One of my crusades is against bad science, and nutrition-related science is some of the worst.
A 2008 review by the Food and Agriculture Organization concluded that “there is no probable or convincing evidence” that a high level of fat in the diet causes heart disease.18 A 2012 Cochrane review of 24 comparisons with 65 508 participants found no benefit from total fat reduction and no effect on cardiovascular or total mortality but a small reduction (relative risk 0.86 (95% confidence interval 0.77 to 0.96)) in cardiovascular events in men (not women).
Embedded Link
id like to mass murder some dieters
does that count?
Let's just stop at the diet promoters
now, now, if we keep cutting down for seemingly sensible reasons, eventually we'll be deciding not to kill anyone at all, and we'll be back where we started
Science is funded by the capital interest of all sorts of industry this kind of report only benefits the industry of fatty food . Money and more profit is the driving force. Incidental mortality is not their problem they leave that to the pharmaceutical and health care industry.
+Manuela Mahler The opposite type of reports only benefit the industry of non-fatty food and dieting books.
Guess we can't believe in science at all then, right?
+Manuela Mahler, the key in science is that if it's badly done like in the example you gave, when the rest of the world tries to reproduce the results they won't be able to using good methods. They'll publish their results and the badly done paper will then get ignored. If you want to stop the bad scientists, fund or do good science.