Are seed oils bad for you?

Numbers match the citations in the article. A working link isn't proof that a page supports a claim; check the quoted passage and date.

1. 1

   Omega-6 fats for the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease

   Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (Hooper et al.)Published Nov 29, 2018Checked Sep 30, 2026

   “A Cochrane review of randomised trials found that increasing omega-6 fats probably has little or no effect on all-cause mortality or cardiovascular events, and may reduce the risk of heart attack (low-quality evidence).”

2. 2

   Biomarkers of Dietary Omega-6 Fatty Acids and Incident Cardiovascular Disease and Mortality

   Circulation (Marklund et al.)Published Apr 11, 2019Checked Sep 30, 2026

   “In 30 prospective studies with medians of follow-up ranging 2.5 to 31.9 years, 15 198 incident cardiovascular events occurred among 68 659 participants. Higher levels of LA were significantly associated with lower risks of total CVD, cardiovascular mortality, and ischemic stroke, with hazard ratios per interquintile range of 0.93 (95% CI, 0.88-0.99), 0.78 (0.70-0.85), and 0.88 (0.79-0.98), respectively, and nonsignificantly with lower coronary heart disease risk (0.94; 0.88-1.00). Relationships were similar for LA evaluated across quintiles. AA levels were not associated with higher risk of cardiovascular outcomes; in a comparison of extreme quintiles, higher levels were associated with lower risk of total CVD (0.92; 0.86-0.99). No consistent heterogeneity by population subgroups was identified in the observed relationships. In pooled global analyses, higher in vivo circulating and tissue levels of LA and possibly AA were associated with lower risk of major cardiovascular events. These results support a favorable role for LA in CVD prevention.”

3. 3

   Re-evaluation of the traditional diet-heart hypothesis: analysis of recovered data from Minnesota Coronary Experiment (1968-73)

   BMJ (Ramsden et al.)Published Apr 12, 2016Checked Sep 30, 2026

   “The intervention group had significant reduction in serum cholesterol compared with controls (mean change from baseline -13.8%v-1.0%; P<0.001). Kaplan Meier graphs showed no mortality benefit for the intervention group in the full randomized cohort or for any prespecified subgroup. There was a 22% higher risk of death for each 30 mg/dL (0.78 mmol/L) reduction in serum cholesterol in covariate adjusted Cox regression models (hazard ratio 1.22, 95% confidence interval 1.14 to 1.32; P<0.001). There was no evidence of benefit in the intervention group for coronary atherosclerosis or myocardial infarcts. Systematic review identified five randomized controlled trials for inclusion (n=10,808). In meta-analyses, these cholesterol lowering interventions showed no evidence of benefit on mortality from coronary heart disease (1.13, 0.83 to 1.54) or all cause mortality (1.07, 0.90 to 1.27). Available evidence from randomized controlled trials shows that replacement of saturated fat in the diet with linoleic acid effectively lowers serum cholesterol but does not support the hypothesis that this translates to a lower risk of death from coronary heart disease or all causes.”

4. 4

   Seed oil misinformation (Wikipedia)

   WikipediaPublished Sep 29, 2026Checked Oct 4, 2026

   “Since 2018, the health effects of consuming certain processed vegetable oils, or seed oils have been subject to misinformation in popular and social media. The trend grew in 2020 after podcaster and comedian Joe Rogan interviewed fad diet proponent Paul Saladino about the carnivore diet. Saladino made several claims about the health effects of vegetable fats. The theme of the misinformation is that seed oils are the root cause of most diseases of affluence, including heart disease, cancer, diabetes, and liver spots. These claims are not based on evidence, but have nevertheless become popular on the political right. Critics cite a specific "hateful eight" oils that constitute "seed oils": canola, corn, cottonseed, soybean, sunflower, safflower, grapeseed, and rice bran. Although critics raise concerns about processing, omega-6 fatty acids, and linoleic acid, scientific evidence finds these oils safe and beneficial, with omega-6s linked to lower cardiovascular risk and no consistent evidence of increased inflammation, cancer, or chronic disease.”

5. 5

   Omega-3 and Omega-6 Fatty Acids and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Diabetes - A Review of Current Evidence.

   Current diabetes reports (Wattick et al.)Published Sep 14, 2026Checked Oct 4, 2026

   “This review examines recent evidence on the effects of omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids on cardiovascular outcomes in diabetes.Recent findingsCardiovascular outcomes trials demonstrate heterogeneous effects of omega-3 supplementation. High-dose purified eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) has reduced cardiovascular events in selected high-risk populations, whereas low-dose combined EPA and docosahexaenoic acid (EPA + DHA) formulations have generally shown limited benefit. Omega-6 fatty acid evidence remains more limited, with most studies evaluating lipid markers rather than clinical cardiovascular outcomes. More investigation is needed into the potential benefits and optimal formulation of omega-3 fatty acids for cardiovascular outcomes in diabetes. Omega-6 fatty acids appear neutral or beneficial when replacing saturated fats, but their effects on clinical cardiovascular outcomes among individuals with diabetes remain uncertain. Future research should prioritize diabetes-specific trials examining patient characteristics, background diet, fatty acid formulation, dose, and long-term safety.”

6. 6

   A Clinician's Guide for Trending Cardiovascular Nutritional Controversies in 2026.

   JACC. Advances (Miller et al.)Published Feb 9, 2026Checked Oct 4, 2026

   “Although the broad outlines of a healthy diet are clear, controversy has arisen surrounding certain foods and nutrients. This review updates contemporary nutrition controversies and the extent to which they may promote or protect against cardiovascular disease (CVD). In this review, beef tallow, ultraprocessed foods, full-fat dairy, seed oils, medium chain triglyceride oils, seafood, and alternative sweeteners are considered. Three groupings included: 1) evidence of harm with a recommendation to limit or avoid; 2) lacking in evidence for harm or benefit; and 3) evidence of benefit. The evidence of harm category included beef tallow, due to association with increased low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, ultraprocessed foods associated with worsened cardiometabolic health, and artificial sweeteners owing to correlations with increased CVD. Within the category lacking in evidence were full-fat dairy, medium chain triglyceride, monk fruit, and stevia. Finally, evidence of benefit included seed oils and seafood based on improved CVD outcomes.”