Is Omega-6 Good for You? https://omegaquant.com/is-omega-6-good-for-you/
The article didn't provide much in the way of specific advice (thus making it a quick and easy read). But the interesting summary is that maybe you should consume higher levels of Omega-6 fatty acids. (In spite of what the internet has told us.)
The article discusses paywalled research from Omega Quant's Bill Harris, et al.:
Biomarkers of Dietary Omega-6 Fatty Acids and Incident Cardiovascular Disease and Mortality: An Individual-Level Pooled Analysis of 30 Cohort Studies
https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/abs/10. ... 118.038908
Originally published 11 Apr 2019 Circulation. 2019;139:2422–2436
Global dietary recommendations for and cardiovascular effects of linoleic acid, the major dietary omega-6 fatty acid, and its major metabolite, arachidonic acid, remain controversial. To address this uncertainty and inform international recommendations, we evaluated how in vivo circulating and tissue levels of linoleic acid (LA) and arachidonic acid (AA) relate to incident cardiovascular disease (CVD) across multiple international studies.
We performed harmonized, de novo, individual-level analyses in a global consortium of 30 prospective observational studies from 13 countries. Multivariable-adjusted associations of circulating and adipose tissue LA and AA biomarkers with incident total CVD and subtypes (coronary heart disease, ischemic stroke, cardiovascular mortality) were investigated according to a prespecified analytic plan. Levels of LA and AA, measured as the percentage of total fatty acids, were evaluated linearly according to their interquintile range (ie, the range between the midpoint of the first and fifth quintiles), and categorically by quintiles. Study-specific results were pooled using inverse-variance–weighted meta-analysis. Heterogeneity was explored by age, sex, race, diabetes mellitus, statin use, aspirin use, omega-3 levels, and fatty acid desaturase 1 genotype (when available).
In 30 prospective studies with medians of follow-up ranging 2.5 to 31.9 years, 15 198 incident cardiovascular events occurred among 68 659 participants. Higher levels of LA were significantly associated with lower risks of total CVD, cardiovascular mortality, and ischemic stroke, with hazard ratios per interquintile range of 0.93 (95% CI, 0.88–0.99), 0.78 (0.70–0.85), and 0.88 (0.79–0.98), respectively, and nonsignificantly with lower coronary heart disease risk (0.94; 0.88–1.00). Relationships were similar for LA evaluated across quintiles. AA levels were not associated with higher risk of cardiovascular outcomes; in a comparison of extreme quintiles, higher levels were associated with lower risk of total CVD (0.92; 0.86–0.99). No consistent heterogeneity by population subgroups was identified in the observed relationships.
In pooled global analyses, higher in vivo circulating and tissue levels of LA and possibly AA were associated with lower risk of major cardiovascular events. These results support a favorable role for LA in CVD prevention.
Unfortunately, the research doesn't consider Alzheimer's or APOE4. The paper does seem to be available on Sci-Hub.