First, Nina Teichholz, and now Scientific American dismantles the quack.
[Early-afternoon update]
Should we eat meat? Thoughts from (of all people) Bill Gates.
First, Nina Teichholz, and now Scientific American dismantles the quack.
[Early-afternoon update]
Should we eat meat? Thoughts from (of all people) Bill Gates.
I actually tend to follow most of these. I eat mostly at home, unless I’m traveling (and even then I’ll cook, if I have a kitchen), and rarely go out. I shop the outer perimeter of the grocery store (meat and produce), and tend to avoid the inner aisles.
Nina Teichholz fisks the quack Dean Ornish within an inch of his low-fat life.
It’s a little confusing, though. The usual format is to blockquote the fiskee, not the critique.
Playing politics with our health.
Yes, she is a loon.
Though I don’t think this author is quite up to date on the science herself:
Coffee, before Starbucks turns it into a milkshake, is pretty healthy for you.
After, too. There’s nothing wrong with milk or fat in coffee.
The results of a controlled metabolic study:
Even short-term consumption of a Paleolithic-type diet improved glucose control and lipid profiles in people with type 2 diabetes compared with a conventional diet containing moderate salt intake, low-fat dairy, whole grains and legumes.
Color me unsurprised.
An interesting story on the state of the art. It’s still terrible.
I think he’s too pessimistic, though, and ignores the technology that will probably create the breakthrough: 3-D printing.
…is not the enemy.
It’s almost like everything we’ve been taught about nutrition for the past several decades is BS.
How many thousands of people has his junk science killed?
“I ate 5000 calories of saturated fat per day, and this is what happened.”
Carb loading is a crock.