re: Seed oils make you FAT

quote:

---

Man, you love your canola oil. It’s odd how people get so angry when people point out that seed oils aren’t good for you.

---

The poster posted a factual study that you can't debunk though

quote:

---

The difference had nothing to do with hfcs and everything to do with not consuming 180+ calories multiple times per day.

---

This is completely inaccurate.

Roughly speaking, caloric surpluses lead to fat storage because of insulin. Carbs and sugars cause insulin spikes. HFCS causes an even more significant insulin spike. It's not natural for your body to ingest something that sweet. For lack of a better term sugar really is the enemy.

There are now studies out that show that even diet sodas cause weight gain, because even though they include artificial, or "low calorie" sweeteners, the body still reacts to them with a small insulin spike.

Seed oils are a small but significant part of the entire mass food system that's creating a state of chronic disease and unhealthiness in the US. When you realize the entire system and food pyramid being pushed by the FDA is working in the opposite direction of your overall health and well-being, you can begin to see how bad it is. We are only a generation or two removed from the history that led to it, with the food demand of two world wars, hybridization of wheat for mass agriculture expansion, etc..

I gave up processed seed oils for lent one year and dropped about 20 pounds before lent was over, without changing anything else in my lifestyle. That led me down a functional medicine journey that has had a huge positive impact on my health, and led me to understand that the standard american diet is killing people, or keeping them sick.

From my understanding the mass manufacturing and refinement process of the oils is what makes them horrible for you. They are damn near cooking it into a transfat during processing, bleaching, deodorizing, etc.. And it's extremely high in omega 6 fatty acids, which cause chronic and widespread inflammation. "Lecithinated" oil is in just about every single packaged food product on the shelves as a preservative. These are highly refined, partially hydrogenated seed oils that cause the same issues. Hell, it's hard to even find a protein powder without seed oils in the form of lecithin.

For non-cooked items: Extra virgin olive oil due to taste and low smoke point.

Cooked: Avocado oil, Ghee, or Coconut oil, due to their high smoke points. Mostly Avocado oil since it has a neutral taste.

You also have to be careful when purchasing non-seed oil products because very often the front of the label will blare out AVOCADO OIL, while the back of the label will show its ingredients include a blend of processed seed oils and avocado oil. Same goes for olive oil products.

ETA: OP: When you remove seed oils from your diet you are not only removing seed oils, but removing all of the ultra processed, packaged foods that include them, so you will generally clean up your diet pretty significantly by just doing that. What else do packaged foods contain? Refined carbohydrates and added sugars. Once you remove seed oils from your diet, start addressing the refined carbs like "enriched" flour and added sugars. The issue is they are in everything. Bread, cereal, pasta, fruit spreads, popular peanut butter brands, everything... so it's very difficult to do.

Also one thing I didn't realize would have such an impact is the order of what you eat. Eating a green salad (without all the added BS), before protein, before carbs (salad, entre, desert) will lead to something like 65% less absorption of those carbs at the end. So something as simple as the order in which you each your meal can have a big impact on your health.

quote:

---

The poster posted a factual study that you can't debunk though

---

I don’t need to debunk anything. I haven’t read the study. I don’t know who conducted it, who wrote it, or who funded it. Moreover, let’s be honest, I don’t think you’ve read the study. I don’t even know that the guy who posted it read it. You probably all read the abstract, which generally is written by marketing people.

I do know that the more you read into these products, which are in most cases less than 100 years old, I think I’ll stick with the fats that we’ve used for most of our recorded history.

If you’re so vested in using your canola oil, by all means, be my guest.

quote:

---

It wasn't long ago that "they" were telling us to switch from those horrible animal fats to plant-based fats like vegetable oil and canola oil. Now "they" are telling us the opposite. Wait a few months and a new study will come out switching it back.

---

They don't do this randomly. It's typically driven by either Lobby groups, revenue, Corp Greed and Efficiency, and maybe, just maybe, intentional choices for a less healthy population (See the "Food Pyramid").

The entire switch from Butter and Lard to alternatives were Agriculture Subsidies.

How can Avocado Oil be bad for you but Bacon Up be is supposedly better for you? I know how some people feel about seed oils, but is avocado oil really apart of that group? I don’t have a problem with cooking something in bacon grease, but buying a literal tub of lard just messes with me mentally.

Seed oils are from the seed, and have to be highly processed to be consumable. Vegetable oils are from the flesh and are ideally “extra virgin” in their consumable form.

Vegetable oils are avocado, coconut, and olive oil. They are pressed from the fruit, not boiled out of the seed.

Even for some of the cheaper mass produced vegetable oils, the pressing process produces heat which degrades the oil. “Cold pressed” is ideal, though not as readily available and more expensive.

quote:

---

Cutting 180 calories from a daily diet probably wouldn’t have much of an impact

---

I came up with the 180 calories because he said he was drinking colas. Each has roughly 180. He likely was drinking several daily so it's more likely 640-720 calories per day he cut.

quote:

---

calories of insulin spiking sugar does not equal 180 calories of eggs, chicken, or vegetables.

You write it off as the next boogie man, but the latest trend is that people are becoming more and more aware that it was sugar that was always the enemy

---

I write off "hcfs" as the new boogeyman. My point was that there was no significant difference between hfcs and regular table sugar. Both cause insulin spikes at roughly the same level, but hfcs is discussed as if it is some uniquely dangerous poisonous compound. People have been aware of the issues with sugars over fats since Atkins blew up in the 1990s.

quote:

---

When you quote what you quoted from MSU, and it emphasizes practicing a well balanced diet, which is based on the food pyramid, which prioritizes carbs above all else, then it’s hard to take the rest of it with any salt

---

The food pyramid doesn't really matter if you're not over consuming calories. It says to consume in moderation a balanced diet. You will have no problems with that if you eat only 1800-2000 calories per day and actually move about a bit rather than stay in a chair or on a couch all day. All this goes back to consuming fewer calories to lose weight. No gimmicks are needed.

quote:

---

That bacon up stuff has preservatives in it, too.

---

Do all commercial animal fats have preservatives? I know the lard I was looking at the other day had a bunch of words i couldn’t pronounce on it

quote:

---

Then don’t make a definitive statement when you don’t know what you are talking about.

---

I assure you, I know what I'm talking about. I'll make all the definitive statements that I want to. And I'm not trying to stop you from consuming your rapeseed oil, bro. Eat all of it that you want to.

quote:

---

I came up with the 180 calories because he said he was drinking colas. Each has roughly 180. He likely was drinking several daily so it's more likely 640-720 calories per day he cut.

---

Again, replace those 720 calories of insulin spiking liquid sugar with 720 calories from proteins and fats and you'd like have similar positive results. At that point, with how easy it is to consume that many sugar calories, you'd likely have a hard time replacing those additional calories with proteins, fats, fruits and vegetables, merely because it's that much harder to eat that many additional calories from those sources in a day.

quote:

---

My point was that there was no significant difference between hfcs and regular table sugar.

---

This was not your point. your point was that the weight loss was from calorie decrease alone and that's false.

quote:

---

Both cause insulin spikes at roughly the same level, but hfcs is discussed as if it is some uniquely dangerous poisonous compound.

---

I think you need to research a bit more. If you want to get into the weeds a bit. Fructose is much sweeter than sucrose, but it's not even the Fructose that spikes your insulin, its the glucose. The most commonly used HCFS will have a little bit higher level of fructose than table sugar, however the bonded sucrose of table sugar still needs to be broken down into glucose / fructose, and in HCFS the glucose and fructose aren't bonded. You are welcome to find all the studies in the world that gloss over this and say what you said, that the "insulin spikes are roughly the same", but they aren't. The insulin spike will be faster and slightly higher with HFCS because of this, though it may not be massively drastic, it does happen. To zoom out a bit, as I stated previously your body isn't meant to ingest something that sweet, that dense, that fast. The insulin spike rate comparison above isn't even considering the speed of consumption. Consuming 180 calories of sugar containing fruits and vegetables isn't nearly the same as consuming 180 calories from drinking concentrated liquid sugar. On top of that, fruits and vegetables, outside of sugar cane and beets, contain mostly fructose, which doesn't cause anywhere near the insulin spike that glucose does.

quote:

---

The food pyramid doesn't really matter if you're not over consuming calories. It says to consume in moderation a balanced diet. You will have no problems with that if you eat only 1800-2000 calories per day and actually move about a bit rather than stay in a chair or on a couch all day. All this goes back to consuming fewer calories to lose weight. No gimmicks are needed.

---

Again, this is incorrect. First you emphasized eating a balanced diet and now you are stating the food pyramid doesn't matter... Making carbs the largest portion of your 2000 calorie diet is the whole damn problem. Just because you lose some weight because you are consuming less crap doesn't mean it's healthy, it just means your body can overcome the amount of crap you are putting in it. That's not a healthy way to live.

Also not considered is the fact that if you eat mainly carbs, and especially drink sugary drinks, in a 2000 calorie "balanced diet", which will generally likely be refined carbs from packaged foods, you will find yourself hunting for more food, as the satiation from carbs is shorter lived than that of proteins, fats, and fruits and vegetables of equal value. So it's easier to put yourself in a position where you are hungry and unhappy because you've already tapped out your calorie limit for the day.

You do you, but stop telling people that the culprit is only calorie surplus, and not sugar and insulin, and the quality of the calories they are consuming.