AbuNai Labs

The Most Common Seed Oils: What to Avoid & Why

Seed oils are pretty much everywhere in modern diets. Most people encounter canola, soybean, corn, sunflower etc. They are usually found in packaged foods, restaurants and even home kitchens. This article identifies what these oils are, how they're produced, and also recommends healthier alternatives. That way you get a better understanding of why people avoid them. Along with better alternatives that are available to use instead.

Key Takeaways

The Hateful Eight are the oils most people pay attention to. These include; canola, soybean, corn, cottonseed, sunflower, safflower, grapeseed and rice bran. Knowing what they are can help you read labels with more confidence.

Most modern diets are already skewed toward omega-6 fats. Swapping to less processed oils can shift that balance over time.

Practical upgrades do exist. Such as; Extra virgin olive oil (EVOO), avocado oil, coconut oil, tallow, butter and ghee etc. These cover most cooking situations, without too much compromise.

What Are Industrial Seed Oils?

Industrial seed oils are extracted from seeds or seed byproducts, then refined for mass production. The common path for most is solvent extraction, often hexane. This is followed by deodorization, bleaching and sometimes high heat processing. They're favored for their neutral flavor, long shelf life and low cost. Which makes them abundant in processed foods, restaurant kitchens, and mainstream grocery aisles. Many have the belief that there are clear tradeoffs, between cost, convenience and nutritional quality.

The Hateful Eight Seed Oils (What to Avoid)

The term "Hateful Eight" gets thrown around a lot in clean eating circles, and for good reason. These eight oils show up more than any others in the modern food supply. What they share in common is industrial processing and a high omega-6 profile. They also have a nearly unavoidable presence in packaged and prepared foods. That doesn't make every one of them equally problematic in every context. Although it does make them worth knowing by name.

Canola Oil: Is usually found in dressings, baked goods, processed foods, and most restaurant fry oils. It draws scrutiny for heavy refining and deodorization. There are also ongoing debates around GMO processing methods. Olive oil works well as a substitute for dressings and low heat cooking. While avocado oil is better at handling higher heat use.

Soybean Oil: This is one of the most widely used food oils in North America. It shows up in processed foods, sauces and condiments. Similar refining concerns apply, along with the fact that soy is a common allergen, and a frequent GMO concern. As a replacement, you can try; extra virgin olive oil for dressings, avocado oil for sautéing, or butter and ghee where the flavor works.

Corn Oil: Can usually be found in frying oils, snacks and packaged foods. Like most of the Hateful Eight, the concern centers on refining and repeated high heat use. Which affects the stability and oxidation potential. Olive oil or avocado oil can cover most use cases here.

Cottonseed Oil: This oil appears in some fried foods, snack foods and packaged items. It's actually one of the first major industrial seed oils, used in the original Crisco. Despite its history, there is still unease about the refining process, and potential concerns around solvent residues. Olive oil or avocado oil are solid substitutes.

Sunflower Oil: Is a fairly common cooking and frying oil, often found in margarine spreads and processed foods. Standard versions are omega-6 heavy, though high-oleic variants do exist. When in doubt, check the label. As a substitute, olive oil works for most other uses. While high-oleic sunflower is an option, if you genuinely need a neutral high heat oil.

Safflower Oil: Is similar in profile to Sunflower oil. Most standard versions are high in omega-6, depending on how it was made. High-oleic versions exist if you need a higher heat neutral oil. However, olive oil handles sautéing and finishing just fine.

Grapeseed Oil: This is actually one of the least common oils among the eight. It shows up in some culinary and cosmetic uses. Often marketed as a lighter cooking oil, for gourmet applications. Despite the positioning, it's omega-6 heavy in most forms. Use sparingly if you're watching omega-6 intake. For a substitute, olive oil is a suitable replacement for most tasks.

Rice Bran Oil: Is most commonly used for frying, especially in Asian cuisines. It's marketed as versatile oil with a high smoke point. However, there are concerns with regards to the refining process. The omega-6 load can also vary by source. Olive oil is a great substitute for dressings and finishing. While avocado oil is great for frying.

Why People Avoid Seed Oils

Most of the concern isn't about fat in isolation. It's about what happens to these oils before they reach your plate. Plus, how often they show up once they do.

Solvent extraction and chemical refinement, introduce steps people prefer to minimize. Residues, oxidation and deodorization effects. Those are separate from the oil's natural fat profile. Polyunsaturated fats also break down when exposed to high heat. Repeated frying accelerates that process, producing compounds most people would rather not consume daily. Fresh cold pressed oil used once at home. Is a different conversation than commercial fryer oil, reused for days at 375°F.

Most modern diets are already heavy on omega-6 fats and light on omega-3s. Adding more through cooking oils widens that gap. The issue isn't one product. It's that these oils are in nearly everything simultaneously. They sit at the center of the ultra processed food problem. Cutting them out tends to push people toward better food choices across the board.

Where Seed Oils Hide in Your Diet

When you see "vegetable oil" on an ingredient label, it almost always means one of these oils or a blend. Beyond obvious cooking oils. They show up in packaged snacks, crackers, salad dressings, condiments, sauces, marinades, dips, restaurant food, etc. Especially anything fried or sautéed. Learning to spot blends and generic "vegetable oil" references, is one of the most practical skills you can build.

Better Alternatives

For everyday cooking. Extra virgin olive oil (EVOO) is considered best for low heat cooking, dressings and finishing. Avocado oil handles higher heat and is neutral enough for most meals. Coconut oil is flavor specific but useful where it fits. For animal fats; butter, ghee and tallow. Are practical, stable, and effective for most cooking situations. When buying, look for dark glass packaging and check the date. If you need a neutral high heat oil, look for "high-oleic" on the label. It does matter.

Real World Tactics

When starting out, try with two swaps. Your daily cooking oil and a common condiment or dressing. Target two or three repeat meals first, then broaden from there. If you eat out frequently, focus on reducing fried foods and choosing simpler preparations. Grilled, roasted or steamed. Give it a few weeks before you assess. You don't need to overhaul everything at once.

Final Thoughts

When learning about the many different seed oils, The Hateful Eight are a practical starting point. Not because every drop of oil is dangerous. More so because they're widespread, often heavily refined, and common in the meals most people consume daily. The goal isn't perfection. It's better understanding. Start with the oils you cook with most. Then move to the packaged foods you buy regularly. Small, consistent swaps compound into real changes over time.

Full article with sources is linked below:

Are Seed Oils Bad for You? What Scientific Evidence Indicates

You've probably heard it by now. Seed oils are toxic. Seed oils are hurting us. Seed oils are the reason chronic disease has exploded.

Then you search a little deeper and find a Stanford professor calling those claims "just nuts," or the American Heart Association endorsing vegetable oils for heart health. Mixed with a pile of randomized controlled trials showing linoleic acid, the main fat in seed oils, doesn't cause inflammation.

So which is it?

The honest answer is, it's complicated. However, when you look at the full picture, including what mainstream sources quietly admit. Paired with what the most cautious voices in functional medicine are saying. The case against seed oils is stronger than the headlines suggest.

Key Takeaways

The real problem isn't the oil, it's the ratio. Omega-6 itself isn't toxic. The issue is that seed oils have quietly pushed the Western diet's omega-6 to omega-3 ratio. From a historical 1:1-4:1, to somewhere between 10:1 and 20:1. That imbalance is what researchers on both sides agree, is worth addressing.

The clinical trials defending seed oils are real, but limited. The studies showing linoleic acid doesn't cause inflammation are genuine. They're also short (the longest ran 40 days), small, and don't capture long term cumulative effects.

Cutting seed oils and cutting ultra-processed food are effectively the same move. Whether you believe the oils are the problem, or just a marker for bad food. The practical action is identical. Cook at home, read ingredient labels, and replace industrial oils with stable fats. For example; avocado oil, ghee or extra virgin olive oil.

What Are Seed Oils, Exactly?

Seed oils are vegetable oils extracted from the seeds of plants. The most commonly known are canola, soybean, corn, sunflower, safflower, grapeseed, cottonseed and rice bran oil. You'll sometimes hear them referred to as the "hateful eight", in seed oil skeptic circles.

These oils are pretty much everywhere. They dominate the ingredient lists of packaged snacks, frozen meals, fast food, salad dressings, crackers, protein bars and condiments. The American Chemical Society's ChemMatters, reported that the average American now consumes more than three tablespoons of soybean oil alone, every single day. Between 1909 and 1999, linoleic acid intake increased by more than 1,000 percent. That's not a gradual shift. That's pretty much a dietary revolution that occurred, without anyone voting on it.

How They're Made

One method includes cold-pressing. It squeezes oil out mechanically with no added heat or chemicals, but is slow and inefficient. Expeller-pressing uses mechanical pressure with some friction generated heat. It extracts more oil without chemical solvents. Then there's the industrial standard, solvent extraction using hexane. A petroleum derived compound combined with high heat, to strip nearly every drop of oil from the seed.

The hexane is removed before the oil hits shelves, and regulatory bodies say trace residues are too low to be toxic. However, critics point out that the process also strips out naturally occurring nutrients. Additionally, the process involves high heat. Which can begin oxidizing the oil before it even reaches a frying pan.

Dr. Mark Hyman. A functional medicine physician, who personally avoids seed oils and advises his patients to do the same, puts it bluntly. These refining methods are efficient. Although they produce oils that are chemically unstable, and prone to oxidation when exposed to heat, light or air.

The Omega-6 Problem

Seed oils are high in omega-6 fatty acids, specifically linoleic acid. Omega-6 and omega-3 are both essential fats. The problem isn't omega-6 itself. The problem is the ratio.

Historically, humans ate omega-6 and omega-3 in roughly equal amounts. Somewhere between 1:1 and 4:1. Today, the average Western diet runs at a ratio of 10:1 or higher, sometimes 20:1. Omega-6 and omega-3 compete for the same enzymes. Omega-3s tend to produce anti-inflammatory compounds. While omega-6s, when dominant. Can shift that balance toward pro-inflammatory signals.

Dr. Hyman frames it this way. When omega-6 fats dominate without enough omega-3 to counterbalance them. Inflammatory signals can overwhelm the body, leading to chronic and low-grade inflammation over time. That chronic inflammation has been linked to heart disease, diabetes, depression, cognitive decline, arthritis and obesity.

What the Mainstream Science Says

To be fair, the bulk of mainstream nutrition research doesn't condemn seed oils. A 2025 systematic review from Penn State researchers, summarized in ChemMatters. Found consistent evidence that higher intake of unsaturated fats from seed oils. Is associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes.

A June 2025 study of nearly 1,900 people, covered by ScienceDaily. Found that higher levels of linoleic acid in blood plasma, were associated with lower levels of inflammation markers, not higher. Dr. Christopher Gardner at Stanford told NPR, that the omega-6 causes inflammation idea, "doesn't play out in real life, it doesn't play out in the human body." Harvard's Walter Willett put it even more plainly, "Seed oils are basically a very healthy part of a diet, and when you look at some of the alternatives, like butter or lard, these are much better.”

So that's the mainstream position, and it's not something to dismiss.

Where It Gets Murkier

Here's however, what those same mainstream sources quietly acknowledge. The Cleveland Clinic confirmed, the chemical refining process strips seeds of their nutrients. It can also introduce harmful byproducts. NPR noted that hexane residues are present, and the U.S. has no legal maximum for hexane in oils, unlike Europe.

Both the NPR piece and the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics. Acknowledged that repeatedly reheating seed oils at high temperatures, does cause changes in the oil that promote inflammation. ChemMatters added that frying creates trans fats from unsaturated fats. It also generates advanced glycation end products (AGEs) and produces acrylamide. Which is a neurotoxic carcinogenic compound.

Dr. Gardner himself acknowledged, "Is it the junk food that's causing these health issues or is it the seed oils? And I have always thought it's the junk foods." The problem with that framing is practical. Seed oils are essentially how junk food is made. Telling people to avoid ultra-processed food, while defending the oil inside. Is a distinction that doesn't hold up in the grocery store aisle.

What the Anti-Seed Oil Camp Gets Right

The most honest criticism of the pro seed oil position isn't that the clinical trials are wrong, it's that they're limited. The NIH / PubMed systematic review, which defenders often cite. Included only 15 trials with small sample sizes, and the longest ran just 40 days. That's not long enough to observe the kind of slow cumulative damage critics are concerned about.

Animal studies consistently show that high linoleic acid diets promote tumor growth. Defenders rightly point out that rodent data doesn't translate directly to humans, although it also doesn't get dismissed just because it's inconvenient.

There's also the aldehyde question. When polyunsaturated fats are heated to frying temperatures. They break down into aldehydes, lipid peroxides, and oxidized linoleic acid metabolites (OXLAMs). Human research on this is still limited. However, "limited research" is not the same as "no concern."

What's the Next Step?

The Reddit community is genuinely split on seed oils. However, one pattern emerges consistently. People who eliminated seed oils report feeling better. The mainstream camp says, cutting seed oils forces you to cut ultra processed food along with it. Therefore, that's what made the difference. The skeptic camp says, the oils themselves were the problem. Either way, the action is pretty much the same. In the end, the result is what matters.

Dr. Hyman's guidance is straightforward. Avoid seed oils and swap them for more stable fats. For high heat, use avocado oil, ghee, coconut oil or tallow. For moderate heat, use avocado oil or extra virgin olive oil. For raw use, try cold-pressed extra virgin olive oil, walnut oil, flaxseed oil.

The Bottom Line

The debate over seed oils isn't really settled. Anyone who tells you it is, on either side, is unfortunately wrong.

It's fairly clear that seed oils are chemically unstable and heavily processed. They have fundamentally altered the omega-6 to omega-3 ratio in the human diet, over the past century. When a physician like Dr. Mark Hyman, who has spent decades working at the intersection of conventional and functional medicine. Says he won't give these oils to his patients. That's worth taking seriously.

The safest bet isn't to panic. It's to cook at home with stable fats, cut ultra-processed food, and stop unknowingly consuming three tablespoons of soybean oil a day.

That's not radical. That's just paying attention.

Full article with sources is linked below:

Gluten-Free vs. Certified Gluten-Free: What the Symbols Mean

You pick up a product at the store. The front says "gluten-free." However, next to it, there's a small symbol. A circle with a grain crossed out. Or, a logo from an organization you may or may not recognize.

That symbol means the product has been independently certified by a third party organization. Not just labeled by the manufacturer. The question most shoppers eventually ask is, whether that distinction actually matters.

The answer depends on what you understand about how gluten-free labeling works, behind the scenes.

What Certification Adds

In the United States, the FDA defines "gluten-free" as less than 20 ppm of gluten. Manufacturers who use that label are responsible for meeting the standard. However, the FDA does not require manufacturers to test finished products for gluten content. It does not audit production facilities. Oversight is largely complaint driven and occurs after a product is already on the shelf.

In Canada, Health Canada sets the same 20 ppm threshold. In the UK, gluten-free claims fall under "Assimilated Regulation" (EU) No. 828/2014. It is also at a 20 ppm threshold. Australia holds the strictest standard globally, with zero detectable gluten.

Certification adds a step between the manufacturer's claim and the consumer's trust. Third party organizations test ingredients, they test finished products, they audit facilities, and conduct ongoing surveillance. The specifics vary by program. However, the core idea is the same. An independent body checks the work, rather than relying solely on the manufacturer to self report.

The Major Programs by Country

Not all certification programs are built the same. The differences come down to three things. The gluten threshold they test for. How they verify compliance. Plus, which organizations endorse them.

United States: The Gluten-Free Certification Organization (GFCO) certifies to 10 ppm. Stricter than the FDA's 20 ppm threshold. Their process includes; ingredient testing, annual facility audits, finished product testing, and off-the-shelf surveillance. The GFCO mark appears on over 60,000 products globally. The Gluten-Free Food Program (GFFP) certifies to 5 ppm. BRCGS operates the Global Standard Gluten-Free, which is facility based and built around HACCP principles. It's endorsed by Beyond Celiac.

Canada: Canada's primary certification path runs through the same BRCGS Global Standard. Co-created by Celiac Canada and the Allergen Control Group in 2011. Products from facilities that meet the standard can carry the Celiac Canada trademark. The threshold is 20 ppm.

United Kingdom: The Crossed Grain symbol. Managed by the Association of European Coeliac Societies (AOECS) and licensed by Coeliac UK. Certifies to 20 ppm, with accredited lab testing and a facility audit. It currently appears on over 21,000 products across Europe.

Australia: Coeliac Australia runs an endorsement program, aligned with the country's regulatory standard. Zero detectable gluten. It's functionally considered the strictest certification program in the world.

The Debate

This is where it gets interesting. Not everyone in the celiac community agrees that certification is necessary.

In 2026, the Celiac Disease Foundation published their position. Third party certification is not required to meet the FDA's gluten-free standard. Their argument. The FDA's definition is science based, and protective for most people with celiac disease. A certification seal does not make a product inherently safer than one, which simply carries the gluten-free label. The CDF described certification as something brands pursue voluntarily. Mostly as a marketing tool.

The certification bodies see it differently. Their argument centers on a practical gap. The FDA does not require manufacturers to test finished products. The FDA does not audit facilities. Additionally, enforcement is largely reactive. Certification programs fill that gap, by independently confirming that what's on the label, actually matches what's in the product.

In the end, both sides do have a point. The regulatory standard is what defines "gluten-free." That standard is real, enforceable, and based on established science. At the same time though. The system that enforces it, relies heavily on manufacturers doing the right thing, without ongoing independent oversight. Certification provides that oversight for brands that choose to participate.

The Bottom Line

The difference between "gluten-free" and "certified gluten-free", comes down to who is checking. With a standard label, the manufacturer is responsible for meeting the threshold. With certification, an independent third party confirms it.

The regulatory standard is real and it is enforceable. For most people with celiac disease, it is considered protective. At the same time, the system behind that standard does not always require testing. It also does not always involve facility audits. Moreover, in most countries. Enforcement is largely reactive.

Certification mostly exists to close that gap. Whether that extra step matters to you, is a personal decision. However, for shoppers who want independent confirmation, that a product has been tested, audited and reviewed. These programs were built for exactly that reason.

Full article with sources is linked below: