Could we get a less audacious title? The article's about how butter appears to be healthier than corn oil -- and that, in general, the health differences between butter and linoleic-acid-based vegetable oils may be a wash. This is pretty interesting, but it doesn't upend the apple cart quite as comprehensively as the current title suggests.
I don't see the title as particularly objectionable, but given that this topic was discussed just yesterday, we'll probably treat the current post as a dupe.
The previous discussion of this topic went with Replacing butter with vegetable oils does not cut heart disease risk (2016) even though the title of the Atlantic article was Is Vegetable Oil Really Better for Your Heart?
The Quartz article, which was apparently posted today, talks about research published "this week", but it links the same research article from April 2016 as the Atlantic article.
That sounds like a better title, at least IMHO... I didn't realize this had been discussed recently. (Wait, "recently" as in "yesterday"? Is this article just a duplicate?)
(As for which fats to use, I figure olive oil used in modest quantities probably can't hurt me, so I'll stick to that for cooking at the moment.)
I would recommend avocado oil for cooking, and olive oil for salads etc. Avocado oil has a much higher smoke point, so it makes for easier cooking and fewer carcinogens.
Olive oil is fine for cooking as long as you're constantly moving it (e.g. sauté, stir fry, etc), because then it never gets a chance to really heat up beyond its smoke point. It's not great for deep frying or foods that you leave in the pan, like steak or seared fish (unless you get refined olive oil, but then what's the point?).
That said, I second the recommendation for avocado oil for general cooking.
