Why?
Options
ivanfawcettgibson
Posts: 193 Member
Do some folk get so heated when discussing lchf?
I was always taught that if a new idea comes along, you test it, rigorously. If the idea holds water you adapt the information to include the new data.
Now we have people mocking, calling it 'woo' or broscience.
Here is what I've found. Articles for lc appear factual, relate to studies and have info graphics of what your pancreas and liver are up to on lchf.
When I read articles to the contrary, the author always, always has an attack on one of the authors of lchf. Now that, that in itself causes me concern. What is it to any of these people if they don't agree? There are ways of disagreeing, and countering scientific claims that don't directly call esteemed scientists intelligence into question.
I find it a bit odd.
I was always taught that if a new idea comes along, you test it, rigorously. If the idea holds water you adapt the information to include the new data.
Now we have people mocking, calling it 'woo' or broscience.
Here is what I've found. Articles for lc appear factual, relate to studies and have info graphics of what your pancreas and liver are up to on lchf.
When I read articles to the contrary, the author always, always has an attack on one of the authors of lchf. Now that, that in itself causes me concern. What is it to any of these people if they don't agree? There are ways of disagreeing, and countering scientific claims that don't directly call esteemed scientists intelligence into question.
I find it a bit odd.
2
Replies
-
I'm not thinking you're talking about this forum. Be forewarned that you can't badtalk other MFP forums here in this forum (it against the rules of posting). Maybe you're talking about a totally different place on the internet.
What I've learned over the years is that its very rare for people to search for the truth. Secondly, some people have too much time on their hands and find it easier to be trolls and "gainsayers". Instead of researching further, they stay stuck with the limited knowledge they have. They don't grow. Research takes work, they're too lazy to keep looking for the truth and or staying updated with the latest research.
Unfortunately, these stunted growth people are everywhere, at work, in your family, church and friends. You have to just let them wallow in their ignorance and choose whether to keep the relationship with them or move on. Truth seekers are so scarce, that when you find them, you'll want to be friends with them ~ so you can bounce ideas off of them ~ and leave the non-truth seekers believe whatever they want. I usually don't even try to have a deep discussion with them... I keep it to, "How ya doing?" "The weather is nice" "Wow did you see that TV show?"
Don't get too discouraged, find another forum. I think this forum here is pretty good.
I hope this helps,
Dan the Man from Michigan
Keto / The Recipe Water Fasting / E.A.S.Y. Exercise Program
P.S. Thank you for the new word I learned "Broscience" (I googled it)
4 -
I think there are different reasons
Some people identify with a personality where they are thought to be knowledgeable about health and fitness either because of some education, career or just being an active participant in the lifestyle for some time. These people have read a lot of stuff that doesn't support the lchf information and will not consider another way because they know and understand their way so well.
Other people might be similar in that they know and understand enough about that way and have been able to achieve success for themselves on the CICO, everything in moderation method. At least in the short term
There are still others that just have bad info and think you will literally get sick. Even members here often mention "low carb flu" as if it's just a given that's absolutely unavoidable because it's caused by low carb eating. Some people even try a few days of low carb and get the dreaded low carb flu and can't possibly go on! Lol
Sad really, since it's just low blood volume from low sodium due to the initial water loss. It's 100% avoidable and isn't caused by low carbing. It's caused when someone starts eating low carb and doesn't understand how electrolytes and water loss work, so they don't eat enough salt.
Can you tell "low carb flu" is a huge pet peeve of mine? Lol1 -
Oh, and I think there is one other kind of person that won't ever get lchf. The people that want to hold the fat person responsible for their situation. Meaning those that buy the whole people are just lazy and just won't put down the food idea. They need to believe in calories in/calories out because those darn fat people need to suffer to lose that weight they put on because of just being lazy bums right?
Yeah, those people are the ugliest.6 -
A comfortable place to live, perhaps not a healthy one, is one in which the world has no uncertainty. Many Folk, including my mum, protect that black and white world as it is emotionally easier than challenging our own truth ie beliefs.
"If you are willing to look at another person's behavior toward you as a reflection of the state of their relationship with themselves, rather than a statement about your value as a person, then you will, over a period of time, cease to react at all."
Yogi Bhajan5 -
People are happier believing they are right.
Even when the science says they are wrong.
Some people hold on to that, desperately.2 -
(...)
What I've learned over the years is that its very rare for people to search for the truth.
I agree with Dan. I think it's easier for us to stay with lies and suffering that we already know, rather than to venture to new stuff that may or may not be true. My mum will rather take medication with horrible side effects than change her lifestyle. It's easier to pop pills thinking they help her. It's like talking to deaf ears.
Even asking questions to oneself may challenge the loops we're stuck in. They might lead to uncomfortable cognitive dissonance. Cognitive dissonance force us to take choices...and that can be harder to do than blaming something or someone outside of your direct control.
Cause recognizing that many things are consequences of choices...is not easy...It is connected to the willingness to change, IMO.
This group is great. On a daily basis I see posts here about you guys wanting to change. That's inspiring
3 -
To your first point, I think people tend to get overly emotional about things they are passionate about. It's unfortunate how that tends to unfold.
Secondarily I would imagine that if there were entire websites dedicated to low carb (there probably are), people who preached about calories in vs calories out would probably get roasted there. All I'm getting at is that since this is a group that is built around tracking calories, they tend to go against anything that isn't about calories.
But finally, as it pertains to actual science on the topic, the insulin hypothesis has been pretty readily refuted.
This DOES NOT make low carb dieting broscience, or a bad thing, or whatever. It's a METHOD of controlling energy intake and it works fine for some people. It also does not work fine for other people and I'd say the same thing about calorie tracking.
1 -
But finally, as it pertains to actual science on the topic, the insulin hypothesis has been pretty readily refuted.
I think you'll find some rather spirited and sophisticated disagreememts with this claim if you leaf back through this group's discussions.
I think you're right about the emotional component. Just as some low-fat converts seem to enshrine the rules of that regime as immutable commendments, there may be a quasi-religious zeal to the loyalty of some LC followers. I suspect this may be triggering some equally emotional reactions in other camps.
I find it refreshing to listen to sensible proponents like Stephen Phinney, who readily admits, and regularly reminds folks, that LCHF doesn't work for everyone, though it is likely to be the best diet for most people with insulin resistance.1 -
I'm sure I will find disagreements in this group.
I would expect it.0 -
Disagreements will exist everywhere on every subject from now until the end of time.
The immovable opinions will work hard to hold up their beliefs while the open minds work to make progress.5 -
You'v seen this play out more than
a few times, I suspect.... perhaps with every conceivable T1D dogma?1 -
I really relate to what @Foamroller wrote about cognitive dissonance. I grew up with the Standard American Diet and then Weight Watchers and a host of other teachings that Fat is bad, Fruits are good. Eat salads to lose weight and avoid red meat. These were my authoritative teachings on health and diet. To abandon those ideas and try something completely different was a leap of faith for me. My initial knee-jerk reaction was this couldn't possibly be good or even work over the long term. However, I was also taught it is foolhardy to keep doing the same thing and expect a different result. I had to read, learn, experiment, more experimentation, repeat and be open to the process. After a year, I have learned what works for me and what doesn't. It is not an easy thing to try to change your way of life and way of eating. The easy route is to believe this is stupid, tried it for 2 weeks, doesn't work. The default is easy, committing to something is harder.
I personally find overly zealous people in general about any topic make me wary. I try to avoid those who would rather discredit others because of their beliefs or way of life rather than be considerate and try to understand the "why's" of their positions.4 -
slimzandra wrote: »I really relate to what @Foamroller wrote about cognitive dissonance. I grew up with the Standard American Diet and then Weight Watchers and a host of other teachings that Fat is bad, Fruits are good. Eat salads to lose weight and avoid red meat. These were my authoritative teachings on health and diet. To abandon those ideas and try something completely different was a leap of faith for me. My initial knee-jerk reaction was this couldn't possibly be good or even work over the long term. However, I was also taught it is foolhardy to keep doing the same thing and expect a different result. I had to read, learn, experiment, more experimentation, repeat and be open to the process. After a year, I have learned what works for me and what doesn't. It is not an easy thing to try to change your way of life and way of eating. The easy route is to believe this is stupid, tried it for 2 weeks, doesn't work. The default is easy, committing to something is harder.
I personally find overly zealous people in general about any topic make me wary. I try to avoid those who would rather discredit others because of their beliefs or way of life rather than be considerate and try to understand the "why's" of their positions.
You said it!!0 -
I'm not thinking you're talking about this forum. Be forewarned that you can't badtalk other MFP forums here in this forum (it against the rules of posting). Maybe you're talking about a totally different place on the internet.
There is no connection in my post to any particular source of any of the reactions I've been accustomed to when discussing lchf. ;-)
I'd also not call it bad mouthing, even if it did. It's an observation of reaction, I've not called anyone out.
I'm of the belief that if someone has found something that works, they should pursue it. That does not give anyone the right to tell anyone else that they're wrong and that you don't understand what you're reading.
1 -
People believe what they were raised believing, and on the whole require little evidence to back it up. People are raised to believe that low fat, grain diets are the way to be healthy. So they will not accept any other theory. Too much meat and high fat is definitely bad for you, right? Nutrition is taught at Uni using 40yo science, and yet newly spat out Nutritionists are "experts" and therefore low fat is the way to go. Right?
Other examples include vaping - which as my sister in law puts it "I don't know what that is but I hate it and you're not doing it in my back yard" (at a barbecue, when there were smokers everywhere and that's fine). When in reality vaping (according to many studies, and the word of my surgeon) is 95% safer than smoking, and has in fact saved the lives of me and my hubby, as well as many many others (look for a video called "a billion lives" on the internet).
Then there's God. A fictitious character, dreamt up by a bunch of guys in the dark ages as a way to control the masses. And his debut (and only) book of stories - 99% of which are improbable at best, and most of which contradict each other. But if you were raised that way, he's more real than anything - despite the fact that we're no longer in the dark ages.
This is how alot of people are. They don't question. Things just "are" because that's what they've always thought. It is a part of who they think they are, and few people want to actually grow. Few people are capable of the open mindedness to question and think and accept that they might be wrong. And they get angry and defensive if you question what they believe to be true. They can't prove it's true, but they don't want to hear it from someone else that it might not be.2 -
EbonyDahlia wrote: »People believe what they were raised believing, and on the whole require little evidence to back it up. People are raised to believe that low fat, grain diets are the way to be healthy. So they will not accept any other theory. Too much meat and high fat is definitely bad for you, right? Nutrition is taught at Uni using 40yo science, and yet newly spat out Nutritionists are "experts" and therefore low fat is the way to go. Right?
Other examples include vaping - which as my sister in law puts it "I don't know what that is but I hate it and you're not doing it in my back yard" (at a barbecue, when there were smokers everywhere and that's fine). When in reality vaping (according to many studies, and the word of my surgeon) is 95% safer than smoking, and has in fact saved the lives of me and my hubby, as well as many many others (look for a video called "a billion lives" on the internet).
Then there's God. A fictitious character, dreamt up by a bunch of guys in the dark ages as a way to control the masses. And his debut (and only) book of stories - 99% of which are improbable at best, and most of which contradict each other. But if you were raised that way, he's more real than anything - despite the fact that we're no longer in the dark ages.
This is how alot of people are. They don't question. Things just "are" because that's what they've always thought. It is a part of who they think they are, and few people want to actually grow. Few people are capable of the open mindedness to question and think and accept that they might be wrong. And they get angry and defensive if you question what they believe to be true. They can't prove it's true, but they don't want to hear it from someone else that it might not be.
There are a whole lot of sweeping broad generalizations in the above. It's wonderful that you're enlightened enough to unravel the secrets of the universe that the rest of us close minded neanderthals haven't been able to figure out.
Don't be too defensive about your vaping though, your hypocrisy's showing.3 -
auntstephie321 wrote: »EbonyDahlia wrote: »People believe what they were raised believing, and on the whole require little evidence to back it up. People are raised to believe that low fat, grain diets are the way to be healthy. So they will not accept any other theory. Too much meat and high fat is definitely bad for you, right? Nutrition is taught at Uni using 40yo science, and yet newly spat out Nutritionists are "experts" and therefore low fat is the way to go. Right?
Other examples include vaping - which as my sister in law puts it "I don't know what that is but I hate it and you're not doing it in my back yard" (at a barbecue, when there were smokers everywhere and that's fine). When in reality vaping (according to many studies, and the word of my surgeon) is 95% safer than smoking, and has in fact saved the lives of me and my hubby, as well as many many others (look for a video called "a billion lives" on the internet).
Then there's God. A fictitious character, dreamt up by a bunch of guys in the dark ages as a way to control the masses. And his debut (and only) book of stories - 99% of which are improbable at best, and most of which contradict each other. But if you were raised that way, he's more real than anything - despite the fact that we're no longer in the dark ages.
This is how alot of people are. They don't question. Things just "are" because that's what they've always thought. It is a part of who they think they are, and few people want to actually grow. Few people are capable of the open mindedness to question and think and accept that they might be wrong. And they get angry and defensive if you question what they believe to be true. They can't prove it's true, but they don't want to hear it from someone else that it might not be.
There are a whole lot of sweeping broad generalizations in the above. It's wonderful that you're enlightened enough to unravel the secrets of the universe that the rest of us close minded neanderthals haven't been able to figure out.
Don't be too defensive about your vaping though, your hypocrisy's showing.
And there I've contradicted and threatened your beliefs with my own - which I feel are based on real evidence, and you are offended and defensive. Point proven. Thank you.1 -
EbonyDahlia wrote: »auntstephie321 wrote: »EbonyDahlia wrote: »People believe what they were raised believing, and on the whole require little evidence to back it up. People are raised to believe that low fat, grain diets are the way to be healthy. So they will not accept any other theory. Too much meat and high fat is definitely bad for you, right? Nutrition is taught at Uni using 40yo science, and yet newly spat out Nutritionists are "experts" and therefore low fat is the way to go. Right?
Other examples include vaping - which as my sister in law puts it "I don't know what that is but I hate it and you're not doing it in my back yard" (at a barbecue, when there were smokers everywhere and that's fine). When in reality vaping (according to many studies, and the word of my surgeon) is 95% safer than smoking, and has in fact saved the lives of me and my hubby, as well as many many others (look for a video called "a billion lives" on the internet).
Then there's God. A fictitious character, dreamt up by a bunch of guys in the dark ages as a way to control the masses. And his debut (and only) book of stories - 99% of which are improbable at best, and most of which contradict each other. But if you were raised that way, he's more real than anything - despite the fact that we're no longer in the dark ages.
This is how alot of people are. They don't question. Things just "are" because that's what they've always thought. It is a part of who they think they are, and few people want to actually grow. Few people are capable of the open mindedness to question and think and accept that they might be wrong. And they get angry and defensive if you question what they believe to be true. They can't prove it's true, but they don't want to hear it from someone else that it might not be.
There are a whole lot of sweeping broad generalizations in the above. It's wonderful that you're enlightened enough to unravel the secrets of the universe that the rest of us close minded neanderthals haven't been able to figure out.
Don't be too defensive about your vaping though, your hypocrisy's showing.
And there I've contradicted and threatened your beliefs with my own - which I feel are based on real evidence, and you are offended and defensive. Point proven. Thank you.
You actually don't know my beliefs. But your defensiveness about your vaping is proving your point well.3 -
I'm not at all defensive about my vaping, although you seem to be fixated on it. I mentioned it to show I felt one way about it based on science, while my SIL felt another way about it based on nothing at all other than her desire to remain uninformed and in her belief bubble. It is an example is all. Same as low carb. Scientific evidence says it works, fear and narrow mindedness and an unwillingness to accept change says it doesn't. There are many examples where this is the case. I'm not sure why this makes you defensive, but it's the internet, and you are allowed to hold on to your own beliefs without being threatened by mine. That's the whole point.0
-
EbonyDahlia wrote: »I'm not at all defensive about my vaping, although you seem to be fixated on it. I mentioned it to show I felt one way about it based on science, while my SIL felt another way about it based on nothing at all other than her desire to remain uninformed and in her belief bubble. It is an example is all. Same as low carb. Scientific evidence says it works, fear and narrow mindedness and an unwillingness to accept change says it doesn't. There are many examples where this is the case. I'm not sure why this makes you defensive, but it's the internet, and you are allowed to hold on to your own beliefs without being threatened by mine. That's the whole point.
Clearly you don't see the point because you choose not to and believe that what you feel to be true actually is based on the limited information you have on it. The example you choose shows how you are no different than those who believe low carb is unnecessary, many have scientific evidence to back their beliefs up as well.3
