5 ms·
It's his formal training, he is a licensed acupuncturist. The man has absolutely no business talking about heart disease, especially with an experienced cardiol
by vfc1 7y ago
It's his formal training, he is a licensed acupuncturist. The man has absolutely no business talking about heart disease, especially with an experienced cardiologist.
The problem of putting someone with acupuncture training debating a cardiologist is that, in the eyes of that huge audience, he presents those opinions as perfectly equivalent, alternative to each other and equally valid.
When in fact, one person has basically no idea of what he is talking about, but in the eyes of the public, and because they are put side by side, they are seen as equivalent when they are not.
Why not put him against a non-vegan cardiologist then? Someone at least with equivalent training.
From a scientific point of view, the only diet that as ever shown to stop the progression of heart disease is a whole-food plant-based diet.
Khan replied to the questions, not sure why you are saying he avoided anything. It's obvious that Joe took Kresser side during the debate.
What kind of tough questions did he ask Kresser compared to Khan?
- iamthirsty 7y ago> It's his formal training, he is a licensed acupuncturist. The man has absolutely no business talking about heart disease, especially with an experienced cardiologist. This is an extremely closed minded view—not everyone with formal training is automatically an expert. This is the appeal to authority fallacy, and a poor one at that. > From a scientific point of view, the only diet that as ever shown to stop the progression of heart disease is a whole-food plant-based diet. This is not true either, and I find it ironic it’s stated authoritatively with no sources.
- carapace 7y agoFWIW https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_China_Study https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_China_Study YMMV
- vfc1 7y agoNot everyone with formal training is an expert, but its the minimum requirement. Literally no one without formal training can be an expert in such a complex topic as heart disease. Why is Joe Rogan asking about heart disease to a licensed acupuncturist in a podcast with 60 million downloads a month? It's like asking for legal advice from a massage therapist. If you had heart disease or someone in your family had it, would you ask an acupuncturist for advice? For the sources: "proved decades ago that heart disease could be reversed solely with diet and lifestyle change" https://nutritionfacts.org/video/our-number-one-killer-can-be-stopped/ https://nutritionfacts.org/video/our-number-one-killer-can-b... The video is a summary of the studies listed via the "Sources cited" button, that you find scrolling down after the video.
- bmurphy1976 7y ago> Not everyone with formal training is an expert, but its the minimum requirement. Literally no one without formal training can be an expert in such a complex topic as heart disease. I have no bone in this particular fight. I'm inclined to agree with you, most of the time, but it's clearly possible to be an expert in nearly anything without formal training: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srinivasa_Ramanujan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srinivasa_Ramanujan Lots of absolutes in this discussion, but reality is usually far more nuanced.
- vfc1 7y agoIt depends, if looking for advise on how to use excel from someone, I don't think that they need to be certified or whatever. For asking someone to do some web design or a logo, I don't think it's necessary either, but there is a limit somewhere. Think about this way, if you yourself or someone in your family would have heart disease, would you take advice from an acupuncturist? I bet you wouldn't. What are the odds that Kris Kresser without any formal training or experience managed to better understand the science behind such a complex topic like heart disease than full-time scientists and cardiologists? Self-learning is great for a lot of things, but heart disease is likely not one of them.
- twoheadedboy 7y agoHow dare you question dietary proselytizing which is clearly masquerading as scientific fact.