# Narration and storyboard draft: Replacing Saturated Fat with Linoleic-Acid-Rich Oils

Authored draft, approximately 60–90 seconds; no rendered video claimed.

The seed-oil debate bundles several different questions. Replacing saturated fat with a linoleic-rich oil can lower lipid markers. That does not by itself establish fewer heart attacks in the exact dietary setting. Our review preserves both the Minnesota clinical null and Sydney's adverse historical coronary result, but does not turn cholesterol-death correlations into randomized proof of harm. Positive whole-diet programmes also matter; their benefits cannot simply be assigned to one oil ingredient. The current grade reflects the precise claim and the original evidence we could verify. Older positive trial scans remain a stated access gap, and oils containingALAwere not excluded merely because the claim was silently narrowed to purelinoleic acid. Controlled feeding does not establish a blanket inflammatory-toxicity claim. Carnivore surveys describe perceived benefits but do not demonstrate long-term cardiovascular superiority. The next useful study would compare defined food replacements, verify what people actually eat, and measure adjudicated coronary events.

1. Show the exact claim, grade and confidence.
2. Show selected publication milestones; label experimental systems and clinical endpoints.
3. Contrast the strongest result with its source-specific limitation.
4. End with the boundary experiment and primary-source links.

Use authored schematics; do not depict Consensus meters as causal confidence or reproduce publisher graphics without appropriate permission.