I consume canola oil and find it useful for some types of cooking. Overall, however, high quality EVOO is in a different league as a targeted health supplement. With respect to ASCVD, keep in mind that atherogenic particles (primarily ApoB and Lp(a)) cause damage only in the presence of inflammation, one metric for which is OxLDL.
For EVOO:
-
PREDIMED (Estruch et al., 2013; corrected 2018) remains the landmark RCT — ~7,400 high-CV-risk participants, Mediterranean diet supplemented with ~4 tbsp/day EVOO reduced major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) by ~31% vs. control (low-fat diet). This is a hard-outcome RCT, one of the few in nutritional science.
-
PREDIMED-Plus (ongoing, ongoing publications) continues to show benefits of Mediterranean diet with EVOO as the primary fat source.
- Observational data from the Mediterranean cohort studies consistently show reduced ASCVD incidence with higher EVOO consumption.
For Canola Oil:
- There is no comparable hard-outcome RCT. The CO evidence base is almost entirely composed of lipid biomarker studies and surrogate endpoint trials.
- The COMIT (Canola Oil Multicenter Intervention Trial) — Jenkins et al., 2014 — is the most rigorous CO-specific trial. It compared five dietary oils/blends in a crossover design. Conventional canola oil and a DHA-enriched canola blend both improved lipid profiles (LDL-C, total:HDL ratio) compared to the Western diet control, and performed comparably to or slightly better than other plant oils on some measures. But this measured biomarkers, not events.
Assessment: EVOO has the stronger ASCVD evidence by a substantial margin, primarily because PREDIMED actually measured what we care about. CO advocates are essentially arguing from mechanism and biomarker extrapolation.
The omega-6:omega-3 ratio in CO (~2:1) is frequently cited as superior to EVOO’s (~12:1), and from a theoretical standpoint this is reasonable. However, ALA-to-EPA/DHA conversion efficiency is notoriously poor (~5–8% to EPA, <1% to DHA), substantially discounting the practical omega-3 benefit
The claim that CO outperforms EVOO rests on a narrow evidentiary base — primarily modest LDL-C advantages and the theoretical omega-3 benefit from ALA. This is not nothing, but it’s insufficient to dethrone EVOO as the more cardiovascularly beneficial oil when the full evidence landscape is considered:
Synthesis and Assessment
| Domain |
CO Advantage |
EVOO Advantage |
| ALA/omega-3 content |
✓ (modest practical benefit) |
— |
| LDL-C reduction |
✓ (marginal) |
— |
| ApoB reduction |
≈ (comparable) |
— |
| Lp(a) effects |
≈ (limited data for both) |
≈ |
| Polyphenol bioactivity |
— |
✓✓ (strong) |
| Inflammation markers |
— |
✓✓ (robust) |
| oxLDL reduction |
— |
✓ |
| Hard CV outcome RCTs |
— |
✓✓ (PREDIMED) |
| Oxidative stability |
— |
✓ |
| LDL particle quality |
— |
✓ (speculative) |
- A key consideration: EVOO polyphenols reduce LDL oxidizability. Oxidized LDL (oxLDL) is the atherogenically active fraction. If EVOO produces a somewhat higher LDL-C but with substantially less oxidized LDL, the net atherogenic burden may actually favor EVOO. Fitó et al. and others have demonstrated EVOO polyphenol-mediated reduction in oxLDL independent of LDL-C levels. This is mechanistically important and likely underweighted in studies that only report standard lipid panels.
-
ApoB-to-LDL-C dissociation: EVOO’s effect on LDL particle size and density deserves attention. High-polyphenol EVOO may favorably shift LDL particle phenotype (toward larger, less dense particles), reducing ApoB per unit LDL-C — though the evidence here is less robust and needs more direct particle counting studies (NMR lipoprotein profiling).
Speculative judgment: The “canola is better” argument likely emerges from a combination of: (1) industry-adjacent research funding (the Canadian canola industry is sophisticated and active), (2) an overweighting of lipid panel biomarkers relative to inflammation and particle quality, and (3) a failure to distinguish between genuine high-polyphenol EVOO and generic olive oil in the comparison studies. When you move the goalposts from fasting LDL-C to ApoB, oxLDL, inflammatory mediators, and hard outcomes, the evidentiary advantage shifts decisively toward EVOO.
The most defensible position remains: for a patient replacing SFA (butter, lard, coconut oil) with either CO or EVOO, both are substantial improvements. But for the marginal comparison between CO and high-polyphenol EVOO specifically, the current evidence does not support CO’s superiority and arguably supports EVOO’s, particularly for inflammation-driven ASCVD risk.
RCC on Olive Oil & Inflamation 2025-36.pdf (1.6 MB)