Protein Power

http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/statistics/observational-studies-2/ "Researchers doing observational studies have much the same problem. They try to think of all the differences between two large populations of subjects so that they can statistically negate them so that only the observation in question – the vitamin C level in the example above – is different between the groups. Problem is they can never possibly think of all the differences between the groups. As a consequence, they never have a perfect study with exactly the same number, sex, age, lifestyle, etc. on both sides with the only difference being the study parameter. And so they don’t really ever prove anything. In fact, we would all probably be a lot better off if all the researchers doing observational studies had followed my lead and fallen asleep mid study."

I thought Good Calories, Bad Calories was very good. It's about the bad science behind the high-carb, low-fat diet advice. From there you can get into things like paleo diet etc. I'm not recommending any particular diet - there are plenty of people who think Taubes is full of it (http://reason.com/archives/2003/03/01/big-fat-fake http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/bray-rev… and I'm not a doctor and have no training in the field. Just an interested observer, since diet, nutrition, and exercise is the base for anything else you're going to do in your life. Amazon link - http://www.amazon.com/Good-Calories-Bad-Gary-Taubes/dp/1400040787 Google Books preview - http://books.google.com/books?id=Xdm40JUD9HwC&printsec=frontcover&…

By the way, I went and read the George Bray review that you posted. It seemed a little odd. For one thing, Bray places great emphasis on a first-law-of-thermodynamics argument which as far as I can tell is just a big red herring. (Obviously nobody is questioning the first law of thermodynamics; equally obviously, thermodynamics doesn't ipso facto explain obesity; so what's the point? It's not clear.) So I dug around a bit and found Taubes' rebuttal, which strikes me as more or less devastating: http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/taubes-r…

Here's a review of Taubes' book by George Bray: http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/bray-rev… in case you do want someone dissing it for you. Also I don't think we should "make up [our] own mind" the biology on this is way beyond the layman. Hacker News has a pervasive conceit that somehow as programmers we can see the obvious truth that people with decades of experience are apparently (or deliberately) unable to. In fact it's the reverse most subjects are substantially more complicated than they appear. You can't encompass the biology of obesity in a pop-sci best seller.

Dr Michael Eades is a good gateway toif you're interested. He wrote a book a while ago now titled Protein Power [1], I think he is working on an update/sequel as well. At the high level, my basic claim is that the idea that dietary saturated fat directly leads to heart attack is incorrect. The history of this claim dates back to President Eisenhower. After having a heart attack while in office he wanted to tell the public how he could avoid the same fate. Researchers cut corners to meet political targets, ignoring data that disproved their hypothesis and claimed that plaque found in cadaver arteries was made of saturated fats and that it got there due to the person's diet. The claims weren't backed up by the studies used and we were told that this was now a known fact when it wasn't. We've spent many decades since avoiding saturated fats in favor of unsaturated fats, which are highly oxidative and have concerning side effects when run through the Krebs Cycle. Dr Eades also has a few interesting talks on the subject when he walks through the Krebs Cycle and the difference of saturated and unsaturated fats in case that's helpful. I think [2] is one I watch years ago, though he has other similar talks on YouTube as well. [1] https://proteinpower.com/ [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MTNJNAZPiw

I read GCBC about two months ago; although I've been interested in health & nutrition for several years now, it's amazing that I never understood how badly science has been mistreated by nutritionists & health experts. Moreover, because this advice runs so contrary to conventional dietary wisdom, many in the community are fascinated by reviewing studies for strengths & flaws (in the similar spirit of code-reviews); consequently, I've learned more about both human physiology and the scientific process in the past few months than my entire life (which is beneficial regardless of whether or not I continue down the low-carb path). For example, compare the quality of minds at work in the following post (it takes off in the comments): http://www.diseaseproof.com/archives/diet-myths-are-the-inuit-healthy.… Here's another example: http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/saturated-fat/abcs-big-meal-propaga…

This [1] may be of interest, and has scientific references (well, Nature) too. I believe there's an associated TED talk. [1] https://proteinpower.com/drmike/2017/07/02/low-carbohydrate-diet-and-c…

This situation has been highly debated among the keto science community. I call it a situation and not a study because they're publishing preliminary results for a pilot study. Hardly conclusive. https://proteinpower.com/drmike/2016/05/06/contradictions-and-cognitiv…

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 [2] https://proteinpower.com/drmike/2006/01/05/the-sugar-hypothesis/

> Ketones (what your body burns for energy when there are no sugars available) don't penetrate to the brain [0] says that this is false. Ketones do go into the brain and the brain does use them for fuel. [0]http://proteinpower.com/drmike/2007/05/22/metabolism-and-ketosis/

I would be very skeptical of statins. An actual MD who disagrees with you: http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/statins/statins-everyone-maybe-anyo…

At some point -- and I'm not saying you've reached that point -- if enough people misread you, maybe you need to communicate more clearly. (Not trying to be rude.) Anyway, here are some fun refutations of Mr. Taubes body of dietary advice: http://reason.com/archives/2003/03/01/big-fat-fake http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/bray-rev… I guess the big issue I have with his advice is that obesity is really most strongly correlated with increased intake of calories, and less so with the macronutritional source of those calories.

It really is an eye opener. I was blown away when I started reading about it all. Some good resources if you're interested. I totally agree to that. Those sources changed the way I was thinking about human health and nutrition completely. To be quite honest, I was not thinking about these topics very much before. I would also add a source that kind of got me started: http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/ Stephan appears to be a very knowledgeable guy, he is probably the least "radical" in his approaches, writes on a variety of topics and is not afraid to change his opinions when faced with contradicting evidence. Also, blog of Dr. Mike Eades http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/ and Hyperlipid http://high-fat-nutrition.blogspot.com/

If you believe Dr. Colin Campbell you might want to take a look at these articles: http://rawfoodsos.com/2010/07/16/the-china-study-my-response-to-campbe… http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/cancer/the-china-study-vs-the-china… They're both very well written and put some serious doubt into the validity of Campbell's conclusions.

My mom, a retired scientist, has been going off the importance of Vitamin D for three years now. To the point, that I have been taking 2000 mg/d for over a year now. It's easy to take and it gets my mom off my back (well, at least, for Vitamin D :) ). She's pushing me to do 4,000 mg/d. Costco sells gel tablets the cheapest. Seriously, she believes it shouldn't even be called a vitamin. She was a well-respected researcher and she regularly emails me the latest research. Think about it, how important is your health? I believe your number one asset is your ability to produce income. Health is a vital part of your ability to work and enjoy life. read more at:   http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/   http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/important-information/vitamin-d-and…

Or, don't: http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/peta-cspi-and-other-menaces/are-we-…

The topic is very important but the article was really bad. A few no-nonsense links for the interested: http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/ http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/ http://www.paleonu.com/ http://high-fat-nutrition.blogspot.com/ http://nephropal.blogspot.com/ I very much like Dr Harris (PaNu blog) position: is not about blindly replicating cavemen lifestile, but studing their metabolism (which is ours) in the light of modern science.

Research? Sort of. Experience? Yes. Owsley "The Bear" Stanley, the famous LSD manufacturer and Grateful Dead sound engineer, lived very healthily on an all-meat diet for over 50 years. (Note: he did have cancer, though likely due to HPV and years of secondhand cigarette smoke and firsthand marijuana smoke, and his diet probably helped him survive it, and he had a heart attack, but that was likely due to complications from his youth that became noticeable after putting on 30 pounds of muscle weightlifting in his 50s.) He posted all about it on a forum years ago. It's a very interesting read: http://activenocarber.myfreeforum.org/ftopic22-0-0-asc-.php Traditional Inuit also eat an all-meat diet with lots of fat. See Weston Price's Nutrition and Physical Degeneration (http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks02/0200251h.html#ch5), as well as the writings of Vilhjalmur Stefansson (http://highsteaks.com/carnivores-creed/vilhjalmur-stefansson/ ). The Plains Indians, as well. See "Guts and Grease: The Diet of the Native Americans" (http://www.westonaprice.org/health-topics/guts-and-grease-the-diet-of-… and this talk by Stephen Phinney, "The Aboriginal Argument" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayf4R-y_RYo). Phinney himself has been on a very low carb, ketogenic diet for, I believe, two decades. Some argue the Inuit were not ketogenic (http://freetheanimal.com/2014/03/reiterate-elevated-ketone.html), but they tend to overestimate how long glycogen remains in muscles after…

It's true that obesity is a growing problem, and it is likely also true that nearly all cases of type II diabetes can be prevented with dietary changes. But, the article repeats the 'reduce saturated fat' meme, which lately has been called into question. Gary Taubes http://higher-thought.net/complete-notes-to-good-calories-bad-calories… Robert Lustig http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM Cynthia Kenyon http://donmatesz.blogspot.com/2009/12/how-insulin-controls-aging.html Nutrition and Vision Research at Tufts (Allen Taylor) http://hnrc.tufts.edu/1192109687036/HNRCA-Page-hnrca2ws_1192109688533.… Kurt Harris http://www.paleonu.com/get-started Mike Eades http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/ Uffe Ravnskov, "fat and cholesterol are good for you" http://www.ravnskov.nu/cholesterol.htm LivinLaVidaLowCarb http://www.thelivinlowcarbshow.com/shownotes/ Weston A Price http://www.westonaprice.org/dentistry/289-invisible-toothbrush.html William Davis http://heartscanblog.blogspot.com/ etc.

Sorry I don't have time to find all my links as I am at work on my lunchbreak but here are a few. Weight Loss As the Paleo diet is by nature pretty low-carbohydrate: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa0708681 Longevity: Cancer Patterns in Inuits - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18760245 This William Lands paper - http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/reprint/83/6/S1483.pdf Medical Establishment: Good Calories, Bad Calories goes deep into the reasons why the medical establishment considers saturdated fat, cholesterol, red meat unhealthy. Have a quick skim of the cliffs notes. Dr Barry Groves - Cholesterol Myth - http://www.second-opinions.co.uk/cholesterol_myth_1.html More Sources: Stephan Guyenet - B. Bio Chemistry - http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/ Dr Michael Eades - http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/ Dr William Davis - Cardiologist - http://heartscanblog.blogspot.com/ Robb Wolf - Research Biochemist - http://robbwolf.com/ Prof. Loren Cordain - http://www.thepaleodiet.com/ edit: formatting