When you mentioned cancers in non-smoking women associated with cooking with omega 3 containing oils, I remembered the late Dr Sara Halburg. No way to tell if she was one of those who were lost to this, but she is missed. Too soon gone. Thank you Sara for all you did.
I say we encourage this woman to take her own advice for another ten years, then, if she is still alive and cognisant, gently request to see her biomarkers. Good luck to her.
She has not lost the plot - the plot is to keep people eating seed oils. It's just propaganda to keep the seed oil business going. That's why it is written as you mention.
To what end is The Atlantic putting out shit like this? IMO, it's part of a push to portray ANY straying from the "mainstream" of the Health Industrial Complex as "right wing". Don't want to just eat bugs, plants and seed oils? RIGHT WING. Raw milk? RIGHT WING. Pay attention to your body and working out? RIGHT WING. Don't blandly trust the advice of doctors to put more pills into your body? RIGHT WING. Don't want to just unthinkingly give your 15 year old daughters hormonal birth control? RIGHT WING etc etc
My favorite quote from your article: "another Willett & Hu effort in creative epidemiology."
Lots of creativity in what should be scientific work by those "researchers" working there.
I opened a few of the links when I was reading the source article, but I realized you had already broken down the relevant parts of Tayag's references, so I didn't need to waste any time.
When you mentioned cancers in non-smoking women associated with cooking with omega 3 containing oils, I remembered the late Dr Sara Halburg. No way to tell if she was one of those who were lost to this, but she is missed. Too soon gone. Thank you Sara for all you did.
Best debunking I have seen in a while. Great work
I say we encourage this woman to take her own advice for another ten years, then, if she is still alive and cognisant, gently request to see her biomarkers. Good luck to her.
She has not lost the plot - the plot is to keep people eating seed oils. It's just propaganda to keep the seed oil business going. That's why it is written as you mention.
To what end is The Atlantic putting out shit like this? IMO, it's part of a push to portray ANY straying from the "mainstream" of the Health Industrial Complex as "right wing". Don't want to just eat bugs, plants and seed oils? RIGHT WING. Raw milk? RIGHT WING. Pay attention to your body and working out? RIGHT WING. Don't blandly trust the advice of doctors to put more pills into your body? RIGHT WING. Don't want to just unthinkingly give your 15 year old daughters hormonal birth control? RIGHT WING etc etc
I think you mean "Right wing extremists," we can't have any reasonable people believing things are good for them.
My favorite quote from your article: "another Willett & Hu effort in creative epidemiology."
Lots of creativity in what should be scientific work by those "researchers" working there.
I opened a few of the links when I was reading the source article, but I realized you had already broken down the relevant parts of Tayag's references, so I didn't need to waste any time.
Excellent article.