Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Colpo's response to Lustig, Taubes and Toxic Sugar

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Colpo's response to Lustig, Taubes and Toxic Sugar

    http://anthonycolpo.com/luke-sissyfa...h-journalists/

    I'm currently trying to form my own opinions based on sound understanding, but jeez it's a challenge sometimes.

  • #2
    I really like Colpo. He's very aggressive and well-researched, and his book was outstanding.

    Some don't like him because he comes off disrespectful at times, but it's only after he's been attacked.

    However, one of the things I don't like about his arguments is that he often uses body composition as a measure of the accuracy of someone's argument. Of course, he does this along with citing the research, but as we all know, appearance has nothing to do with knowledge on a subject.

    But all in all, Colpo is a great resource, and this was a great article in my opinion (everyone knows by now that I'm pretty anti-Taubes/Lustig though, so this should come as no surprise ).
    My nutrition/fitness/critical thinking blog:

    Comment


    • #3
      There was a whole Colpo vs Eades thing a few years back if you wanna follow the back and forth between them two. Then there is the more semirecent Colpo and Jaminet thing as he took issue with their protein recommendations or something like that. And then there is the Colpo vs His own ego thing.... yeah his ego body slammed him then grew so large so as to eclipse the sun and send the Earth into 10,000 years of darkness.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Neckhammer View Post
        There was a whole Colpo vs Eades thing a few years back if you wanna follow the back and forth between them two. Then there is the more semirecent Colpo and Jaminet thing as he took issue with their protein recommendations or something like that. And then there is the Colpo vs His own ego thing.... yeah his ego body slammed him then grew so large so as to eclipse the sun and send the Earth into 10,000 years of darkness.
        I don't think you can attack Colpo's ego without attacking Eades' ego as well . That was a two-sided exchange.
        My nutrition/fitness/critical thinking blog:

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by jakejoh10 View Post
          I don't think you can attack Colpo's ego without attacking Eades' ego as well . That was a two-sided exchange.
          Quite true they both give as well as they can take...

          I will say that Taubs and Lustig could "walk the talk" a little better.
          Last edited by Neckhammer; 08-14-2013, 05:24 PM.

          Comment


          • #6
            That was hilarious!

            That said. There will always be a small group of people who will believe anything and everything Taubes says. I used to believe some of it as well. Some people will cling to the fallacy that carbohydrate releasing insulin = the body storing fat.
            Those would be the type of people who want the easier way to healthy body at normal weight. Sorry to break it to you, but that's simply not how nature works.
            As to Lustig, even back when I believed in very low-carb, he lost all credibility with me when I saw him proclaiming that sugar and high fructose corn syrup are both affecting the human body in the same way and are equally as bad for us.
            I wouldn't trust my child's healthcare to someone who spews such nonsense.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Graycat View Post
              <<snip>>
              As to Lustig, even back when I believed in very low-carb, he lost all credibility with me when I saw him proclaiming that sugar and high fructose corn syrup are both affecting the human body in the same way and are equally as bad for us.
              I wouldn't trust my child's healthcare to someone who spews such nonsense.
              I'm with Lustig on this. 55% vs 50% fructose is the difference. Insignificant in the scheme of things
              Four years Primal with influences from Jaminet & Shanahan and a focus on being anti-inflammatory. Using Primal to treat CVD and prevent stents from blocking free of drugs.

              Eat creatures nose-to-tail (animal, fowl, fish, crustacea, molluscs), a large variety of vegetables (raw, cooked and fermented, including safe starches), dairy (cheese & yoghurt), occasional fruit, cocoa, turmeric & red wine

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Neckhammer View Post
                Quite true they both give as well as they can take...

                I will say that Taubs and Lustig could "walk the talk" a little better.
                Agreed.

                Originally posted by peril View Post
                I'm with Lustig on this. 55% vs 50% fructose is the difference. Insignificant in the scheme of things
                Yeah, I agree with Lustig on this point as well.
                My nutrition/fitness/critical thinking blog:

                Comment


                • #9
                  I don't want to sidetrack too much, but doesn't it matter that HFCS is derived from gmo-ed corn by the process described below:

                  High fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is, as the name implies, corn syrup whose glucose has been partially changed into a different sugar, fructose. To make HFCS, you start with corn, then mill it to produce starch -corn starch. Starch, consists of long chains of glucose. To make corn syrup, you mix the corn starch with water and then add an enzyme, produced by a bacterium, that breaks the starch down into shorter chains of glucose. Then you add another enzyme, produced by a fungus, that breaks the short chains down into glucose molecules. At that point, you have regular corn syrup.

                  To make the corn syrup into high fructose corn syrup, you turn some of its glucose molecules into fructose molecules by exposing the syrup to yet another enzyme, again produced by bacteria. This enzyme converts the glucose to a mixture of about 42 percent fructose and 53 percent glucose, with some other sugars as well. This syrup, called HFCS 42, is about as sweet as natural sugar (sucrose) and is used in foods and bakery items.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by peril View Post
                    I'm with Lustig on this. 55% vs 50% fructose is the difference. Insignificant in the scheme of things
                    I think this is valid and can see why he takes this position - however I have also read that not all HFCs is 55% so I'm not sure if he's correct or not. Either way, avoiding HFCs helps you avoid a bunch of processed junk so it can't be a bad idea.

                    What I took from lustig was mostly 1. Sugar in excess, particularly soft drinks, has contributed to obesity in the us. I think it's hard to argue with this (although I know many will!). Cutting cokes helped me lose a fair bit of weight so this tracks with my personal experience.

                    2. Stuff like rice and pasta is ok. Not sure what I think of this.

                    3. Fruit is ok. Agree.

                    I think taubes added a lot to the discussion, whether you agree with conclusions or not, because he pointed out how very, very bad all this "science" and diet advice has been. Also I have not exactly been looking for swimsuit photos but he looked fine last I saw a picture.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Graycat View Post
                      I don't want to sidetrack too much, but doesn't it matter that HFCS is derived from gmo-ed corn by the process described below:
                      GMO makes no difference due to the subsequent processing. It comes down to glucose & fructose so the GMO origin is of no consequence

                      BTW, I think Colpo was foolish to refuse Demassi's offer. Cutting off his nose to spite his face. But he does seem to enjoy spite. He will always be fringe with his approach
                      Four years Primal with influences from Jaminet & Shanahan and a focus on being anti-inflammatory. Using Primal to treat CVD and prevent stents from blocking free of drugs.

                      Eat creatures nose-to-tail (animal, fowl, fish, crustacea, molluscs), a large variety of vegetables (raw, cooked and fermented, including safe starches), dairy (cheese & yoghurt), occasional fruit, cocoa, turmeric & red wine

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by lea View Post
                        I think this is valid and can see why he takes this position - however I have also read that not all HFCs is 55% so I'm not sure if he's correct or not.
                        The two more commonly used are HFCS 55 and HFCS 42.

                        Either way, avoiding HFCs helps you avoid a bunch of processed junk so it can't be a bad idea.
                        Can't disagree, however I don't think there's any reason to fear it.

                        What I took from lustig was mostly 1. Sugar in excess, particularly soft drinks, has contributed to obesity in the us. I think it's hard to argue with this (although I know many will!). Cutting cokes helped me lose a fair bit of weight so this tracks with my personal experience.
                        My problem with many of his arguments is that they stem from studies using massive amounts of pure fructose, which is extremely uncommon in "real life". Fructose is always accompanied by some amount of glucose.

                        I think taubes added a lot to the discussion, whether you agree with conclusions or not, because he pointed out how very, very bad all this "science" and diet advice has been.
                        I don't want to turn this into a Taubes sh*tstorm, but much of the "science" that Taubes presents is equally as faulty as what he's attempting to refute.
                        My nutrition/fitness/critical thinking blog:

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by jakejoh10 View Post
                          My problem with many of his arguments is that they stem from studies using massive amounts of pure fructose, which is extremely uncommon in "real life". Fructose is always accompanied by some amount of glucose.
                          Yup. He's basically arguing a straw man.
                          Disclaimer: I eat 'meat and vegetables' ala Primal, although I don't agree with the carb curve. I like Perfect Health Diet and WAPF Lactofermentation a lot.

                          Griff's cholesterol primer
                          5,000 Cal Fat <> 5,000 Cal Carbs
                          Winterbike: What I eat every day is what other people eat to treat themselves.
                          TQP: I find for me that nutrition is much more important than what I do in the gym.
                          bloodorchid is always right

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Allenete View Post
                            Luke Sissyfag, Gary Taubes, Robert Lustig, & the Problem with Journalists « AnthonyColpo

                            I'm currently trying to form my own opinions based on sound understanding, but jeez it's a challenge sometimes.
                            I liked the point about her credentials, lol. This was an enjoyable read, thanks.
                            | My (food) Blog | Follow me on Facebook | Pinterest | Twitter |

                            “It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.” - Samuel Adams

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Just navigate this sh*t storm....

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X