You are literally the definition of the dunning kruger effekt, its hilarious.
But fine, i have time, so let see what you provided.
The first paper is just stating that some pesticides that were tested on rats and mice were carcinogenic to the animals. Very low level evidence. Show me data that the plants we eat that were in contact with these pesticides have negative health effects on humans.
Now to your second link. Lets go through these toxins one by one shall we?
Aquatic biotoxins
Mostly effects fish and mussels, so no problem for vegans.
Cyanogenic glycosides
Only found in 25 edible plants. When you cook,soak or peel these plants properly you will have no problem with cyanogenic glycosides.
Furocoumarins
Only phototherapy with furocoumarins to treat skin conditions have been shown to increase skin cancer risk. Whether or not dietary furocoumarin exposure may confer the same risk is not known.
What we know is that citrus fruits, which contain furocoumarin, have several health benefits.
Protection against stomach cancer : https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10120-007-0447-2
beneficial effects on body weight control: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/ptr.6673
Helping with cvd problems: shorturl.at/FGPT9
Lectins
No one eats raw beans. So again no problem.
Mycotoxins
Just don’t eat mouldy food. Also: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31608429/
Solanines and chaconine
No one eats green tomatos or biter peels.
Poisonous mushrooms
Don’t eat poisonous mushrooms.
Pyrrolizidine alkaloids
No one eats these plants that contain these toxins.
Now lets look at your third link.
Fiber does not cause diverticulosis. High fibre intake reduces the risk of diverticular disease. This systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies from 2019, (yours is from 2012 and is only a single cross-sectional study), shows this: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7058673/#__ffn_sectitle
So my evidence has more weight, judged by the evidence hierarchy. Also, your study showed that people who eat more fiber have better bowel movement.
Lets keep going (:
Link number four.
Bad and low level evidence. (Rat and mice studies) Polyunsaturated fats have several health benefits.
Replacing the energy from saturated fat with polyunsaturated fat or carbohydrate appear to be useful strategies against cvd. They also found out that reducing saturated fat intake for at least two years causes a potentially important reduction in combined cardiovascular events: https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD011737.pub2/full
Its also effective against Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0162368
Link number five.
Again, low level mice studies. Here is actually good data that shows that consumption of soybean oil actually improves Lipid and Lipoprotein Profile: https://aocs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/lipd.12298
Link number six.
I don’t care about articles. Give me a direct link to the scientific data.
Link number seven…. Im getting real tired.
I don’t care what any industry covers up or if they sponsor certain studies (no matter if its the beef, sugar or oil industry). Only because a study is supported by the meat,sugar or oil industry, doesn’t mean it’s invalid.
Now to the rest of your claims.
It is crystal clear that saturated fat increases LDL: https://www.bmj.com/content/314/7074/112.long
And it is a FACT, and i cant say it loud enough, that LDL causes atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/38/32/2459/3745109?login=false
This is not just some basic data, this is high level evidence and at the top of the evidence hierarchy. My evidence objectively stumps yours to the ground.
How does it feel to be objectively wrong?