[Vision2020] ketogenic diets

Tue Sep 3 10:49:56 PDT 2013

Unfortunately, often folks use skeptical arguments to wield some political advantage. In my experience, I find that people use them when they want to hold onto a disreputable claim, something that either lacks evidence or has no evidence in its favor. A local pastor uses them to pave the way for religious faith getting rid of all beliefs based on evidence.

As I said before, the structure of most of your anti-climate science arguments is such that it would undermine all evidence based belief. There is nothing particular about climate science as far as I can tell. It strikes me that there is something flawed about only using skeptical arguments to undermine some beliefs. Either they undermine all beliefs -- since no set of evidence entails that a belief is true; there is always a gap -- or they undermine none. That's my view!

On Sep 3, 2013, at 8:27 AM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> wrote:

> It appears that the federal government, based on shoddy science and a "cascade" (as described in the article I posted) got their basic diet information wrong and subsequently caused an obesity epidemic that is threatening the health of millions.  I would argue that the obesity epidemic in the Western world is more of a dire issue than global warming is to the average westerner.  
> 
> If it can happen with something as basic and as far-reaching as setting an American's suggested diet, then it can happen in climate science as well.  That is why we need to be *extra* skeptical, especially since I see many parallels already to the diet problem and the anti-skeptic rhetoric automatically makes me wonder if there is a cascade happening there as well.  Some of the proposed mitigation techniques could be just as damaging in the short term as some of the projected outcomes are for our grandchildren, so we owe it to ourselves to be open to criticism in this area.
> 
> That's not to say that climate science has it wrong, just that its opposition to skepticism could lead us to the same kind of problems as the medical and nutrition industries are running into.
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
> From: Joe Campbell <philosopher.joe at gmail.com>
> To: Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> 
> Cc: Art Deco <art.deco.studios at gmail.com>; "vision2020 at moscow.com" <vision2020 at moscow.com> 
> Sent: Tuesday, September 3, 2013 3:01 AM
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] ketogenic diets
> 
> I am somewhat of a real skeptic and have studied skepticism for much of my life. I question everything and always have. But skepticism and questioning has never led me to go out the window instead of the door. When considering policy decisions that have a literally global impact, radical skepticism strikes me as irresponsible. At that point we should listen to experts. It is fine if you want to step out the window because you are a gravity skeptic but I'm going to speak up whenever you decide to take the rest of us with you. Sorry.
> 
> On Sep 2, 2013, at 11:10 PM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> The experts have been saying that a low fat, restricted calorie diet high in carbs was best for the last 30 years at least.  I'm skeptical of their claims.
>> 
>> Anyway, my intention wasn't to derail this thread.  I just found the parallels amusing.  Let's make a deal.  If you will take note somewhere in the back of your mind that the climate experts might be wrong, I'll take note somewhere in the back of my mind that they might be right.  Deal?
>> 
>> Paul
>> 
>> On 09/02/2013 09:36 PM, Joe Campbell wrote:
>>> One difference is you can find many experts on the various sides of the diet debate. If the experts -- folks with MDs and PhDs -- said one diet was better than all others, then go on that diet! But that is not the case. Faulty analogy.
>>> 
>>> On Sep 2, 2013, at 8:43 PM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> I wanted to reply to this sooner, but I was on vacation.
>>>> 
>>>> Read Gary Taubes book "Good Calories, Bad Calories".  Or search for "gary taubes why we get fat" on YouTube.
>>>> 
>>>> It would appear that the "high fat causes heart attacks" hypothesis isn't as strong as it was once thought to be.  Research comparing high fat / low carb unlimited food intake diets vs. the traditional high carb, low fat, restricted calorie diet consistently shows the high fat low carb diets allow the subjects to lose more weight and it makes their cholesterol numbers better.  
>>>> 
>>>> Here is an article from the New York Times talking about the subject: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/09/science/09tier.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
>>>> 
>>>> I chuckle reading this, because there are hallmarks of the climate science debate here, too.  Politics gets involved and suddenly it hurts your reputation to be skeptical of the consensus view. Everyone studies the consensus topics, but nobody researches topics that by their very nature conflict with the consensus view.  That doesn't make either one of the looked-down-upon topics any more true, but I do find it amusing to see human nature at work.
>>>> 
>>>> That's not to say that high fat low carb diets are perfect.  I have seen research that shows that if you have a pre-existing heart condition, then the ketogenic diet might make it harder to recover in the event of a heart attack.  I've also seen research that suggests that pregnant women who are obese and on that kind of diet can affect their babies by making them fatter and have smaller livers.  I look at those risks and compare them to the risks of being obese, and I side with the diet that will help me lose that weight the best and that makes my cholesterol numbers better to boot.  I mean, look around.  How many really old fat people do you see?  But I admit that it's a complicated area of study.  Certainly, if I ever get pregnant, I'll drop off the diet for nine months.  
>>>> 
>>>> Besides, most of the high fat studies I've run across (I haven't done an exhaustive search by any means) involve high fat / high carb diets instead of high fat / low carb diets.  In other words, simply adding fat to the traditional diet appears to be what is risky.  Especially to mice, or rabbits.  Yes, one study showed that eating fat from meat doesn't sit will with an herbivore's biology.
>>>> 
>>>> I know one data point is just an anecdote, but my appetite has already returned to normal, I don't fight sleep in the afternoons, I don't crave ice cream or sweets, I'm not constantly running to the bathroom, I don't feel the urge to keep eating when I know I've had enough, and I seem to have as much energy as I had before and I believe that I'm thinking clearer.  And, my pants are starting to get loose around the waist.
>>>> 
>>>> Paul
>>>> 
>>>> On 08/31/2013 06:43 AM, Art Deco wrote:
>>>>> @Paul,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Do you think that eating a high fat diet for years might have caused the condition Atkins died of?  Perhaps you               should read a little about the long term effects of high fat diets, those high in "bad" fats like beef fat.
>>>>> 
>>>>> w.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 12:40 AM, lfalen <lfalen at turbonet.com> wrote:
>>>>> Mediterranean may be misleading as one might think of a lot of pasta. Not the case. The DASH diet is similar. One should eat whole grains and a minimum of processed or high carb. foods. The more color the better (blueberries etc.), eat legumes and nuts.
>>>>> Roger
>>>>> 
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: lfalen <lfalen at turbonet.com>
>>>>> To: vision2020 at moscow.com,                             "Art Deco" <art.deco.studios at gmail.com>, "Paul Rumelhart" <godshatter at yahoo.com>
>>>>> Date: 08/30/13 17:58
>>>>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] ketogenic diets
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>> I would not recommend any of the diets you mentioned for long term. the Atkins diet can lead to health problems in the long term. It is especially dangerous for any one with kidney problems. For overall good heath I would recommend the Mediterranean Diet or something close to it. In other words a diet with lots of variety, high in fruits and vegetables, vegatable oil  such as Olive, some fish, a small amount of red meat, and low fat dairy products.
>>>>> Roger
>>>>> 
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: "Paul Rumelhart" <godshatter at yahoo.com>
>>>>> To: "Art Deco" <art.deco.studios at gmail.com>, vision2020 at moscow.com
>>>>> Date: 08/30/13 17:02
>>>>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] ketogenic diets
>>>>> 
>>>>> I've seen this claim before.  Here is what snopes says: http://www.snopes.com/medical/doctor/atkins.asp
>>>>> 
>>>>> When he went in to the hospital because of head injuries he sustained from a fall outside of his clinic on April 8, 2003, he weighed 195 pounds.  When he died after being in a coma 9 days later on April 17, 2003, he weighed in at 258 pounds.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I doubt he gained 60 pounds in 9 days on the Atkins diet while in a coma.  A quote from the spokesperson for the Atkins Physician Counsel:  "During his coma, as he deteriorated and his major organs failed, fluid retention and bloating dramatically distorted                                       his body and left him at 258 pounds at the time of his death, a documented weight gain of over 60 pounds."
>>>>> 
>>>>> Paul
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>> From: Art Deco <art.deco.studios at gmail.com>
>>>>> To: vision2020 at moscow.com
>>>>> Sent: Friday, August 30, 2013 3:59 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] ketogenic diets
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>> To see how well it worked long term for Atkins himself read about his condition at his death and how his widow (an interesting story in itself) tried to suppress the photos
> 
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20130903/6e58d133/attachment-0001.html>