5 ms·
I don't think it forgot to mention them. I think it's arguing against them. I think the presenter who has an MD and a PhD from the WashU School of Medicine an
by Kinnard 11y ago
I don't think it forgot to mention them. I think it's arguing against them.
I think the presenter who has an MD and a PhD from the WashU School of Medicine and a BA in Biology from Princeton (Of course I don’t think that having a diploma (or three) from a University makes what you say any more or any less true[0]) is arguing against the lipid hypothesis[1] and for the sugar hypothesis[2]: that sugar is actually the cause of all those ill effects.
There doesn't seem to be a consensus, though in the past the consensus seemed to be for the lipid hypothesis though that appears to be rapidly breaking down.
[0] Lots of people without degrees of any sort are saying the same thing, they’re all just as right/wrong
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lipid_hypothesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lipid_hypothesis
[2] https://proteinpower.com/drmike/2006/01/05/the-sugar-hypothesis/ https://proteinpower.com/drmike/2006/01/05/the-sugar-hypothe...
- noondip 11y agoI laugh at lipid hypothesis deniers. It's as if several decades worth of research is worth nothing to them. Akin to climate change deniers, they seem to vehemently cling to their beliefs for ideological or financial reasons only.
- ferrari8608 11y agoI recommend you read The Fig Fat Surprise by Nina Teicholz. You will be quite surprised how completely wrong your view on the subject is.
- noondip 11y agoLikewise, except my recommendation for you is How Not to Die by Michael Greger, or just see http://nutritionfacts.org http://nutritionfacts.org
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- ghostbrainalpha 11y agothe "Big" Fat Surprise
- ferrari8608 11y agoI don't know why you put Big in quotes. Elaborate on that please?
- DrScump 11y agoTo contrast his typo above ("Fig [sic] Fat Surprise"), I think.
- Kinnard 11y agoIs laughter the right response? Perhaps they have several decades of counter-evidence or question the soundness of the research done supporting the lipid hypothesis? I feel like curiosity is always appropriate.
- noondip 11y ago> Perhaps they have several decades of counter-evidence They don't. At best, they are armed with a few dozen recent, biased, cherry-picked publications with illogical conclusions, which I'm happy to pick apart if anyone can actually cite them. The downvotes only affirm my point - people would rather be in denial than search, find and read the research for themselves, and admit they had been fooled.