It’s strange that this comment labels the butter vs. Crisco argument — the bit about humans consuming butter for at least 3000 years — as a naturalistic fallacy, and then goes on to defend seed oils because “humans have been consuming seed oils for many thousands of years”.
Do you see the irony?
Yes, humans have been consuming seed oils in the form of seeds and nuts since the inception of our species, and well before, on down the ancestral tree; nuts and seeds like olives, almonds, and such. But humans have not gone out of their way to consume the likes of cottonseed or rapeseed, and I think one of the larger points here is that humans can’t consume the likes of cottonseed or rapeseed or safflower without industrial-scale machines and processes.
Just because humans have consumed nuts and seeds of some type, does not mean humans are equipped to consume nuts and seeds of all types. There’s a difference between a plant-human relationship that is based on a long history of mutually beneficial co-evolution (wheat, olives, almond, apples) and a plant-human relationship that has literally just started and is only possible because of industrial-scale machinery.
Some of our food relationships have already been validated by historical use, other food relationships have just begun. I think this “food is healthy until proven otherwise” approach is a dangerous one in a world where new “foods” are being invented at a rapid pace, and are being tested on human health in real-time.