39.48, -82.98 | John Burns - 1/11/2025 18:54
"Science that can not be questioned is not science. It is dogma."
Did anyone ever say that you could not challenge science? Maybe a politician did, but not a scientist.
So, you built a straw man and attacked it...and now feel free to ignore anything based on actual evidence. Remarkable.
For the record, I will agree that nutrition recommendations are (and have been) built on less-than-robust evidence. It is hard to do controlled feeding studies on humans, for obvious ethical reasons. Plus, we have varied genetics, lifestyles, environments, etc.
So, the effects of diet are largely inferred from association studies, instead. Some of these follow thousands of subjects for decades, but still rely on association. Papers are published, some get retracted. Hawksters use it all to sell books or garner clicks on YouTube. Sensational headlines, fear, uncertainty, doubt -- it all sells.
But, through all this noise and confusion, we can detect a signal. If one association study after another makes the same finding, you have to start paying attention.
Science is a process, not an immutable endpoint. If you want to focus on the noise in order to justify eating what you really want to eat, fine. But when you try to convince others to follow along (signature line notwithstanding) you are just part of the noise, not the signal. Something to keep in mind. |
Food guidlines origins
