Recently, I’ve been hearing from many patients who have read Dr. Perlmutter’s new book, Grain Brain, and are now concerned about their carb intake. In his book, Dr. Perlmutter suggests that dietary carbohydrates cause high blood sugar, inflammation, and other effects that lead to a “toxic brain,” which can then develop into neurological conditions such as Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, depression, and others. Based on this line of causality, he recommends that everyone consume a very low carb diet (<60g per day) in order to prevent neurological disease.
First of all, I’d like to point out that very low carb (VLC) and ketogenic diets can be effective therapeutic tools for treating many neurological disorders. I touched on this briefly a while back in my podcast with Emily Deans, and initial studies on low-carb diets and mental health have shown promise. (1, 2, 3, 4) Because Dr. Perlmutter is a neurologist, it makes sense that he would be a proponent of low-carb diets for his patients based on these therapeutic effects.
Does eating carbs destroy your brain and lead to neurological disease?
However, recommending a low-carb diet as an intervention for sick people is very different from promoting it as a preventative measure for the entire population, which is what Dr. Perlmutter does in Grain Brain. His approach would be somewhat akin to recommending that everyone go on the Autoimmune Protocol to prevent autoimmune disease, which would be unnecessarily restrictive and unhelpful. It’s important to realize that just because a low-carb diet can help treat neurological disorders, doesn’t mean the carbs caused the disorder in the first place. While I don’t argue with the idea that refined and processed carbs like flour and sugar contribute to modern disease, there’s no evidence to suggest that unrefined, whole-food carbohydrates do. In fact, there are three compelling reasons why this is not the case.
#1 – We Evolved Eating Whole-Food Carbohydrates
The first reason it doesn’t make sense that carbohydrates cause neurological disorders is that we’ve been eating carbs for a very long time, and we’re well adapted to digesting and metabolizing them. For instance, fruit has been part of the human diet for longer than we’ve been recognizably human, and while starch hasn’t been part of the human diet for quite as long, it’s clear that we’ve evolved mechanisms to digest and utilize it efficiently.
Compared with most primates, humans have many more copies of the gene AMY1, which is essential for breaking down starches. (5) This gene is unusual in that the number of copies varies greatly between populations, with more copies present in populations that consume more starch. This indicates that starch played a significant role in our evolution, and some scientists have even argued that consumption of starch was partially responsible for the increase in our brain size.
In addition to possessing the ability to break down complex carbohydrates, our bodies require glucose to function properly and maintain homeostasis. The fact that humans can produce glucose from protein is often used as an argument that we don’t need to eat glucose, but rather than viewing this as evidence that that glucose isn’t important, we might view it as evidence that glucose is so metabolically essential that we evolved a mechanism to produce it even when it’s absent from the diet.
#2 – There Are Many Traditional Cultures with High Carb Intake and Low or Nonexistent Rates of Neurological Disease
If carbohydrates cause neurological disorders, one would expect to see high rates of dementia and similar diseases in populations where carbs constitute a significant portion of the diet. But as it turns out, many of the cultures that maintain the lowest rates of neurological and other inflammatory disease rely heavily on carbohydrate-dense dietary staples. For example, the Hadza of north-central Tanzania and the Kuna of Panama obtain a high percentage of their total calories from foods that are high in natural sugars, such as fruit, starchy tubers and honey, yet they are remarkably lean, fit and free of modern disease. (6, 7)
Other examples include the Kitava in the Pacific Islands, Tukisenta in the Papa New Guinea Highlands, and the Okinawans in Japan. The Kitavan diet is 69% carb, with a high reliance on starchy tubers such as yams, and sugary tropical fruits such as banana and papaya. (8) The Okinawan diet is even more carb-heavy at 85% carbohydrate, mostly from sweet potato. (9) Finally, the Tukisenta diet is astonishingly high in carbohydrate at over 90%. (10) All of these cultures are fit and lean with practically non-existent rates of neurological disorders and other modern chronic disease. (11)
#3 – Modern Research Does Not Support the Notion That ‘Safe’ Carbs Are Harmful
The claim that carbohydrates from whole-food sources cause neurological disorders is not supported by anthropological evidence. In addition, modern studies on the health effects of carb-dense foods such as fruit also fail to support Perlmutter’s hypothesis. In fact, studies overall suggest that eating whole, fresh fruit may actually decrease the risk of health issues such as obesity and diabetes, and that limiting fruit intake has no effect on blood sugar, weight loss or waist circumference. (12, 13)
As you may know if you’ve been following my website, there is plenty of modern research demonstrating that diets rich in refined and processed carbohydrates are harmful. However, this is not due to carb content alone, and there’s no evidence that whole-food carbs have the same effect. When an author or expert recommends excluding or severely limiting one of three macronutrients that humans consume, the evidence demonstrating harm should be strong—not only because of the inconvenience of following such a restricted diet, but because extreme diets (ketogenic or VLC diets in this case) are not always harmless. In my practice I’ve seen many patients who’ve worsened on long-term VLC diets, including those with adrenal issues and poor thyroid function. Long-term VLC diets can also lead to imbalances in gut bacteria due to a lack of prebiotic fiber, which can result in digestive issues.
As I’ve always maintained, you need to find out what works for you and tailor your diet to your specific health goals, rather than follow a canned approach. This is exactly what I’ll teach you to do in my book, Your Personal Paleo Code (published in paperback as The Paleo Cure in December 2014), which is coming out at the end of December.
Better supplementation. Fewer supplements.
Close the nutrient gap to feel and perform your best.
A daily stack of supplements designed to meet your most critical needs.
I have to agree with Dr. Perlmutter’s position on carbs & gluten sensitivity. Why? Based on my own experience of cutting out “bad carbs” & going gluten free for over 12 months now. The result? My C-Reactive Protein level went from 47.02 (yes, it was that high) to 0.54 in 12 months. Hard to argue that inflammation in the arteries & probably the rest of my body wasn’t helped by following Dr. Perlmutter’s eating recommendations.
45 pounds lighter, healthier test results; I’d say thank you Dr. Perlmutter. He is onto something.
That’s not surprise, you were probably grossly overweight, had aretrial inflammation that jacked up your CRP, was probably prediabetic if not diabetic, and had fatty liver. Whatyou did is caloric restriction via carb restriction and gluten avoidance, as proteins and fat induce satiey and gluten containing foods tend to be hyperglycemic. But the end result is caloric restriction, which you achieved via carb and gluten-restriction. Sensible plans such as that which is not hypocaloric and not ketogenic nor VLCing, there is no problem. It’s when Perlmutter starts making preposterous claims about fat being the preferred fuel for the brain, how ancestral diet was 70%+ fat and starts linking carbs and gluten to everything from dementia to Lou Gherig’s disease that he loses credibility. But you lost your weight and rid yourself of inflammation through caloric restriction; carb and gluten avoidance was a means to an end.
Fantastic article in the Atlantic today!
Researchers asked if one diet could be crowned best in terms of health outcomes. If diet is a set of rigid principles, the answer is a decisive no. In terms of broader guidelines, it’s a decisive yes.
https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/03/science-compared-every-diet-and-the-winner-is-real-food/284595/
Looks like more ammo against low carb and no grain to be honest. It is scientifically sound that removing entire food groups from diet or restricting certain foods is detrimental.
Overall this champions common sense and shows the real culprit is “fake food”.
Katz’s guidance might be helpful for the average person. Some of us, however, are not average and do need special diets, which, for example, rule out grains. I would not rule out any particular food for everybody, but I know what works for me and what does not.
About gluten — I can see that gluten can be a problem for lots of people. (I have not been diagnosed with gluten sensitiity, but i have never had a test.) What I have been wondering is, do you have to cut it out completely to feel the benefits, or is just a little gluten OK? So if I basically cut out gluten at home, will the occasional sandwich outside nullify my efforts?
Thanks, Elisabeth
“And now I’m going to say goodbye to this thread because it’s long enough”
OK, then, see you later on today or tomorrow.
In the meantime, find a good therapist for your conspiracy theories and delusions.
For all of you who have health issues with gluten, here’s a great blog page that tells even more about “Wheat Belly.”
https://noglutennoproblem.blogspot.com/2012/03/wheat-belly-busted.html
The authors are also hardcore researchers, in addition to writers and authors of several books on a non-gluten lifestyle.
It’s not an attack on Davis’ “Wheat Belly,” but they also feel that a good diet should, and can include wheat for a lot of people, if done right.
In addition to Dr. Julie Jones’ piece that shows how all these people lie and misinform, I think you may find this interesting also.
> In other news, water is wet.
Yes, you dive in water, it’s not coincidence that you get wet. . And if you’re on the advisory board of a marketing organization for the wheat and bread industry, it is probably not coincidence that you think Wonder Bread is just about the perfect human food.
It is partly because of “science” like what you’ve cited that we are headed for 100 million obese Americans, a diabetes epidemic like the world has never seen, and an explosion of blood sugar-associated cancers and Alzheimers.
Perlmutter doesn’t necessarily have the answers, but he is at least one eminent doctor who is sincerely asking the right questions instead of just cashing checks from corporate sponsors and drug companies.
Fortunately we are in the midst of a scientific awakening on this issue. As we pass 40 percent and head for 50 percent of our adult population headed for obesity and early death, there are definitely more doctors and scientists starting to wonder — there’s got to be something wrong here that we didn’t understand. Maybe it’s not just fat people’s fault for not all running 10 miles a day and living in a constant state of hunger for their entire lives Maybe they might just be eating the WRONG FOOD.
The American food industry cannot be expected to look out for our health. They serve their stockholders — so their job is to box up the most inexpensive raw materials they can find (corn, wheat and soybeans) into products that sell in the greatest volume possible. Their interest in science is what formulations taste best and sell the most; and what shreds of scientific research can be spun into advertising slogans like “healthy whole grains.” I wouldn’t expect anything else.
And now I’m going to say goodbye to this thread because it’s long enough and I doubt anybody but Perry is actually reading.
I am with you, this thread has run its course.
Now that the serious discussion is over, all the Trolls come out, eh?
So lets not feed the Trolls, it only makes their behavior worse.
Dont go Tom… !!!!
Gee, ya think, Tom?
In other news, water is wet.
.
Now do a little more digging and you will see that she has been doing studies on all kinds of foods long before.
She knew long before that wheat, and carbs in general is not the problem. It’s mainly overeating and not exercising.
And let’s go ahead and discount all her commonsense comments on whole wheat bread. Like, it having around 1 1/2 tsp of sugar, instead of 6, 10…teaspoons.
Brilliant, Tom. Brilliant.
You’re just too smart for me.
Dr Julie Jones:
“scientific advisor to the carbohydrate committee of the International Life Sciences Institute. She is on the scientific advisory panel for the Grains Food Foundation and Chartwell. She has been consultant for many companies.”
https://www.gowiththegrain.org/about/bios/bio-jones.php
“But I do think you need to be aware of where Perry’s info is coming from.”
*Jumps up and down with hand in the air*
Oh, oh, oh! Let me tell them! Let me tell them!
The article is written by St. Catherine University Professor and consultant Dr. Julie Jones.
Her article was published in a whole array of websites, with many being scientific literature sites.
Many scientists have questioned Dr. Davis’ use of the science that he backs up his claims with.
I decided to see who was behind Perry’s “why eat bread” link.
According to whois, the whyeatbread.com domain was registed in December 2013 by Lewis Bakeries. Lewis is a large industrial bakery based in Evansville, Indiana.
Lewis’s signature product is “Bunny Bread” — a white sandwich bread similar to Wonder Bread: https://www.lewisbakeries.net/
(As a foodie I have nothing against Lewis or the joys of white sandwich bread. Little quarter sandwiches of Spam salad! Pigs in blankets! Yum!)
But I do think you need to be aware of where Perry’s info is coming from.
There may be good reason to disagree with Gary Taubes, Perlmutter etc., but they are not, to my knowledge, being sponsored by the food industry or the drug industry.
For those of you who want even more sources on why wheat is not bad for you (if you don’t have any issues with wheat, that is), and why there is so much bullshit out there spread by complete idiots, you may find this pretty interesting
https://whyeatbread.com/general-dieting/flaws-wheat-belly-1/
Julie Jones, along with so many others, also addresses this idea that wheat gives you a higher blood sugar level than a Snickers bar.
Speaking of bullshit…
there are a lot of idiots parroting this Snickers bar nonsense without doing their own research.
Some fools are saying that whole wheat bread has 6 teaspoons of sugar. Some say there are 10!
Two slices of bread, at 3 ounces, has around 6 grams of sugar.
(Most bread brands are 2 ounces, so. . . .)
Folks, um–that’s around 1 1/2 teaspoons of sugar!
A carrot–A CARROT–has about half that.
And natural sugar, when in a complex carb, is just fine.
It’s what our body needs. We wouldn’t be here without carbs.
Don’t believe the crap that whole wheat is bad–or even addictive.
It’s spread by dumbasses, like Mark Hyman, William Davis (“Wheat Belly”), Perlmutter, Taubes, posters, and soooooo many people with their own stupid little websites.
“Everything you see I owe to spaghetti.”
Sophia Loren
Beaker: The best diet possible imo is to feed the good gut bugs and starve the bad ones.
———————————————
I think this is a really promising idea, but 1) we don’t know if it’s true; 2) if it’s true, we don’t really know what are good bugs and bad bugs 3) Sorting out #2 is an enormous task that might take decades, because there are hundreds, probably thousands of bug types, and “good” or “bad” might depend on the context.
It’s so complicated. Everybody who has experimented with low-carb/paleo knows the tremendous changes your gut goes through when you restrict the supply of sugar and starch. To me it feels better to lose the 4-6 pounds of fluid, the “wheat belly/beer belly.” Inflammation goes down, and inflammation is probably bad, but who knows.
Being keto-adapted FEELS healthier but is it? It will take a long time to know for sure. Are some carbs necessary to maintain a healthy flora? That’s one of the big ideas of the Perfect Health Diet and I wouldn’t dismiss it. But there is certainly very little data at this point.
As for Perry, he’s a classic troll and responding only encourages him. He doesn’t back up anything he says, doesn’t add any information. He is highly persuaded of the superiority of his own opinions and the inferiority of everybody else’s — but that is not someone I would want to have a conversation with.
https://healthwarriorwellness.com/health-warrior-summit-replay-day-5/
Perry,
You are obviously very passionate about your beliefs so DUDE chill on the cursing. This is a great blog with really passionate people wanting to just be healthier. I really enjoyed reading your post. You had very compelling thoughts that to many will just not read and bypass when your using profanity. All that time you spent on your very well thought out points will be wasted when use profanity and blast others the way you do. What’s amazing is that “to each is own ” is still super important. I can’t do wheat, donuts, fast food anymore or I add serious pounds and loose energy. For myself and family Gluten Free and an organic and holistic lifestyle works for us and keeps us trim, fit and super vibrant. My medical tests of the last couple years has been incredible since switching to gluten free. We don’t preach to others unless they ask or we see an opening. We have seen so much research and heard people try to prove that organic vs. no organic and gluten vs non gluten and we just don’t care. We know it works for us. So my point is chill on the cursing as others who really could learn from you won’t give you the chance. If I have offended you my apologies….
Marc, you’re just showing yet another bullshit person talking about this.
Yeah, and?
Her, Perlmutter, Taubes…they are all the same.
Just like all the others, she starts out by talking about other races of people eating fat and meat.
Yeah, so what?
‘And because she doesn’t know about how the Inuits get their carbs through meat is enough to tell me she doesn’t know as much as she leads on.
The Inuit Paradox
https://discovermagazine.com/2004/oct/inuit-paradox#.UypZBM5_RK9
And of course fats, and meats, play a very important role in our diet, duh, but these races also got their carbs through other means.
They also did not have Cheetos all the time or overeat either.
They were also a hell of a lot more active.
Damn, some people drive around and around to find a parking space close to the entrance.
Also, these races were not as healthy as these “experts” claim, either. Look up their health history.
They aren’t like many unhealthy Americans, but they aren’t super healthy either.
These quacks and idiots just parrot one another, saying the same thing. “Oh look how healthy they are.”
None of them do any real research.
I suspect Gedgaudes is one of the parrots.
I know many people, myself included, who are just as healthy, if not healthier.
And ya know what? We eat plenty of carbs. We also eat junk food. We just don’t over do it and we are more active.
This is common sense—that sooooo many freakin’ people don’t have.
I’m not saying that these races NEED carbs, I’m saying they are getting more carbs than you think.
I really hate that shit!
What’s really ridiculous is when this woman compares us to mammals, like the gorilla.
Uhhh, the human body is not like theirs.
Eat a bunch of leaves and stalks, and see what happens.
Jesus.
She talks about how our body is designed for a fat diet.
Duh. Of course it is. But so what? We are talking about carbs here, and with the exception of certain individuals, they are not bad for us.
Stress, pollution, sadness, eating bad foods all the time, not being active enough is!
Also, having to deal with stupid people on a daily basis.
When she said that “the brain runs better on fat” tells me right there she is isn’t very bright.
Yes, of course the brain converts fat to glucose for energy, but it cannot convert enough and fast enough for those times when we put the brain through its paces.
It’s impossible for the body to do it.
It’s biology 101.
It’s the same with muscles.
Show me one marathoner or triathlete who can perform on fats just as well as the one on carbs.
Just one.
You can’t, and neither can these blowhards.
If they could, they would have.
Fats are for hiking.
Carbs are for running.
The fat cannot convert fast and well enough for that much much energy.
Again, just like the brain.
You are listening to a bunch of fools who don’t do enough research, and they are not including those of us who work our body harder.
It’s basic biology 101 that a med student in neurology knows.
FATS AND THE BRAIN OF A BABY
Yes, fats are vital for babies, but we are talking about the development stages.
There’s a BIG difference between that and keeping an already-developed brain functioning properly when we overwork it.
You see, they take stuff like this, twist it around, and leave out little bits of info to make their case.
They also think that just because a baby needs fat for the brain means he needs it for primary energy throughout his life.
Idiots.
There was a study done on epileptic children, and it showed that it slowed down seizures, but what were they eating and drinking, and how much, before the study???
Besides, those on such a diet also do more than just eat less carbs. They stopped eating junk food. They are now more active. They are eating more nutrients in general. They stopped smoking. . . .
In other words: They are taking better care of themselves
across the board–period!
The medical est. already knows that diseases and overall health can dramatically go down when these are included.
But, hey, let’s give this ketogenic diet the credit, right?
Of course fats help with things like, say, nerve health and slowing down tumor growth, but we simply do not know for a fact that it helps with diseases, along with epilepsy to a point where it makes a difference.
You also have to keep in mind that many of these case studies are done on individuals who eat 300 plus carbs, on a daily basis, with many of the carbs being simple.
Some people cannot handle that, though many can.
Hell, there are some whose brain goes haywire from eating carbs, There is a very small class of people who are like this.
Just like there is a very small class of people who can’t drink milk.
I suspect that many of these case studies included these people who have such rare low tolerance levels.
I agree that fats are healthier for the brain than carbs, I have never said otherwise–what I am saying is that carbs are also not bad for our health. And they certainly are not killing our brain!
For nearly everyone, that is.
If that were not the case, you’d see people walking around like the Walking Dead,” and dropping like flies.
Most of the world eats plenty of carbs…and that includes some of the world’s smartest/healthiest/fittest/fastest humans.
Gee…hmmm…how is that possible???
*scratches head*
Those who are anti-carbs couldn’t compare to those who eat 100 on up to 200 carbs, especially in races and other such sports.
Common sense!
A ketogenic diet is not bad, of course, but it’s simply not needed in nearly all cases either.
It’s overkill by a bunch of drama queens.
I’m 50-years old. I have a calorie intake of around 2,500. Most days around 1,116 are from carbs, which come from two cups of oatmeal, a couple of slices of whole wheat bread, peas, corn, a couple of cups of beans, and a potato.
I can outperform guys twenty years younger, both mentally and physically.
That includes eating candy bars and doughnuts and going to McDonalds every now and then!
MORE BULLSHIT FROM HER:
She said that the body cannot digest roots for its carbs.
Wow, she said that?!
They are hard to digest–LIKE MANY VEGETABLES–but the body gets enough carbs, and nutrients from it.
I didn’t watch the whole video. That woman was giving me a fucking headache.
Here is a link to a good you tube of a lecture by Nora Gedgaudes on the benefits of being keto adapted.
*chuckles*
Tom, seriously, stop talking.
Perry, have you ever heard of ketones? Seems to me your confidence belies a basic lack of background reading. I am not going to engage with you because you respond with insulting remarks But I think if you read up on ketones that might help you realize there is a world of good information out there that will be new to you. Don’t presume that what you were taught in 1972 or 1980 is still true.
I think the mystery is nearing an end. It’s now been found that “grain brain” is not what is going on here. The real issue is more likely “Melatonin Brain”. It is exposure to blue wavelength light during night hours that is causing the rise in brain disease. This light (screens, phones, LED, TV, tablets, etc) halts melatonin production, thus leading to the exact symptoms claimed by “grain brain”. It’s now even been found that shift workers are getting brain damage. The balance of circadian rhythms and melatonin production is far more plausible a culprit that “grain” imo. This will become far more apparent in the near future.
Many people, who are anti-carbs, don’t do enough research. If they did, and they were big enough to admit they were wrong, they’d see that the brain does indeed need carbs to function properly.
Yes, fats play a role, but only a minor one.
Our brain is a constantly-running “mechanism” that needs a continuous and fast-acting energy supply.
Fats on their own cannot do this.
The harder one works the brain, the more fast-acting energy it needs.
This is basic biology 101
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK22436/
The reason I mentioned students is because, of course, they put extra work on the brain. The fat cannot keep up.
I will agree that fats are our primary fuel for everyday normal physical activities.
Every now and then, some meat-eater, who thinks he or she knows it all, will try to run for over two hours on a mostly fat diet.
The body cannot turn fat into energy that fast. That is what carb stores are for.
They are left far behind by the ones who fill up on carbs.
Look it up.
They “hit the wall” a hell of a lot faster.
Give me the name of one athlete, just one, who is at the top of their game on a fat diet.
Save the fat diets for hiking, and, long-distance biking. As long as the peddling is kept at a certain speed, that is.
I don’t know what you were thinking when you wrote out that post, Marc.
“1) Old beliefs (carbohydrates are essential fuel for brain function/exercise; saturated fat causes heart disease etc. ) are super hard to kill off — it’s gonna take decades.”
Oh boy.
Uhhhh, the brain’s primary source of energy are from carbs.
Ask any marathoner or endurance athlete who uses their body for fast sports and to overwork the muscles. Ask any student who uses their brain into overtime.
Back in the olden’ times, they used carbs for instant energy to run away from danger. That is what carbs are for when we first started on this planet.
Fats are mainly for keeping us going to the very last second of breath when there isn’t any food around.
Hello???
“2) Especially when it come to diet, people get so emotional. Fruit, for example, is a treat that has been successfully dressed up as healthy. You get to have your sugary banana and grapes and yogurt with corn syrup jelly at the bottom”
Show me where I said “corn syrup.”
Many people get emotional mainly because there is so much misinformation and stupidity out there.
Like this thread, for example.
“Your oatmeal, your corn chips are labeled “rich in fiber/heart healthy” so you think that means good for you.”
Wow…you actually said that about whole oatmeal.
That’s just too stupid to give any more of my time to.
I couldn’t make heads or tails from the rest of your rambling.
Sorry.
The brain can certainly run on sugar ( carbs). If you feed it a carb rich diet it can and will run on that fuel. But it’s a question of which came first, the chicken or the egg.
The Brain can run on suger if that is what you feed to your body to use for fuel. The same with athleitic performance. But it certainly doesnt have to or need to use sugar for it’s primary fuel.Human infants who breast feed are all keto adapted. The child’s metabolish does not change until we purposefully feed it sugar and carbs and drop the fat intake.
Keto adapted athletes may well outperform a sugar adapted athlete. Dr. Phinney and Voleck have just published a new book about keto adapted athletic performance:
“The Art and Science of Low Carbohydrate Performance”.
Perry’s comments (like Brittdoc’s above) are worth saving as examples of a couple of things:
1) Old beliefs (carbohydrates are essential fuel for brain function/exercise; saturated fat causes heart disease etc. ) are super hard to kill off — it’s gonna take decades. The new research is breaking down a paradigm that we’ve lived with for 50 years, so the resistance/cognitive dissonance is extremely high among lay people and health professionals. Which is why books like Perlmutter’s (and Gary Taubes “Why We Get Fat” are so important because they put the paradigm breakage into plain language so lay people can participate.
2) Especially when it come to diet, people get so emotional. Fruit, for example, is a treat that has been successfully dressed up as healthy. You get to have your sugary banana and grapes and yogurt with corn syrup jelly at the bottom, and you eat them happily in the belief that they’re good for you. Your oatmeal, your corn chips are labeled “rich in fiber/heart healthy” so you think that means good for you. So when someone comes along and suggests fruit juice is not much different than soda, that much of supermarket fruit isn’t much better than candy, that “whole grain” is in fact not heart-healthy — that really sets people off.
Really, diet should be a taboo subject for polite company — right up there with politics and religion — because people take it so personally.
3) People defending the dominant paradigm have a tendency to go ad hominem — nut job, quack etc. The ad hominem attack provides a powerful chilling effect for scientists who might otherwise be tempted to question the dominant paradigm. In fact this is why in the history of science, paradigm shifts have usually come from rebels outside the established academy whose careers don’t depend on the approval of their scientific peers.
It’s why that with THIS paradigm shift, lay people like the people taking part in this discussion have an important role to play, because there are a lot of powerful medical professionals and food companies and drug companies who have a lot invested in the old paradigm and will have to be dragged to the new one kicking and screaming.