Any Gary Taubes fans out here?
Options
Replies
-
I believe the only thing I've read by him is his piece in the NY Times, something about a Big Fat Lie.
It made sense based on what I know about my own body and my own health/weight journey. So yes, I suppose I'm a minor fan. I never knew he was controversial or hated until I read these message boards. But then a lot of stuff considered the conventional wisdom on these boards, I think is controversial or flat out wrong. Different strokes.3 -
Christine_72 wrote: »He has plenty of fans, the people who follow/believe his points of views and advice like him. The people who disagree and do not follow his way of thinking hate him. Pretty much goes for every self proclaimed expert on the interwebs.
Dr. Oz has a lot of fans too. For that matter, so did Charles Manson. I don't judge veracity by the size of one's fan base.10 -
Christine_72 wrote: »He has plenty of fans, the people who follow/believe his points of views and advice like him. The people who disagree and do not follow his way of thinking hate him. Pretty much goes for every self proclaimed expert on the interwebs.
Dr. Oz has a lot of fans too. For that matter, so did Charles Manson. I don't judge veracity by the size of one's fan base.
And Dr. Mercola...
And Justin Bieber...
There's no accounting for taste.12 -
Don't forget Freelee the YouTube banana girl!
I would trust the banana girl before some of these "experts"...
The summer my sister in law blew up my phone with texts screaming at me for refusing to listen to a Mercola webinar while on vacation and warning me that I was making my son autistic and would eventually "give" him (my son) cerebral palsey if I didn't chelate him of the nonexistant Thimerisal in his vaccinations still burns painfully in one corner of my mind...
I call some of these " doctors" The Crazymakers...they whip their fans into a froth of paranoia but damn, do they ever make money doing it. So there's that.
All well and good, follow what thou wilt but don't jam it down my throat, and everybody winds up happy.
I think if "hate," if you will, comes from that...these people tend to make their own beliefs a crusade, often with a gigantic intrusive marketing push - all fueled on fear tactics, then they can't believe people tell them to shut up, LOL.
Not saying this of Taubes specifically or trying to make the OP feel bad. But yeah, if there is a negative reputation, this sort of thing is why.3 -
Christine_72 wrote: »He has plenty of fans, the people who follow/believe his points of views and advice like him. The people who disagree and do not follow his way of thinking hate him. Pretty much goes for every self proclaimed expert on the interwebs.
Dr. Oz has a lot of fans too. For that matter, so did Charles Manson. I don't judge veracity by the size of one's fan base.
Lol Touche'
0 -
I wouldnt go that far lol she has peddled so much woo that a lot of those that have followed her way of eating have ended up with health issues and gained weight(of course) she also totes that it helped or cured her mothers cancer at one point. she also loves to slander others nothing good about her either0 -
I never could understand people who spread false information just to popularize a dietary pattern. The raised expectations do more harm than good in the long run. Not to mention to toll the truth takes on their own credibility.5
-
CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »
I wouldnt go that far lol she has peddled so much woo that a lot of those that have followed her way of eating have ended up with health issues and gained weight(of course) she also totes that it helped or cured her mothers cancer at one point. she also loves to slander others nothing good about her either
Nah, I was being facetious, Banana Girl really is bananas .
3 -
-
I do agree that sugars and starches can be a problem for some people like me but I'd rather follow the GAPS diet which is really helping me with candida issues I've had for 9 years.1
-
Years ago I watched the bloggingheads episode referred to in here. I think this is a decent discussion of Taubes: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/thin-body-of-evidence-why-i-have-doubts-about-gary-taubess-why-we-get-fat/I have great respect for Gary. He's a science journalist's science journalist, who researches topics to the point of obsession—actually, well beyond that point—and never dumbs things down for readers. I read both of Gary's fat books, invited him to speak about diet at my school two years ago, and discussed the subject with him on Bloggingheads.tv last month. Gary marshals mountains of data in support of his thesis, but I still have misgivings about it. My reaction is partly visceral; the Atkins diet—which prescribes little fruit and vegetables and lots of meat—strikes me as, well, gross....
I think this last is a lame argument, but it's a blog post and I respect that Horgan is upfront about it....in a 2007 article for The New York Times Magazine, "Do We Really Know What Makes Us Healthy?," which I often assign to students in my science-writing seminar. The article examined the "here-today-gone-tomorrow nature of medical wisdom," such as the claim—touted in the 1990s and retracted a decade ago—that estrogen could improve the health of aging women. Gary noted that even the best-designed epidemiological studies are confounded by factors such as "healthy-user bias," the tendency of people who faithfully adhere to a treatment to be healthier than those who are less compliant—even if the treatment is a placebo. He warned that if a study implies that "some drug or diet will bring us improved prosperity and health," we should "wonder about the unforeseen consequences."
Gary, it seems to me, applies this critical outlook more to high-carb, low-fat diets than to the Atkins diet...
This is really the essence of my own issues with him. I think he is so convinced he is right that he has a blind spot when it comes to the conclusions he prefers such that he cannot apply the same sort of rigor and acknowledgement to the flaws or weaknesses in the arguments/evidence that he does to the other claims he examines.
More: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/journalist-gary-taubes-raises-bucks-to-disprove-his-diet-theory/5 -
Hahahahahahahahahahhaahhaahahahahahaha
No.
Never.
I'd almost take vegan gains or freelee over him! Almost.2 -
lilolilo920 wrote: »Hahahahahahahahahahhaahhaahahahahahaha
No.
Never.
I'd almost take vegan gains or freelee over him! Almost.
is that a big almost or a little almost? lol0 -
Not a fan if him or lchf.JerSchmare wrote: »What's really a shame is people who think the haters just hate him are really clueless about why. They seem to ignore the fact that Taubes is completely baseless. There is nothing there. He could say, "Milk is bad", without explaining why, and all his followers will stop drinking milk. It's so lame. If someone makes a statement like that, I want to see studies and facts that back that up. Unbelievable how gullible people are. And then they say, "different stokes". No it's not different strokes. It's stupid (Taubes) versus smart (anyone that understand that Taubes is a fake).
Thank you!0 -
AlabasterVerve wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »AlabasterVerve wrote: »I'm a fan. Lean-meat-healthy-whole-grains was a doozy to overcome but his Good Calories Bad Calories was instrumental for me in that regard. I think he's done a world of good for nutrition science.
how has he done a world of good for nutrition science when he knows squat about it? thats like getting nutrition info from dan rather or any other newscaster/journalist. That would be like getting an eating plan from a podiatrist.
By expecting it to be, you know, pseudoscience. It doesn't matter whether what he personally believes is right or wrong he's had a huge impact on nutrition research for the better.
fixed it for you ...2 -
He is generally frowned upon on these forums. He is a very good journalist though and knows how to make money in journalism. His knowledge on nutrition is amusing at best, but hey, he's making money with it so good for him.
thisTacklewasher wrote: »Frowned upon is a bit of an understatement. He's generally considered a fraud who found a way to get rich through food scaring.
and this ..
Right.
3 -
AlabasterVerve wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »AlabasterVerve wrote: »I'm a fan. Lean-meat-healthy-whole-grains was a doozy to overcome but his Good Calories Bad Calories was instrumental for me in that regard. I think he's done a world of good for nutrition science.
how has he done a world of good for nutrition science when he knows squat about it? thats like getting nutrition info from dan rather or any other newscaster/journalist. That would be like getting an eating plan from a podiatrist.
By expecting it to be, you know, science. It doesn't matter whether what he personally believes is right or wrong he's had a huge impact on nutrition research for the better.
Trouble is that he hasn't had a GOOD impact. What he does is not science, it is fear-mongering. He's figured out (as a journalist) what type of fear mongering he can make money off of and run with it. The one time his foundation actually funded any actual research, the results were not to his liking so he responded by slagging the researcher.
In short, he does not know good science and his impact on the industry has been wholly negative, except to his own bank account.8 -
AlabasterVerve wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »AlabasterVerve wrote: »I'm a fan. Lean-meat-healthy-whole-grains was a doozy to overcome but his Good Calories Bad Calories was instrumental for me in that regard. I think he's done a world of good for nutrition science.
how has he done a world of good for nutrition science when he knows squat about it? thats like getting nutrition info from dan rather or any other newscaster/journalist. That would be like getting an eating plan from a podiatrist.
By expecting it to be, you know, science. It doesn't matter whether what he personally believes is right or wrong he's had a huge impact on nutrition research for the better.
Forming a belief and then cherry picking evidence and ignoring data that refutes those beliefs is not science. That's more akin to religion.
A true scientist would be open to changing his views based on evidence.7
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.4K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 982 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions