“Dangerous Paleo Diet” Study is Ragged With Holes

There’s a deep sense of irony in adding to a never-ending series of headlines on a study that shouldn’t have had any attention paid to it at all. But the publication on the dangers of the “paleo” diet that’s spawned countless headlines is so flawed that it’s worth exploring why it got so much attention.

Source: “Dangerous paleo diet” study is ragged with holes

I hate how the popular press covers nutrition and health. Popular journalism on this is a garbage fire. Its terrible.

You get dubious results like this ampped up to full volume. You get an emphasis on in individual isolated studies instead of a focus on broad scientific evidence. You get idiots like Dr. Oz and Michael Pollan taken as credible experts on things, and even given TV shows to spew their garbage. You get blatant pseudoscience that contradicts the scientific consensus taken as a credible/sensible opinion.

Advertisements

Replace Carbs with Cauliflower to Stick to a Low-Carb or Paleo Diet

…cauliflower is currently undergoing a revival as a saving grace for low-carb or Paleo dieters. In fact, my cauliflower rice article was one of the most popular, and it seems the uses of cauliflower are getting more and more inspired – or strange; I’ll let you decide.

Source: clever ways to swap carbs for cauliflower

Carbohydrates aren’t inherently bad for you, but cauliflower is one of the world’s healthiest foods. So even if you’re not on a low-carb diet, you might want to try these substitutions.

The Myth of High-Protein Diets

MANY people have been making the case that Americans have grown fat because they eat too much starch and sugar, and not enough meat, fat and eggs. Recently, the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee lifted recommendations that consumption of dietary cholesterol should be restricted, citing research that dietary cholesterol does not have a major effect on blood cholesterol levels. The predictable headlines followed: “Back to Eggs and Bacon?”

Source: The Myth of High-Protein Diets

These are not controlled studies.  While controlled studies provide better evidence, they are not feasible for all questions (in this case it would be impractical and unethical).  Results from observational studies like this one are not invalid, you just need to consider potential confounding, as they seem to have done here.  The study itself says that substituting fish, poultry, and nuts for red meat lowered the mortality risk.

This is no surprise coming from Dr. Dean Ornish, a longtime advocate of eating a plant-based diet. But his phrasing here surprises me. He seems to be suggesting that high protein in and of itself is bad, even if you’re getting your protein from low-calorie, low-fat sources like salmon.

Processed meats are so tightly linked to diabetes that we can inject rats with a compound from meat and cause diabetes. However, this is just processed meats we’re talking about. If you just cut some raw meat and then cook it, you’re mostly fine.

Related reading: