Actually, science does win. No one uses "alternative forms" of engineering to put up bridges. Because the consequences would be fairly immediate, highly undeniable, and horribly expensive.

Unfortunately for all of us, dietary choices do not have these advantages. It takes decades for habitual bad decisions to start becoming obvious. This allows plenty of wiggle room for careerists and con artists to hold sway. I've concluded that almost all eating plans -- scientifically based or sheer propaganda -- have one thing in common which virtually guarantees a short-term upward bounce in health: they all tend to cut down on certain kinds of junk foods. Even if the composition of the diet doesn't change, the amounts often do. That alone can help people feel better.

But yes, I agree with the sentiment: we need more and better science in the health/medicine field. But this has other vast differences which make it far more more slippery than other fields of science.

Whether the bridge falls down or stays up is a clearly demonstrated binary. No one has cultural or family traditions about what kind of bridge will cross that next river, or for that matter, any choice if we want to reach the other side. If we have a phobia about it, that's clearly recognized and we can seek treatment. And there's no struggles to "fit in." We all use the same bridge.

Food is infinitely more complicated, emotional, and embedded in our identity. Other people feel entitled to comment, opine, and even harass us about our personal choices. We are tempted by offers of hospitality, we have hurt feelings when we don't want birthday cake, and our own emotions often drive us into short-term bad decisions.

Grandma would never want us to take the bad bridge, but she would be hurt if we didn't eat her special holiday treat.

Even now, in the midst of a global emergency, we have elements of society who deliberately undercut the known science of acute illness treatment, which currently operates at a level that is at an absolute, and undisputed, peak. Even decades of research that created prevention medicine in an amazingly short time has created controversy.

In the far less defined world of nutritional science, it's no wonder there's so much confusion and factionalism. I'm reminded of our past threads on the Rice Diet: a radical approach to diabetes that made one third of the people worse, one third unchanged, and one third well on their way to remission.

Unlike bridges, we don't have ONE way to achieve that river crossing goal.