If I'm reading the response chain right, you're actually not saying it's untrue, just that criticizing veg oils is something that people will call you a conspiracy theorist for suggesting?

Cause if so, I'm kinda with you. I definitely think veg oils are awful for health, and have basically been called crazy for saying so.

Not much conspiracy there though excepting maybe the main thematic one which is that unhealthful stuff is foisted on the populace to keep them dumb and compliant.

Yup, we’re on the same page on both counts.

...is this a kind of thing people say? If you have something to argue about the healthiness of certain foods, make your argument.

> is this a kind of thing people say?

Is what a thing people say?

Just point to something and say "that thing you said is something other people have said, and I call those people conspiracy theorists, which presumably means something to me, but probably isn't the literal definition of conspiracy theorist, because there's no actual conspiracy in something being unhealthy inherently, and so don't say that thing."

Basically, completely avoiding the object level and jumping to a meta discussion that can only be political and not further the discussion.

How is a government agency blocking imports of food that parents wish to buy for their children not a political topic?

It would be disingenuous at this stage in our society to make the case that speech is not heavily regulated and often labeled as conspiracy (and worse) when it runs counter to corporate and establishment narratives. Hence, the metapolitical comment.