"not consistent with current notions"
Like the notion that saturated fat and cholesterol are bad?
"not supplying us with evidence that supports his claims"
Where is the evidence from HUMANs eating real foods that support your claim? Where is the evidence that the low-carb diet is unhealthy? There is more than one low-carb diet. So, would Jan Kwasniewski's diet be unhealthy, where proteins are limited to RDA levels and carbs are kept high enough to avoid ketosis (and gluconeogenesis)? Or, do you think your diet is the only healthy diet that is possible and you couldn't have solved your problems with another method?
Do you need "proof' that white flour and refined sugar are a form of "empty calories"? If so, what nutrients do they have, relative to fruit? Try reading Weston Price. Health declined with the introduction of sugar and white flour. This is before the days of enrichment, so none of your points are relevant. Sugar has never been enriched. Do you really think refined sugar is totally innocent with respect to disease? Hundreds of medical doctors would disagree with you.
What is going on here does not seem like scientific debate. Seems more like some kind of cult. I have asked questions and they have not been answered. I've asked for studies on humans and they have not been provided. You can interpret any study to suit your theory, but that does not mean it is the only interpretation or the right one.
Where is the evidence that the iron in red meat is unhealthy, or that raisins and prunes are healthier? You can eat as you want, but please show me evidence that someone eating a diet of 100% cooked meat would have any health problems. Maybe you could have cured your health problems long ago if you had tried eating cooked meat. Maybe you are looking for ways to rationalize your refusal to do so.
Bruce |
Free Forum Hosting
Important Announcement
Prev Message
