Is anyone else a little annoyed by Taubes? page 4

[magicmerl]

You may have cross posted here guys. Which one did you mean, Taubes, Kruse, or Sisson?

Taubes.

I missed that tiff! Do you have a link?

From a Taubes supporter:

Taubes (usually my hero) makes the argument that Guyenet is ignoring populations that were poor, eating unrewarding food, and still got fat, thus “refuting” the reward theory. Guyenet disagrees and says that their food was not necessarily unrewarding.

Taubes says that in science it is always a good idea to consider all the facts, not just the ones that fit your theory. In fact, please do it before giving a talk on the subject. Then he walks away from the mike.

As the entire audience cringe from the awkwardness of the situation Guyenet answers, with superb coolness, “Thanks for the advice.”

There are several posts out there on it.

Here's Guyenet's refutation of Taube's carbohydrate hypothesis of obesity.

It's a known fact that people find it easier to eat less total fat when restricting carbs. The question is whether there is an additional 'metabolic advantage' to be gained whereby people can eat the same amount of calories yet the people on lower carbs do better. The proof of that pudding would have to be in a clinical trial that attempted to measure that and found no such metabolic advantage. The only advantage is that it's easier to eat less on low card.

[Paleobird]

Taubes tries to take Guyenet down - YouTube

I watched that but it didn't seem "intellectually dishonest" or like he was trying to "take Guyenet down". The two had a perfectly civil exchange of ideas (OK Gary's last comment was a bit snarky). Taubes was just trying to point out that Guyenet was harping a bit too hard on the "food reward" thing as if it were the only factor around.

Everybody benefits when ideas get exchanged like that. No need to get the egos involved.

[Rasputina]

How about, "Carbs, Calories, and Context : It All Counts"

Damn! That's snappy! Now, go write it, so we can put all this trifling mess to rest!

[magicmerl]

I watched that but it didn't seem "intellectually dishonest" or like he was trying to "take Guyenet down". The two had a perfectly civil exchange of ideas (OK Gary's last comment was a bit snarky). Taubes was just trying to point out that Guyenet was harping a bit too hard on the "food reward" thing as if it were the only factor around.

Everybody benefits when ideas get exchanged like that. No need to get the egos involved.

Perhaps it was a case of the pot calling the kettle black?

[Paleobird]

Perhaps it was a case of the pot calling the kettle black?

Yeah, probably. Like Rasputina says, it all counts but it seems like many of these speaker/author folks seem to find their one soap box and defend it to the death. No one factor is the root of all health evils just like no one "quick fix" really exists.

[Forgotmylastusername]

Critiques of Taubes?
Kreiger himself has published a study with link on his site stating that a low carb diet works best.
That series of articals doesn't refute the insulin/carbohydrate hypothesis of fat storage. It refutes the insulin/protein hypothethesis of fat storage which I have never heard any one state anyway.

As an electronic design engineer, I only get paid by making things work well in the real world. It does me no good to finesse the circuit, persuade it through clever arguments that it should work, or cite endless up to date studies on why it should work. Either I did my job right and it works, or it doesn't.

I'll tell you what the value of Taubes’ "dated" research is: it works. Since the time of Banting's publication, countless people have achieved effortless, long term sustainable normalization of body fat percentage by restricting carbohydrates. Methods based on "modern understanding of obesity" and “thermodynamics" has produced no useful results; indeed, it has been a grotesque failure. In case you haven't noticed, there is an epidemic of diabesity going on.

If the practitioners of modern weight loss theory only got paid when their clients achieved long term weight loss, an entire multi-billion dollar treatment and research industry would collapse. That is the real reason for Taubes bashing. Health care practitioners only continue to get paid when their clients stay sick.

That low-carb can work isn't what's being disputed. It's all the other fairy tale nonsense, ignored research, misrepresentation of data that taubes spouts. Seriously, the guy set out with a book advance and an agenda to prove carbs are evil and fattening.
Low carb isn't the panacea and long term weight loss isn't achieved by many on ANY diet. Remember when obesity rates dramatically fell when 1 in 11 people was following an Atkins style diet during the one of the huge low-carb popularity explosions? Neither do I.

[Rasputina]

His tiff with Guyenet showed that he's not an intellectually honest person, which makes his material suspect.

He's similar to the Wheat Belly douche. Has some nominally correct conclusions, but the road to those conclusions is riddled with 6-foot potholes.

At which point during the "tiff" (because it was actually a very civil debate), did you feel that Taubes was "intellectually dishonest"? What specific points of "Wheat Belly" did you disagree with? I'm going to pull a bit of a Sherlock here, and suggest that you really, deeply want to discredit these gentleman, because you want to personally justify your grain consumption. Guess what? We really don't give two farthings whether you, personally, consume grains. Grain consumption is not the basis of Primal nor Paleo, but all stripes post here, so there's no need to play good cop/bad cop.

[magicmerl]

At which point during the "tiff" (because it was actually a very civil debate), did you feel that Taubes was "intellectually dishonest"? What specific points of "Wheat Belly" did you disagree with? I'm going to pull a bit of a Sherlock here, and suggest that you really, deeply want to discredit these gentleman, because you want to personally justify your grain consumption. Guess what? We really don't give two farthings whether you, personally, consume grains. Grain consumption is not the basis of Primal nor Paleo, but all stripes post here, so there's no need to play good cop/bad cop.

The bot got ya

Here's another write-up.

[Rasputina]

The bot got ya

Here's another write-up.

Damned bot!

[Paleobird]

Here's another write-up.

Why does it have to even be framed as "This VS. That"? I think they are both right.