Eliyahu Goldratt was a physicist who wrote business novels about how to improve production line efficiency and for awhile were required reading in business schools around the country. He developed a method called "Evaporating the cloud" which stated that all conflicts occur at the level of assumptions.
Let's look at our assumptions:
1. We are all interested in better health.
2. We will carefully examine each other's sources.
@Daves_Not_Here, you are violating the second assumption, so our conflict can never be resolved. I've recommended source material which you refuse to read. Meanwhile, I've carefully studied almost every research report people have suggested. Yesterday, @Bogdel recommended "Eat to Live" by Dr. Furhman. I bought the book and read it entirely. I also studied the Eco-Keto report. In other words, I spent most of my time yesterday on the topic. I agreed with most of the things in Dr. Furhman's book, but I do have a couple minor questions.
There is no evidence in the eco-keto study that even suggests any of the participants went into ketosis. In fact, given the amount of plant or animal fat in the diets, it's unlikely any of them went into ketosis. The keto people seem to think there are no carbs in non-starchy vegetables. By percentage, it's probably about 60 to 80% of the calories eaten. You voiced the opinion that any diet that gets you to eat more plants is good. I'll rephrase it in an important way. Any diet that substitutes a tiny amount of vegetables for the obvious junk in the Standard American Diet will improve markers of degenerative disease. However, this small amount is not likely to improve long-term health.
You made the statement that NIH funding is a sign of a good study. It used to be, up until about 1980. However, there are 28 institutes in the NIH, but no institute of nutrition. The NIH is infested with people with ties to the meat and dairy industry, pharmaceutical industry and food industry. There is a more insidious element that most don't recognize; that is the emphasis on reductionist thinking. It has gotten to the point of ridiculous. For example, there are approximately 10,000 phytochemicals in every bite of vegetables you eat. (Phytochemicals are biologically active.) There are 200,000 enzymes in every cell, and they are changing every nanosecond. Yet reductionist thinking says to study a single one of these in isolation to find a "cure." What they really mean is "to find a product they can sell."
A study generally will not get funded unless there is a product to sell at the other end. I didn't know this until recently when I studied "Whole" by Dr. Campbell. Today, it would be impossible to do anything near what he did in the China Study. In fact, it's not even possible for doctors to recommend a diet as it doesn't fit into "best practices." Any who do risk a lawsuit or even criminal prosecution in the 19 states that have food disparagement laws.
Dave, it has gotten to the point where everything you post is wrong because you don't do your research. All you do is look at headlines. I don't mean to offend, but it is true.
Great link from Dr. Greger on this point -- it does not seem he agrees with the dogmatic nonsense, "keto is unhealthy".
Actually, you are orders of magnitude wrong. If you would read his book, "How Not to Die!" he doesn't respond to questions like "is a white potato good." What he asks is "Is it the best thing I can eat?" and will opt for a sweet potato instead. He doesn't touch a bit of food outside the WFPB concept.
Unfortunately, your blatantly false statements waste space and cost time to respond to.
So Atkins is a strawman, but it's fun to invoke his name as it induces bunched panties in all the right people. Atkins offended the mainstream healthcare and nutrition establishments and they've never forgiven him.
Again, blatantly false. The mainstream healthcare and nutrition establishments embrace him because he increased meat and dairy sales and took the attention away from the focus on fat. Do your homework instead of voicing unsupported opinions.
Vegan activists maliciously misrepresented the cause of his death. I interpret sites like Atkins Exposed as another chapter of The Orthodoxy Strikes Back (although it looks like t has not been updated since 2005, before deceitful vegan historical revisionism was exposed).
Again, blatantly false. One of the doctors I follow simply asked the hospital for a copy of his medical records. At this time, it was a perfectly acceptable practice. Adkins had advanced heart disease and probably died of congestive heart failure and not a knock on the head from falling. The family claimed he was 185 pounds, but he was about 260 pounds when he died. Then the family claimed he gained 55 pounds overnight from water retention.
Frankly, I see no further point on going on with this discussion as it's keeping me from doing other important activities, and we aren't making any progress.
