Brady doesn’t eat eggplant, Paltrow takes coffee enemas. Seems pretty obvious that the pseudoscience critic Caulfield is right, right? "There is almost no evi

Brady doesn’t eat eggplant, Paltrow takes coffee enemas. Seems pretty obvious that the pseudoscience critic Caulfield is right, right? "There is almost no evidence to support this monk-like approach to eating," Well, here is some evidence: Tom Brady. "Brady's approach seems to be loosely based on the alkaline diet, which is the idea that you can control the pH of your blood through the food you eat. (Spoiler: you can't.)” So Caulfield will now shoot down a diet that is not Brady’s diet? “As noted in a 2016 systematic review of the relevant evidence, 'there is almost no actual research' to support the ideas behind the alkaline diet." The study concludes that food and drink pH have no influence on cancer, as if cancer is the only health problem. Is it proper journalism to pit nutty celebrities against science and say science wins because it is science? Has science concluded that food has no effect on pH in the body? Can a daily green breakfast smoothie erode tooth enamel? Do meat and dairy cause osteoporosis? Is the relationship between food, pH, inflammation, and disease fully understood? I won’t be spending $200 on Brady’s book, but there might be something to his monk-like approach to eating, especially as compared to say his offensive line’s approach.