Sarah Todd argues that the rising skepticism about seed oils is more than a dietary debate; it reflects deeper issues with America's food system. The scientific consensus is that there is no clear evidence seed oils are harmful to health. The alternatives are not necessarily healthier, but there is profit to be made either way.
But the seed oil backlash is about more than what fats get used in our packaged snacks and veggie stir-fries. Fears about the oils have taken root amid rising concerns about possible links between industrial food processes and chronic disease and a public that’s grown more distrustful about everything from how their food is produced to the government’s ability to ensure its safety. Americans are increasingly convinced that something — possibly a lot of things — in their food is making them sick, and that neither government policies nor the food industry are doing enough to look out for them. That vacuum has given more sway to health-conscious influencers and advocates who question mainstream nutrition advice. And for businesses hawking seed oil alternatives like beef tallow or avocado-oil chips, there’s also a lot of potential for profit.
The future of nutrition literacy may rely on teaching people to bring a healthy skepticism to what they hear on social media, too, and to anyone who claims with one hundred percent certainty that there’s a single villain — whether seed oils, dairy, gluten, or sugar — in American diets. A tenet of responsible public health messaging, after all, involves admitting room for doubt.