Comments on “Nutrition offers its resignation. And the reply”

I have suspected as much for quite a while. Never really got bent out of shape by it though. Corrupt Generals and corrupt Bankers and stupid Economists can destroy nations and economies. Bad nutrition takes decades to kill someone. Horrible nurition can kill someone quickly but nutritionists are not called upon to solve droughts or tell us that we can avoid scurvey by having some lime in our tequilla. So it seems to me in the grand scheme of things nutritionists are relatively harmless.

Than you for this. The useless of nutrition “science” should be more widely known. It seems there must be a concerted effort to debunk the false and unjustified claims.

I studied nutrition for a decade, and psychology for the last seven years. I have to say, psychology trumps nutrition. The studies presented in the book Mind over Medicine show that your social connections and emotional health have EVERYTHING to do with getting cancer, whereas foods have a marginal impact by comparison. That said, foods do have impacts. Ironically, people eat “healthier” when they are more emotionally satisfied, so it is hard to say how much of our concepts about healthy food goes straight back to emotional healthy anyhow.

I’ve long suspected this. And after reading Nina Teichold’s “Big Fat Surprise,” it pretty much confirmed what you write above. For me, the big warning sign was this focus on how dangerous saturated fats were, and how much superior were seed oils. Funny how humanity has evolved for thousands of years to be best suited to fats that were only invented about 120 years ago. And the fats we were eating meanwhile (animal fats) were somehow the problem all along.

I try to keep it simple: meat and vegetables, with a little wheat product thrown in in modest quantities. Little sugar.

Cheers,

Kim G
Roma Sur, CDMX
Where the obesity rate is appalling.