'Here is a recent video presentation of Gary Taubes at UW.
http://videomedia2.swedish.org/medi...6f4ee9b66ef8f8f'

I will watch it sometime. I have seen Taubes speak on video before. He hold his own very well against Pritikin - and I'd like to see him in a discussion with Dr. Oz (who, recently in an article in AARP's magazine, is said to have reversed a man's type 2 diabetes by putting him on a vegan diet).

Dr. Oz is a cartoon.

'By the way, there is no such thing as "scientifically proven". You can either disprove an hypothesis or maybe confirm that it is still valid by failing to disprove it with your current research.'

I'm glad you said that because I DO know that. In fact, I was looking at one of the studies on the metabolism journal website. It was about the effect of vitamin D intake on insulin resistance in African American women. It was a simple 'this is the hypotheis, this is what we did, this is how it leads to this conclusion about the hypothesis...'

Very short and sweet and very neat. Reading it, I thought that I had read somewhere that AA (African Americans) benefit differently (maybe less) from sunlight (and vitamin D) because of skin pigment differences. What I read may have been about the pigment differences and might have included other races as well. I don't remember.

But even if I had THAT study right in front of me, it wouldn't change the fact that the metabolism study about intake of vitamin D in AA had a certain outcome and that outcome is all there is. No one has to think that it changes the value of Vitamin D for their own use. My clamoring to say, 'But, but... but...!' has not changed their study and its value.

I do know that scientific 'proof' is nothing more than whether a study was conducted well and the conclusion reached within standard guidelines for research.

'Dr. Oz is a cartoon.'

He's a Doctor and a successful writer. Other than that, he's just another diet wizard.

I must say that your down to earthness is welcomed. Thank you for your patience and for taking the time to post here.

Patrick

Right back atcha, Valtor.

From a link in my signature.

Mol Imaging Biol. 2009 September; 11(5): 293.
Published online 2009 April 28. doi: 10.1007/s11307-009-0233-0.

PMCID: PMC2719747
Copyright © The Author(s) 2009

Consensus Science and the Peer Review

Jorge R. Barriocorresponding author
Department of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, David Geffen UCLA School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA USA
Jorge R. Barrio, Email: jbarrio~mednet.ucla.edu.
corresponding authorCorresponding author.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2719747/

Patrick

'If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it's science, it isn't consensus. Period.'

Consensus doesn't stop science from being done.

'Responding to generalized concerns, the NIH has recently produced new rules for grant writing and reviews, mainly with the intent to stimulate formulation of new ideas, but in the end it is us who must forcefully strive for the honest debate of truthful facts for the benefit of all. It is our responsibility as scientists, physicians, reviewers, and/or editors to be alert and always remember that “...consensus is invoked only in situations where the science is not solid enough.'

I don't think the last sentence in accurate. ONLY in situations where the science is not solid enough? I don't believe that at all.

Michael Crichton died recently,didn't he? He is better known as an author than as a scientist, although he was very skilled at using science in his books. His impassioned plea to disregard consensus might be the imaginative author in him speaking, not the working scientist.

On some unconscious level I know that, but I guess I just feel a bit rebellious. On the Mean forum they often try to invalidate my arguments with "the weight of evidence" and I counter with this consensus science article.

Patrick

Yeah, it can be a long process. After 4 years of low carbing I am also still fat. Even being 109 pounds lighter does not make me thin yet. And my blood sugars have greatly improved but are still not totally "normal" and my cholesterol levels just keep going up and up and up, from a total of 180 two years ago to 229 last year to 280 this week.

That's discouraging. My annual physical is coming up soon. We'll see how it goes.

True, Taubes's educational background is in the sciences, from very prestigious universities. Yes, absolutely worth it! I am currently reading it again for the second time and it is still an amazing eye-opener to me to read the dissections of the nutritional studies over the last hundred years or so, and to see the ways various conclusions have been "slanted" even when the absolute evidence does not fully support those conclusions.

I thought I saw somwhere upthread that you referred to yourself as a scientist? I guess I would have to check as maybe I'm wrong. As I don't think of an systems programmer as a scientist. I know because I are one, - IBM mainframe systems programming, CICS/TS and MQSeries, IBM Certified MQSeries Specialist. (at least until the end of May when I get the can and my job responsibilities get moved to India). But I ain't a scientist.

But maybe you mean your educational background. That's certainly possibly. I've met people in this field with degrees in physics and chemistry. I started out there but ended up with a degree in Business/Finance. But if that's the case then it seems Gary Taubes has as much right to call himself a scientist, or an engineer, with a degree in applied physics from Harvard and a masters in aerospace engineering from Stanford.

P.S. I just checked the thread but I don't see the above here, yet I thought I had read it in one of your posts somewhere. Oh well, I may be hallucinating. Or just plain have a bad memory. It's hell getting older.

Ooooh, don't talk like that! I want all those things too. Well except for the ramen noodles. They never had the least appeal to me. But in the "bad old days" if I was offered a choice between a prime rib or a dish of homemade macaroni and cheese the macaroni would have been the clear winner every single time! I don't totally dislike meat, and I admit I do love bacon, but I'm not especially fond of meat. I eat it - but I hate to eat it alone. I have to have it *with* something to make it reasonably palatable to me. But from a pure taste and desire standpoint I could easily be a vegetarian. But it does not seem to agree with my health. I've tried WW probably 3-4 times, and I did lose some weight as long as I stuck to it. But it was just not possible for me to stick to a diet where I went to bed just about every night, almost in tears from the constant never-ending hunger pangs.

I wondered if I'd be "triggering" anyone with that post. I'm on another list which doesn't you allow to go into the details of cheats and cravings for that very reason.

I thought of a bunch more I could add to the list. Thing is - when I actually have a cheat the reality is never as good as the fantasy.



I love 'em. And the danger lies in the fact that they're very cheap and very easy to make. Also I can convince myself in the store that I'm buying them for my son.



I used to be a vegan for ethical reasons. (I explain to my confused coworkers and friends that now I eat the other food groups.) Unfortunately I piled on 50 pounds in 4 years. I think it's what wrecked my metabolism, because after quitting the vegan diet and returning to SAD, I added another 35 pounds in one year. It was like living a horror movie. The incredible expanding woman!



Amen!