Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

These articles always bring up a lot of comments that use the phrase "good for you" or "healthy", but in my experience most of the time a person saying "___ is good for you", they pretty much never quantify how or why.

Can you explain, in what capacity oils aren't "good for you" ?



I think the best talk of the health dangers of seed oils is in the following video:

Dr. Chris Knobbe - 'Diseases of Civilization: Are Seed Oil Excesses the Unifying Mechanism?' [1]

If you're short on time, you can skip directly to the trials data section [2]

1. https://youtu.be/7kGnfXXIKZM

2. https://youtu.be/7kGnfXXIKZM?t=2020


> in rats

So we're deriving that an entire class of foods aren't "good for you", because of a specific outcome in a study conducted on rats?

edit

Also, the effect produced on the rats was weight gain. Is all weight gain bad? Oils aren't "good for you" because "weight gain"? So, if a person's goal was to gain weight, would oils be "good for them"? And if yes, isn't this just way too broad a statement ("oils aren't good for you") to have any value?


Indeed, not all animal trials are valid in humans, and your skepticism is warranted.

In the rest of the video he discusses how it affects human health, along with the data to support that assertion.

It's seed/vegetable and hydrogenated oils that are bad for you and are correlated with obesity, heart disease, diabetes and cancer.

Coconut oil, olive oil and butter are fine.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: