4 ms·

Taubes is a dogmatic cherry-picker.

• enraged_camel 14y ago
  Not sure why your comment is being upvoted, since it offers no evidence whatsoever to support your claim that Taubes is a cherry-picker.
• wpietri 14y ago
  Perhaps you could provide some, I don't know, facts or reasoning or something?
  • aaxe 14y ago
    May as well provide evidence on the earth revolving around the sun. But here you go: http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/12edbj/im_gary_taubes_science_writer_and_author_of_sweet/c6ud82x http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/12edbj/im_gary_taubes_...
    • wpietri 14y ago
      Yes, the opinions of one pop-sci writer are just as well-studied and well-understood as something that has been carefully examined since 1543. Your jerkiness aside, his reply to that seems clear and cogent. In particular, this seems like a reasonable criticism: http://nusi.org/the-science/review-of-the-literature/ http://nusi.org/the-science/review-of-the-literature/ It's not even clear to me that the post you link and his reply are necessarily at odds. A calorie-metering approach and a shift in diet could both be effective weight-loss strategies in that they would be acting at different points in the process and using different resources.
      • aaxe 14y ago
        I'm sorry, I didn't realize I needed to put a disclaimer to hyperbole. Besides his general criticism (which is valid), he doesn't actually address any of the findings of the studies. Aka, cherry-picking.
        • wpietri 14y ago
          The hyperbole wasn't the problem. Which you surely know. Cherry-picking is where you pick the sources that support your case while ignoring the rest. What he did was a sweeping dismissal. He may be right or wrong; I have no idea. But if you're going to accuse somebody of being an intellectual fraud, you should probably know what you're talking about.