View Single Post
  #15   ^
Old Tue, Jan-09-07, 08:19
ubizmo's Avatar
ubizmo ubizmo is offline
New Member
Posts: 384
Plan: mumble
Stats: 273/230/200 Male 73 inches
Progress: 59%
Location: Philadelphia, USA

It is heartening to see a few scientists willing to follow the evidence, which is supposed to be what science is all about. And the important message is that those studies that support lowcarb diet can no longer be regarded as "isolated." There is a real body of evidence out there that can no longer be ignored.

That said, I have no doubt that the low-fat goons will strike back with a vengeance. They will insist that we *know* that a diet high in animal fat is bad for the heart, so any amount of research that purports to show the opposite must be flawed. But Gary Taubes's new book, which is due out soon, will target that "knowledge," so the timing is good.

In a sense, the low-fat paradigm isn't a true Kuhnian paradigm. According to Kuhn, a paradigm begins with a solved problem. After that, a period of "normal science" commences, with scientists trying to model new problems on the solved one, and to use the same methods to solve them. This lasts until problems start to pile up that don't get solved in the paradigm, and then there's a "revolution," a new paradigm, and a new period of normal science. In the case of the low-fat "paradigm," there never was any solved problem. There was no brilliant success to inspire a generation of imitators--unless you count Ancel Keys's "Seven Countries Study" as a brilliant success.
Reply With Quote