3 ms·

Why is an opinion piece about a nutrition topic with 1 citation worthy of discussion on Hacker News? Here is an article with citations and discussion of modern

Why is an opinion piece about a nutrition topic with 1 citation worthy of discussion on Hacker News? Here is an article with citations and discussion of modern research and patient experience that comes to a different conclusion: http://chriskresser.com/3-reasons-gluten-intolerance-may-be-more-serious-than-celiac-disease/ http://chriskresser.com/3-reasons-gluten-intolerance-may-be-... I won't bother submitting it to Hacker News since it doesn't have the official NYTimes scientific stamp of approval.

mattmanser 11y ago
Chris Kresser, M.S., L.Ac is a globally recognized leader in the fields of ancestral health, Paleo nutrition, and functional and integrative medicine Yeah... Really scientific, unbiased, peer reviewed, modern research. Not a snake oil salesman at all. Also any article in the format "X reasons [thing] is more harmful than [other thing]" can generally be laughed at.
- brerlapn 11y ago
  TFA clearly doesn't support your re-written straw man headline, and by comparison: - Kresser: 21 citations to "scientific, unbiased, peer reviewed, modern research" - NYT OpEd guest writer: naked unsupported assertion that "most of these assertions [about gluten], however, are contradicted by significant evidence" providing no references or scientific discussion Which one is snake oil again? More ironic, the Kresser article does talk about gluten as an auto-immune trigger, making your dismissal seem even more knee-jerk. There are people doing serious work on nutrition, but you won't have much luck finding them in the NYT, much less the OpEd section.
  - atinoda-kestrel 11y ago
    Which one is snake oil again? Well... cod liver oil, actually. And that would be here: http://store.chriskresser.com/ http://store.chriskresser.com/ Frankly, I wouldn't put a whole lot of faith in either.
aurora72 11y ago
IMHO that nytimes article seems to dream of a world in which we could enjoy breads and all other wheat products with no health concerns. A nice dream but it annot be applied to real world.

mattmanser 11y ago

Chris Kresser, M.S., L.Ac is a globally recognized leader in the fields of ancestral health, Paleo nutrition, and functional and integrative medicine Yeah... Really scientific, unbiased, peer reviewed, modern research. Not a snake oil salesman at all. Also any article in the format "X reasons [thing] is more harmful than [other thing]" can generally be laughed at.

brerlapn 11y ago
TFA clearly doesn't support your re-written straw man headline, and by comparison: - Kresser: 21 citations to "scientific, unbiased, peer reviewed, modern research" - NYT OpEd guest writer: naked unsupported assertion that "most of these assertions [about gluten], however, are contradicted by significant evidence" providing no references or scientific discussion Which one is snake oil again? More ironic, the Kresser article does talk about gluten as an auto-immune trigger, making your dismissal seem even more knee-jerk. There are people doing serious work on nutrition, but you won't have much luck finding them in the NYT, much less the OpEd section.
- atinoda-kestrel 11y ago
  Which one is snake oil again? Well... cod liver oil, actually. And that would be here: http://store.chriskresser.com/ http://store.chriskresser.com/ Frankly, I wouldn't put a whole lot of faith in either.

aurora72 11y ago

IMHO that nytimes article seems to dream of a world in which we could enjoy breads and all other wheat products with no health concerns. A nice dream but it annot be applied to real world.