It's NOT a Diet rather a Lifestyle Change

GaleHawkins

CSARdiver wrote: »

GaleHawkins wrote: »

GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »

Using Whitaker as a source?

Just reading the Wikipedia on him is enough to discredit him.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Whitaker

Gale, I realize that your belief in what you say is earnest. But frankly, nothing you post has any relation to actual science. It's all pseudo-science.

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1110260814001173

Why do you say this link has nothing to do with science?

I try to post sources that hold terminal degrees in healthcare vs being one that posts personal opinions on healthcare topics without holding terminal degrees or specific experience on the subject yet stating their views are based on medical science.

I prefer to base decisions on the substance of the argument rather than the letters behind one's name. That is science.

Reliance on those with terminal degrees amounts to faith unless you are duplicating studies and challenging information.

That way of thinking is common I agree and is why you will love Julian Whitaker if you will follow his evolution over the past 40 years I expect. He once is a paid spokesman for the makers of statin drugs then when it became clear of all of the pseudo-science behind statins and cholesterol in general he evolved to be more science based than marketing based. If one knows the history of Dr. Whitaker they will understand why some unfounded criticism has been made against him.

GottaBurnEmAll

GaleHawkins wrote: »

GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »

Using Whitaker as a source?

Just reading the Wikipedia on him is enough to discredit him.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Whitaker

Gale, I realize that your belief in what you say is earnest. But frankly, nothing you post has any relation to actual science. It's all pseudo-science.

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1110260814001173

Why do you say this link has nothing to do with science?

I try to post sources that hold terminal degrees in healthcare vs being one that posts personal opinions on healthcare topics without holding terminal degrees or specific experience on the subject yet stating their views are based on medical science.

1. Alan Aragon has a Masters in Nutrition Science. He's more qualified to speak on sugar than Lustig or Julian Whitaker.
2. Why are you posting links about CRP and CHD?
3. Also? The Egyptian Heart Journal? Not a very impressive publication to be citing as a source. Horribly low impact factor.

Anecdotally, and anyone else feel free to correct me, isn't the thinking elevated CRP = CHD outdated now? I know in the past it was presumed to be so, but I thought they'd moved past that and see it as a more generalized inflammatory marker now.