disease, and autoimmune diseases too.

Or these papers which show that seed oils fry your brain and can lead to mood disorders, cognitive decline and dementia. Yikes.

#6 Seed oils contain toxic additives and byproducts

Because seed oils are so unstable, harmful chemicals must be added during manufacturing to prevent oxidization and rancidity.

Otherwise, seed oils would smell like rancid fish 🤢

Some of the most common additives are butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA), butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT), and tertiary butylhydroquinone (TBHQ), which have been shown to be carcinogenic…

And when seed oils are heated up (which is most of the time), they release toxic aldehydes in such high concentrations that they exceed the safe daily limit set by the World Health Organization by 100-200x!

#7 Seed oils cause you to crave more junk food

Seed oils increase the production of endocannabinoids, specifically 2-AG and anandamide.

These compounds hijack the satiety receptors in our brain in the same way that cannabis does, leading to increased cravings for more food.

It can create a vicious cycle, where the more seed-oil-enriched food you eat, the more you will crave it.

The take-home message:

In the realm of health and nutrition, meat, carbohydrates, and sugars seem to get all the public scrutiny.

But seed oils appear to get a free pass.

Mainstream health advice continues to recommend them as “heart-healthy” alternatives to healthy animal fats.

And there are literally entire diets founded upon the premise of cutting out meat, sugars or carbs, yet very few that focus on eliminating seed oils.

Except us.

Because we advocate for an animal-based diet that removes these dangerous substances.

And in our opinion, removing seed oils is probably the single biggest lever to radically improving your health.

How to quit seed oils

Step 1 – Kick them out of the house

Throw away every bottle of seed oils and seed-oil containing food that is currently in your home. Replace with real butter and tallow.

Step 2 – Don’t buy them

Stop buying processed foods at the store, or at least read the labels.

Replace with single ingredient, real foods like ground beef, steaks, eggs, fruit, and honey.

Step 3 – Beware of pork and chicken

Avoid eating animals fed grains and high amounts of seed oils, like pork and chicken.

These animals also store the linoleic acid in their fat, and pass it on to you.

It’s possible (but difficult) to buy corn and soy-free chicken and pork. But ruminants like beef and lamb are best, because even if they are fed some corn or soy, they are able to process it more efficiently than pigs and chickens.

Step 4 – Avoid seed oil restaurants

If you are paying somebody else to provide you with food, then the chances are it contains seed oils.

Because pretty much all chain restaurants, and even most independent restaurants cook with seed oils.

If you are eating out, your best chance of avoiding seed oils will be at higher-end restaurants. Because they are more likely to make your dish to order, and to take requests.

Avoid deep-fried foods at all costs.

Ask for your steak to be fried in butter.

You will need to prepare as much of your own food as possible, and this is the part of seed oil avoidance that can require the biggest change in habits for many people.

It can mean refusing to eat at the ball game…

Insisting on bringing your own food on the airplane…

And being that person who asks the server what oil they cook in.

But imagine a world without seed oils…

We would all be 20lbs lighter. Rates of chronic disease would be a fraction of current levels.

Beloved, I wish above all things that thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth.
3 John 1:2

***I eat no seed oils. Yes, it’s possible!!!
 
"Canola oil, rapeseed oil, corn oil, peanut oil, sunflower oil, rapeseed oil.."
"You said rapeseed twice...."
"I like rapeseed..."
Three times. Canola (Canadian Oilseed) is a breed of rapeseed. When SEED OIL HATERS say that they are industrial lubricants, they're talking about rapeseed, which has a bitter, unpalatable taste and more concerningly, a high uric acid content (uric acid causes gout). Canola is a cultivar of rapeseed developed here in the fifties in order to create a low uric acid oilseed for human consumption. Canola is a generic breed, there are specific breeds available from different suppliers like Nexera which have been further tinkered with and patented.
 
A hundred years ago, fewer than 1 in 10 people had a chronic disease.
And today, 3 in 4 Americans are overweight or obese, and 1 in 3 are diabetic or pre-diabetic.
Smoking tobacco

A lack of exercise

Excessive alcohol

Poor nutrition
Smoking tobacco and excessive alcohol are not to blame, considering the majority of people in the 40's and 50's smoked on Dr's orders.

The problem is our food is jammed full of salt and sugar as bulking agents so that Big Food get's more money for selling their slop. That and people are too fucking fat and lazy.
 
WRONG
HFCS has a higher ratio of fructose to glucose than normal corn syrup (which is basically pure glucose). The ratio compared to table sugar is nearly identical: ~50:50.

I'm being a bit of a cunt here. I used to use your exact argument in regard to HFCS until another user here on the farms set me straight on that.
Yeah, most HFCS is 42% fructose/58% glucose. The stuff used in most soda is 55%/45% to match honey. You're right, normal corn syrup is pure glucose, and then enzymes are added to convert some to fructose, the same enzymes you'd use to change glucose to fructose in any other situation. I think the 42% is the concentration the enzymes stop working at or something.

The different ratios have useful properties for baking or candymaking.
 
No, they're not modern at all. 120 years ago my ass, olive oil is as old as civilization. The romans and every civilization they traded with used it extensively and were just fine


Grapeseed oil is a byproduct of wine making that has been produced and used since at least roman times. Its no more harmful than any other fat. Its just oil

The article is delusional nonsense
Olive oil isn't a seed oil dumbass.
 
The different ratios have useful properties for baking or candymaking
The long and short is that HFCS-42 is less sweet than table sugar and more readily fermentable so it works great for confectionery products that don't need a lot of sweetness. HFCS-55 is the opposite, meaning it's great for something that you want to be extra sweet and have a longer shelf life (soda, candy, etc.).

One argument you might be able to make regarding table sugar is that the fructose and glucose are chemically bound together as sucrose, meaning your body has to expend more resources to break it down into its components. The practical health consequences of this are yet to be seen and probably negligible though.
 
I won’t PL but getting rid of seed oils and limiting processed foods has improved my health and my cooking so much it’s embarrassing. My kitchen is full of success thanks to tallow, butter, and duck fat (and olive oil, lard, and avocado oil, bacon drippings…). I’ve also returned to traditional American and European cooking— I’m much happier now that my cooking is about nurturing and has meaning rather than just being delicious or impressive.
 
I would like to see an example. Most of the time people say this stuff, they point to the studies linking HFCS to diabetes which, yeah: so is table sugar.
It’s possible that HFCS and seed oils are proxy measures for ‘shit food.’ I’m sure I’ve read that it’s metabolised slightly differently though, with a higher effect on insulin. Maybe I’m wrong on that?
I suspect that some seed oils are not good for you. Canola isn’t for sure. We do need fat in our diet, the membranes in our cells are fats, and different t fats create different properties. I can well see that they could be detrimental the same way polyunsaturated fats and trans fats are. I’m not sure all seed oils are as bad, and again it’s a proxy for cheap shitty good in many ways.
Certainly something g that should be researched more.
I fry in butter, and bake with butter. Sometime use olive oil, but never canola or other sunflower/ge Eric vegetable oils.
I think it’s the combination of sugar and fats that makes us so fat along with plastics that disrupt hormones. I doubt it’s a single factor that drives it.
 
I won’t PL but getting rid of seed oils and limiting processed foods has improved my health and my cooking so much it’s embarrassing. My kitchen is full of success thanks to tallow, butter, and duck fat (and olive oil, lard, and avocado oil, bacon drippings…). I’ve also returned to traditional American and European cooking— I’m much happier now that my cooking is about nurturing and has meaning rather than just being delicious or impressive.
The only nut oil I ever really used was safflower oil but once I learned how easy it was to make clarified butter it became the oil of the house.
For those who do not know how to make it:
High smoke point and makes everything taste like awesome.
 
It’s possible that HFCS and seed oils are proxy measures for ‘shit food.’
Oh, you're absolutely right on that. Cheap ingredients go in cheap products. It shouldn't come as much a surprise that things which are "bad for you" in a myriad of other ways would also contain benign, yet also cheap, ingredients.

Overall: it's not really something I worry about much. If you're not obese or feeling like shit all the time, whatever you're doing is probably fine. If you are one or both of those things, whatever you're doing wrong is probably glaringly obvious if you take a 5 minute inventory of what you eat throughout the day.
All these petty nuances about "what kind of oil/sugar am I using?" and whining about fucking food coloring isn't doing anyone any favors.
 
Oh, you're absolutely right on that. Cheap ingredients go in cheap products. It shouldn't come as much a surprise that things which are "bad for you" in a myriad of other ways would also contain benign, yet also cheap, ingredients.
It's also as much a problem that people use these things in ways they shouldn't be used. You don't heat flaxseed oil, it burns at a very low temperature and that's when it turns into liquid cancer. Even really good virgin olive oil burns easily, all of those things that make a good virgin oil awesome turn into nasty chemicals when you put them at cooking temperatures.

Sprinkling some walnut oil over a salad isn't going to hurt anyone. Trying to use it to sear a steak is going to taste nasty and turn a lot of it into the nasty organic chemicals that might over enough time make you look like the toxic avenger.
 
So what?

A chronic disease at 80 years of age is preferable to starvation at 80 months.

And you are under no obligation to consume anything you don't want, if you fear them? Don't eat them.

This is a favorite savior-complex issue that pops up every few years and always washes out the same - inconclusive and irrelevant.
 
I believe there is some evidence that an imbalance in the ratios of Omega oils can be harmful, example - joint pain / arthritis - but I don't have studies to hand. The suggestion was to take Omega-3 supplments and specifically Omega-3, not in combination with others, to rebalance that ratio due to the high amounts of Omega-6 in the modern diet.

I don't know for certain the validity of the article's viewpoint that seed oils are catastrophic. Like others have said, a lot of other things have also increased over the last 120 years. But it is correct to say that Omega-6 consumption as a proportion over Omega-3 has skyrocketed is it not, and that an excess of Omega-6 can block the uptake of Omega-3?

There is some data to back up the assertion that an excess ratio of omega-6/omega-3 does lead to a pro-inflammatory state. The building blocks of the inflammatory pathway are based on omega-6 metabolism, so you can imagine having the pipeline stuff full of precursors could mean you are more likely to make pro-inflammatory molecules rather than anti-inflammatory molecules, which are constructed from the omega-3 metabolic pathways.

This is where the theory that "omega-3 is good for you" came from. The thinking was if you can add more omega-3's into your diet and try and tip that ratio back more towards a neutral balance it is to your benefit. The preliminary evidence indicated it might work, but the larger, better studies do not support this interpretation. So, the conclusion is, it's better to cut back on omega-6s than it is to try and stuff the omega-3 pathways to force a restoration of normal metabolic balance, because it doesn't work.

Well yeah, a hundred years ago they just flat-out died at a young age from those chronic diseases. Average life expectancy was in the 60s even after major decreases in infant mortality.

A lot of seed oils aren't great but arguably the big problem now vs. back then is zinc and magnesium deficiency. A lot of produce just doesn't have the same amounts of available minerals it used to, probably due to soil depletion and monoculture. Reduce the population of the United States back to what it was in the 1920s and we'll be in good shape.

This is true, the average person does not typically get enough metabolically useful magnesium in their diet, and most people over 40 are also at a chronic zinc deficiency.

Olive oil, avocado oil and clarified butter are all great.

I would agree that those you listed are among the healthiest options if one is looking for excellent sources of monounsaturated and saturated fats that are beneficial (in reasonable quantities). Research has shown that saturated dairy fat is the one type of animal saturated fat that is not strongly linked to cardiovascular disease, and some recent research has show that saturated dairy fats (in reasonable quantities) are actually protective against type-2 diabetes and metabolic syndromes related to insulin resistance.

It's (well, the HFCS used in soda, there are a few different ratios of fructose to glucose) chemically identical to honey aside from honey having traces of a few other sugars like maltose and dextrose. And I guess finished honey has a bit less water so it's even more concentrated (supposed) evil.

Yet all the loud voices against HFCS pimp honey as a replacement.

It's very odd, isn't it? I haven't been able to find a reason for this in a way that makes sense according to human metabolism and physiology. The body should treat HFCS no different than honey, for the most part. As PD 2.0 mentioned above, one big difference is the molecular bonded nature of sucrose, but humans have enzymes that act on sugar beginning in our mouths that separate the two sugars quite easily, with the rest of it being done by the acid in the stomach through acid hydrolysis. I find it hard to believe the molecular bonding of sucrose can explain such a discrepancy.

@WhiskeyJack

Wasn't there some investigation into certain chemicals within plastics causing the immediate weight gain? I remember hearing about that years ago. Something is certainly fucky nowadays when the majority of people are overweight.

Perhaps, but I don't think you can solely blame that on the exponential rise of allergies.

@Prokhor Zakharov
@Larry David's Opera Cape

What about allergies gained later in life? My mother for example became allergic to damn near everything(mushrooms, all nuts, fish) in her late 40's.

You have stumbled upon one of the more interesting issues/mysteries in allergy/immunology. Most people think of allergies as static throughout life, but that isn't so. Our allergies do change throughout our lives,. In fact, men have 3 different periods where their allergies change, and women experience at least 4 such periods in life. During each window we have the potential to gain or lose allergies. The first is the classic one, when you are a child. The second is in your 20s to very early 30's, common refrain is "I had asthma as a kid, but it went away" (asthma cant "go away" but the pathological immune response behind it can disappear during one of these windows) "I used to be allergic to a certain food, but I'm not any longer". For reasons that are not currently understood, during the period when our development is ending in our 20's to early 30's, the window for retraining the immune system opens again. What were troublesome allergies as a child can disappear, but we can also develop new allergies of any intensity, including all the way up to anaphylaxis. For men, the 3rd windows opens in the late 50's-early 60's. Once again, the same thing is seen, old allergies that have been a problem for decades can disappear, and new allergies, such as hay fever, can suddenly appear. For women they tend to get, at a minimum, another window, typically at the start of perimenopause into menopause itself. This isn't particularly surprising since the modulation of nearly every system in the body is occurring during this time period. In your mother's case, she got the short end of the stick, it sounds like she didn't lose any former allergies, but gained a whole bunch of new ones she never had before. That is sort of a worst case scenario. Although, she is fortunate that it may not be permanent. During the window in the 60's she may indeed see the number and/or intensity of those allergies lessen, possibly to a significant extent, so all hope is not lost.

As for the "why", medicine comes up short. No one is quite sure how the process actually works, why there are distinct windows, how it starts, and how it ends. If it was understood, it could be a powerful therapeutic tool to rid people of terrible allergies. It is an active area of research, but after decades, there is little to show for it. Hopefully in the future we will have the tools to understand this process. Women do have one additional window of time where allergies can change, sometimes its temporary, and sometimes its permanent. That is during pregnancy. It is well documented that in some women all allergies, as least while pregnant, completely disappear. For some, after giving birth, they see a gain/loss of allergies on the same scale as a traditional window. This process is not understood in the least. As for people who experience a temporary reprieve relative to their allergies while carrying a child, it is believed to be a side-effect of the way the immune system has to modulate itself to tolerate the presence of an organism that has DNA which is not completely the same as the mother's. It can even extend to the point where people who have debilitating auto-immune disease will see full remission during pregnancy. However, some women actually gain auto-immune disorders during pregnancy, such as adult onset type-1 diabetes, which does not resolve with the birth of the child due to an actual auto-immune process during pregnancy that attacks the pancreas, not unlike what happens to children who develop juvenile diabetes. How it all works is a total mystery. The scientific understanding of immune modulation and tolerance in pregnancy is quite poor.
 
Última edición:
Atrás
Top Abajo