Longevity & Aging · Supplements
olive oil decreases all-cause mortality
In plain terms: Does olive oil help you live longer?
Strong support Longevity & Aging 💰 Industry COI noted🔬 Includes disconfirming
Part of: • Olive oil
RefutedContestedStrong support
consensus score 1.00
Higher olive oil intake is consistently linked to lower risk of dying over time - roughly 10-17% lower - and swapping butter or margarine for olive oil looks beneficial. It's mostly observational, and the one randomized trial showed a clear heart-death benefit but didn't quite reach significance for overall mortality. Encouraging and low-risk.
📅 Last reviewed: 2026-07-15 ⓘ
Evidence ladder
How far up the ladder this claim has climbed. A high consensus on a low rung means "consistent so far," not "proven in people."
Top evidence so far: All trials, pooled (Meta-analysis)
MechanismIn-vitroAnimalObservationalRCTMeta-analysis
How the studies fall
6 support 0 contradict 1 tested null 0 mixed · 7 sources, 6 independent groups · 4 superseded — pooled inside a review, counted once
What the evidence shows
Higher olive oil intake is consistently associated with living longer: several dose-response meta-analyses put all-cause mortality roughly 10–17% lower at higher intakes (about 8% lower per 10 g/day), backed by large cohorts (the Nurses'/Health Professionals studies, EPIC-Spain, Moli-sani) that also show benefit from swapping butter or margarine for olive oil.
The evidence (13)
| Source | Grade | Stance | Quality | Finding |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ke Y, Fan H, Zhao Y, Fu X, Wang M, Gao Y, Chen Y, Huo W, Zhang W, Wang L, Wu Y, Li X, Zhang D, Hu F, Zhang M, Sun L, Lu J, Hu D 2024 · Food Funct | meta-analysis | supports | high | Dose-response meta 30 studies (2.7M): all-cause mortality RR 0.85; 8% lower per 10 g/d. |
| Del Saz-Lara A, Saz-Lara A, Cavero-Redondo I, Pascual-Morena C, Mazarío-Gárgoles C, Visioli F, López de Las Hazas MC, Dávalos A 2024 · Food Funct | meta-analysis | supports | moderate | Systematic review + DerSimonian-Laird random-effects meta-analysis of prospective cohorts, searched to October 2024: 'Fourteen studies were included in the systematic review and seven in the meta-analysis.' Pooled all-cause mortality: 'an association between OO consumption and reduction in all-cause mortality (HR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.80-0.91)', summarised as a 15% reduction. Right claim, right direction, but only seven cohorts pooled (fewer than xia-2022's 13, already moderate here) and the paywalled abstract reports no heterogeneity, risk-of-bias, GRADE or publication-bias figures, and no PROSPERO registration - quality moderate rather than high. Its seven cohorts are nested inside the far larger oo-ke-2024 and oo-martinez-2022 pools. |
| Zhang Y, Chadaideh KS, Li Y, Li Y, Gu X, Liu Y, Guasch-Ferre M, Rimm EB, Hu FB, Willett WC, Stampfer MJ, Wang DD 2025 · JAMA Intern Med 2025;185(5):549-560 | observational | supports | high | NHS + NHSII + HPFS, 221,054 US adults, up to 33 y, 50,932 deaths: olive oil per 5 g/d HR 0.92 (95% CI 0.91-0.94) for total mortality, P for trend < .001. (The 17% mortality reduction for swapping 10 g/d butter is for TOTAL plant-based oils - safflower, soybean, corn, canola, olive - not olive oil alone.) |
| Tessier AJ, Cortese M, Yuan C, Bjornevik K, Ascherio A, Wang DD, Chavarro JE, Stampfer MJ, Hu FB, Willett WC, Guasch-Ferré M 2024 · JAMA Netw Open | observational | supports | moderate | NHS + HPFS, 92,383 US adults free of CVD/cancer at 1990 baseline, 28 y, 2,183,095 person-years - but the only modelled outcome is cause-specific. 'Main Outcome and Measure Dementia death was ascertained from death records' and 'Participants were censored at death from causes other than dementia'; the 37,649 total deaths appear once as context ('this study documented a total of 4751 dementia deaths (3473 in NHS and 1278 in HPFS; 37 649 total deaths)') and are never modelled. Direction on the endpoint it did measure is uniformly inverse, not mixed: 'Consuming at least 7 g/d of olive oil was associated with a 28% lower risk of dementia-related death (adjusted pooled HR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.64-0.81]) compared with never or rarely consuming olive oil', holding after APOE e4 adjustment (HR 0.66) - though it is carried by women (HR 0.67 [0.59-0.77]) and null in men (HR 0.87 [0.69-1.09]). The all-cause estimate for this exact sample belongs to the group sibling Guasch-Ferre 2022, which the authors cite as their own prior work: 'Recently, we showed that olive oil consumption was associated with a lower risk of total and cause-specific mortality in large US prospective cohort studies'. Read from PMC full text 2026-08-19. |
| Buckland G, Mayén AL, Agudo A, Travier N, Navarro C, Huerta JM, Chirlaque MD, Barricarte A, Ardanaz E, Moreno-Iribas C, Marin P, Quirós JR, Redondo ML, Amiano P, Dorronsoro M, Arriola L, Molina E, Sanchez MJ, Gonzalez CA 2012 · Am J Clin Nutr | observational | supports | high | EPIC-Spain cohort (40,622 adults from 5 Spanish regions, 13.4 y, 1915 deaths), olive oil measured directly: 'In comparison with nonconsumers, the highest quartile of olive oil consumption was associated with a 26% (95% CI: 13%, 36%) reduction in risk of overall mortality'. Continuous, energy-adjusted estimate (which avoids the atypical nonconsumer reference group): 'For each increase in olive oil of 10 g · 2000 kcal⁻¹ · d⁻¹, there was a 7% (95% CI: 3%, 10%) decreased risk of overall mortality'. Same cohort as oo-buckland-2011 (shared group_id epic-spain-buckland); this is the informative member of that pair. ↩ SUPERSEDED — pooled in the review above, counted once |
| Ruggiero E, Di Castelnuovo A, Costanzo S, Esposito S, De Curtis A, Persichillo M, Cerletti C, Donati MB, de Gaetano G, Iacoviello L, Bonaccio M, Moli-sani Study Investigators 2024 · Eur J Clin Nutr | observational | supports | high | Moli-sani (22k): >3 tbsp/d olive oil HR 0.80 all-cause mortality, independent of diet quality. |
| Guasch-Ferré M, Li Y, Willett WC, Sun Q, Sampson L, Salas-Salvadó J, Martínez-González MA, Stampfer MJ, Hu FB 2022 · J Am Coll Cardiol | observational | supports | high | NHS+HPFS, 92,383 US adults, 28 y, 36,856 deaths: highest olive-oil intake (>7 g/d) vs never/rarely, pooled HR 0.81 (95% CI 0.78-0.84) for all-cause mortality; substituting 10 g/d of margarine, butter, mayonnaise or dairy fat with olive oil was associated with 8%-34% lower mortality. But: 'No significant associations were observed when olive oil was compared with other vegetable oils combined.' ↩ SUPERSEDED — pooled in the review above, counted once |
| Martínez-González MA, Sayón-Orea C, Bullón-Vela V, Bes-Rastrollo M, Rodríguez-Artalejo F, Yusta-Boyo MJ, García-Solano M 2022 · Clin Nutr | meta-analysis | supports | moderate | Outcome-wide systematic review + random-effects meta-analysis of prospective cohorts (searched through January 2022): 36 studies in the SR, 27 pooled — 'twenty-seven studies (24 prospective cohorts and 3 different reports from one RCT) were assessed in 4 quantitative random-effects meta-analyses.' All-cause-mortality pool: 733,420 participants with 174,081 deaths; 'inversely associated with all-cause mortality (RR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.85 to 0.93, per 25 g/d).' Direction supports the claim on a tight CI, but two things temper it to moderate rather than high: the paper's own heterogeneity admission — 'Only the results for T2D were homogeneous. Specific sources of heterogeneity for the other 3 outcomes were not always apparent' — and the pool counting a single RCT as three separate reports. Abstract-grade only (Elsevier paywall, not in PMC), so no forest plots, risk-of-bias or publication-bias figures are visible, and no PROSPERO registration is stated. Its cohorts are nested inside the larger, later oo-ke-2024 pool (30 cohort articles / 2,710,351 participants, searched to March 2024). ↩ SUPERSEDED — pooled in the review above, counted once |
| Guasch-Ferré M, Hu FB, Martínez-González MA, Fitó M, Bulló M, Estruch R, Ros E, Corella D, Recondo J, Gómez-Gracia E, Fiol M, Lapetra J, Serra-Majem L, Muñoz MA, Pintó X, Lamuela-Raventós RM, Basora J, Buil-Cosiales P, Sorlí JV, Ruiz-Gutiérrez V, Martínez JA, Salas-Salvadó J 2014 · BMC Med | observational | tested-null | moderate | OBSERVATIONAL cohort analysis inside PREDIMED (n=7,216, 323 deaths, median 4.8 y; exposure = baseline FFQ olive-oil tertiles measured before randomization, not a randomized comparison). 'No statistically significant associations were found for cancer mortality and all-cause mortality.' Table 2 model 3, top vs bottom tertile of total olive oil, HR 0.78 (0.58, 1.05), P for trend 0.18; per 10 g/d 0.94 (0.87, 1.00). EVOO alone (Table 3 model 3) 0.82 (0.61 to 1.09), P for trend 0.25. Null on the directional claim -> contradicts, but a weak, low-precision null: every point estimate favours olive oil, the authors read it as 'a non-significant possible inverse relation', and a secondary repeated-measures analysis gives 'HR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.56 to 1.00'. Cardiovascular mortality was significant (HR 0.52; 0.29 to 0.93, 81 deaths) but is a different outcome. Quality moderate: blinded adjudication, extensive adjustment; self-reported FFQ exposure (validity r=0.60), conceded residual confounding, trial oil donated by industry. Underpowered trend toward the claim (point estimate favours it, interval includes no effect): graded tested-null per CONVENTIONS §5 second clarification 2026-09-26. |
| Zhang Y, Zhuang P, Wu F, He W, Mao L, Jia W, Zhang Y, Chen X, Jiao J 2021 · BMC Med | observational | supports | high | NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study, 521,120 US adults aged 50-71, '129,328 deaths were documented during a median follow-up of 16 years.' On the claim's own outcome (all-cause mortality), Model 3 vs non-consumers: T1 0.96 (0.94-0.99), T2 0.97 (0.95-0.98), T3 '0.96 (95% CI, 0.95–0.98) for olive oil', P-trend < 0.001, and continuously 'each 1-tablespoon/day increment of canola oil or olive oil consumption was associated with 2% and 3% of reductions in all-cause mortality, respectively'. Swapping fats helps more than adding oil: 'Substituting 1 tablespoon/day (8 g/day) corn oil, canola oil, or olive oil for equivalent amounts of butter was associated with 5%, 6%, and 7% lower all-cause mortality, respectively.' Stance (supports), grade (observational) and quality (high) all stand — n, >99% follow-up, adjustment for HEI-2015/energy/all other oils, and robustness to a 4-year lag, exclusion of prevalent disease and a propensity score. The PREVIOUS EXTRACT DID NOT: it quoted 'HR 0.96/tbsp cardiometabolic mortality', which is the wrong outcome for this claim (the cardiometabolic figure is 0.96 per tablespoon, the all-cause figure is 0.97 per tablespoon / 0.96 by tertile) — right by coincidence, not by citation. Three caveats belong on this vote. (1) Dose: top-tertile olive-oil intake was a median 3.8 g/day (IQR 2.6-6.2) against a modelled 1-tablespoon = 8 g/day increment, and the authors concede 'the overall intake level of individual vegetable oils was low in this population with a relatively narrow intake range' — the tertile HR is the estimate observed data supports, the per-tablespoon HR extrapolates ~2x past it. (2) Exposure was captured once at baseline (1995-96) and 'Portion sizes for individual oils/fats were estimated based on the 1994–1996 USDA Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals (CSFII)', so between-person contrast is frequency-driven with an imputed portion. (3) 'the inverse association of olive oil consumption with all-cause mortality was restricted to alcohol drinkers' (P-interaction = 0.003), an explicit residual-confounding signal; 'Finally, a causal relationship may not be established due to the observational nature.' POOL NOTE: this is not a null and should not be described as one — 0.96 (0.95-0.98) is significant with very tight CIs; it anchors the LOW-EFFECT end of the I2 = 93% mortality pool against NHS/HPFS at 0.79-0.81, and the low-intake range above is the likeliest reason. DOUBLE-COUNT: oo-xia-2022 this note and pools this exact 0.96 (0.95-0.98) estimate as ~73% of its participants. |
| Xia M, Zhong Y, Peng Y, Qian C 2022 · Front Nutr | meta-analysis | supports | moderate | Random-effects meta-analysis of prospective cohorts (PubMed + Scopus to 31 Jul 2022): 'the highest intake of olive oil was related to an obvious decrease in the risk of all-cause mortality (RR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.77-0.90, p < 0.001), with substantial between-study heterogeneity (I2 = 93%, p < 0.001)'; 5 g/day increment RR 0.96, and 'For all-cause death, there seemed no preventive effects when increasing the intake level beyond 20 g/days.' Stance and quality (moderate) both stand; the count in the previous extract does not — the mortality pool is not 13 cohorts: 'A total of 11 independent cohorts from 10 publications have reported the risk of all-cause mortality, comprising 713,000 subjects and 173,817 deaths.' The I2 of 93% is structural, not noise: Figure 2 shows the Guasch-Ferre NHS/HPFS cohorts at RR 0.79-0.81 against the single largest cohort, Zhang 2021 NIH-AARP (n = 521,120, 73% of the pooled participants), at RR 0.96 (0.95-0.98), with Trichopoulou 2003 null (0.96, 0.83-1.11) — so the headline 17% reduction describes none of the large contributing cohorts well. Publication bias negative (AS-Thompson p = 0.175), all included studies NOS >= 7, leave-one-out stable, clean non-industry funding. Pool is nested inside oo-ke-2024 and overlaps oo-martinez-2022 almost completely (733,420 participants / 174,081 deaths there vs 713,000 / 173,817 here). ↩ SUPERSEDED — pooled in the review above, counted once |
| Zou X, Liu H 2025 · Food Sci Nutr | meta-analysis | supports | moderate | Umbrella review (PROSPERO CRD420251146945) of 19 systematic reviews/meta-analyses, searched only to 22 Nov 2023; it POOLS NOTHING OF ITS OWN — 'The estimated summary effect with 95% CI and dose–response was extracted from every eligible article.' On all-cause mortality it re-states two already-published estimates: 'OO showed a protective effect on all‐cause mortality (SHR = 0.94, 95% CI: 0.92, 0.97), and every 25 g/day OO intake was associated with an 11% lower relative risk of all‐cause mortality with potential heterogeneity (RR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.85, 0.93)' — which is verbatim the Martinez-Gonzalez 2022 pool the vault already holds as oo-martinez-2022 (RR 0.89, 0.85-0.93 per 25 g/d, 733,420 participants / 174,081 deaths) — plus an all-MUFA-combined figure the umbrella itself grades very low: 'The risk of all‐cause mortality was significantly reduced when correlated with MUFA from multiple sources (RR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.83, 0.96)'. Direction is protective and the umbrella's own GRADE for it is moderate, but this is a restatement, not new data: its Table 6 mortality row carries I2 = 65.20 and an Egger p of 0.00, and the authors warn '75% of the studies did not report publication bias, causing a significant lack of transparency and potentially inflating effects in the original meta‐analyses.' Counting it in the primary layer would double-count oo-martinez-2022, so role = review (precedent u). |
| Buckland G, Agudo A, Travier N, Huerta JM, Cirera L, Tormo MJ, Navarro C, Chirlaque MD, Moreno-Iribas C, Ardanaz E, Barricarte A, Etxeberria J, Marin P, Quirós JR, Redondo ML, Larrañaga N, Amiano P, Dorronsoro M, Arriola L, Basterretxea M, Sanchez MJ, Molina E, González CA 2011 · Br J Nutr | observational | supports | low | EPIC-Spain cohort (40 622 adults, 13.4 y, 1855 deaths). The measured exposure is a composite 18-unit rMED score over nine components, not olive oil: 'A high compared with a low rMED score was associated with a significant reduction in mortality from all causes (hazard ratio (HR) 0·79; 95 % CI 0·69, 0·91)'. Olive oil enters only as an attribution - 'A high olive oil intake and moderate alcohol consumption contributed most to this association' - with no standalone olive-oil hazard ratio reported. Right direction, weak claim-specific weight; the direct olive-oil analysis of this same cohort is oo-buckland-2012. |
Disagree, or know a study we missed?
We grade by evidence, not opinions. The way to weigh in is to point us to a study we haven't cited (check the evidence table above first), or to flag a problem with one we have. Every submission is reviewed; if it holds up, the grade updates and shows in Science Changes Its Mind.
Opens a short form. You'll sign in with Google so submissions are tied to a real account — we don't display your identity, and we only accept a link we can verify (PubMed, DOI, ClinicalTrials.gov).
Educational only, not medical advice. Grades and scores reflect published evidence weighted by study design and quality; see the methodology.