Science, Truth & Advocacy -- Random Thoughts

Long and rambling.  You've been warned ;-)

Disclaimer:  This post is not a discussion of peer review research of possible import to interested parties.  If that offends you, please click that X up there in the upper right corner of your browser.


There have been a lot of things going on about the net this past week that don't really deserve blog posts devoted to them by themselves, but that weave into a common theme.  Some involving this blog/blogger, most not so much though I'm ... err ... familiar with the players.  If there was ever a more honest admission of the underlying motivation of the greater LC community than that of Mark Sisson's a little over a year ago, I don't know of it.

A recent undercurrent in the blogosphere is discounting the importance of insulin, instead pointing toward leptin, among other hormones, as the “master hormone.” I disagree with this slightly, not because I discount the importance of leptin, or grehlin, or any of the nearly innumerable myriad hormonal players in this crazy, complex amalgamation of meat and bones we call the human body, but because it misses the point of what I’m trying to do: maximize buy-in and discuss what works for the largest amount of people that come looking for the type of help I provide.  .....

..... Even if “eat less, move more” is ineffective advice that rarely works over the long-term, it makes intuitive sense to someone who isn’t steeped in this stuff every day. We need simplicity.

That’s why I like focusing on insulin – because it simply works, and it’s easy to understand.  

When I found LLVLClue-land roughly three years ago, little did I know I had lost roughly a hundred pounds doing low carb the wrong way.  I mean I knew that my "planned cheats" method violated Atkins' flawed "one bite of potatoes will ruin you" law, but I knew not that eating an almost paleo diet (the occasional LC wrap made with some wheat, oat bran and flax) devoid of low carb frankenfoods (other than sucralose for coffee or mixer if I had a cocktail) was so very wrong.  My plateau was attributed to not eating enough fat and/or calories, my occasional low carb wrap, etc.etc.  And then I learned of my worst sin.  Despite it being 2009, I had not yet discovered and been baptized into the church of Gary Taubes and the Anti-Insulin Crusaders.  I quickly learned that if one doesn't believe, one doesn't belong.  Leave my intellect, knowledge and just basic common sense at the door please.  We're here to change the world with the teachings of Taubes (or fill in your favorite guru & philosophy ... it's all the same it seems).  Soon I would learn that there was a web of minions out to gather the flocks and indoctrinate those who might just be trying an Atkins-style diet with the teachings of the Great Taubesini,  so they too could go forth and spread the word.   The phrase "Gary Taubes tells us ..." abounded.  You do realize he's just making a lot of this shit up ... right?

If you don't believe, you don't belong.  Go on your merry way.  Oh ... and we really don't care about you.  If you're a low carber, you're not the right kind of low carber for our needs.  Be gone with you.  And certainly if you're not one, or not extreme enough and willing to mend your ways in that regard, be gone with you too.  In their quest to expand the community, LC'ers adopt any celeb who's ever eschewed a slice of bread as a beacon for their cause, but members?  Be silent and go along or we don't really need you ... but please visit our sponsor today!

There is a clear disdain of "authority" among the leaders and followers of this movement which presents a small problem for those seeking to replace the authority figures.  This is the main purpose for indoctrination ... to learn which authorities they must defer to.  A major theme in this vein is that against the establishment obesity researcher.  Another theme is the blanket dismissal of all so-called conventional wisdom.  This church lays claim to the "truth" about what is indisputably "healthy" ... and it is based on science.  Not just any science, mind you, but that which supports their ideology.  Everyone who disagrees just doesn't understand.  Of course to do this, they must rely on the work of your mainstream obesity and diabetes researchers, because at some point, links to Mercola dot com fall short.  So, one must learn to be a master cherry picker.  If any low carber reading this does not recognize how much the community talks down to anyone who doesn't believe in their dogma, they need to be a little more reflection.  I submit the following as just exemplary of what I'm talking about:

I have a great deal of respect for the work Sarah Fragoso, author of Everyday Paleo ... is doing to promote the healthy Paleo diet to a generation of people who are severely carbohydrate-addicted, sugar-stoned, fat-phobic and getting more obese and chronically ill than ever before.

This implication that everyone who doesn't sing the glories of eating virtually no sugar or starch must be so because they are addicted -- nay *stoned* --  permeates low carb circles.  They have so convinced everyone that carbohydrates per se are addictive that nobody can possibly control themselves around them.  Add in whole websites and books about how carbohydrates can KILL you, how a single grain is the cause of everything from obesity in the inner city to rioting in Greece, and you've got one hot mess.   So this brings me to the first topic:  a blog post Jimmy Moore entitled  Healthy Recipe Blogger Despises The ‘Hate Mail’ From The Low-Carb Community.   Here's this person's original email to JM (as posted on his blog)

Hi Jimmy,

I am a big fan of yours. I love to read science and research, and listen to ALL sides of the low-carb/low-fat debate. I think I have listened to almost all of your podcasts. I truly consider myself open minded in all sense of the word.

With that said, I have a blog read by over 10,000 people per day with healthy recipes for kids, including low carb, low sugar, and recipes that have grains! Because number one, I LOVE GRAINS! Simple as that. They taste good, and make me happy!

The reason I am writing to you, is I that I was hoping one day you would address the idea of tolerance. I get traffic from the low carb world that sees a post I do about oatmeal, or toast, or cereal and they explode with mean things to say in my email box. I can tell you that I get hate mail almost on a daily basis from the low carb world. I’ve ignored it for a long time, but now it’s really starting to affect me, and I don’t know what to do! People tell me that I’m killing the children of the world by sharing a recipe about oatmeal! Whether you agree with me or not, the hate needs to stop!

Thanks for listening to my rant! Tolerance for all!

I don't get that the blogger in question *despises* anything.  Do you?  Why would Jimmy use such a word?  Whether he realizes it or not (and I do believe he does), that word will incite, at the very least, a defensive response.  It makes the blogger sound hateful and angry by inference, although she doesn't sound like she "despises" anyone.  Jimmy's response to her was basically to share some bad emails he's received over the years as testament to some notion that this just goes with the territory.  Mr "Paula Deen is missing a golden opportunity to educate people about diabetes" Moore, is too tone deaf and full of himself to realize that this blogger was offering him a golden opportunity to address some of the ugliness that permeates the LC community.  But he doesn't even step to the plate, save for the lame disclaimer:

Let me just say up front that while I appreciate people having passion and enthusiasm for low-carb living, I have never advocated for anyone to talk down to someone or scold them for the choices they make about food.

Unless they're a diabetic eating carbohydrates I suppose. Heck ... unless they eat carbs, period.  Somehow it's perfectly acceptable for the carbophobes to rant against the inherent dangers of carbohydrate consumption because they have an intolerance to them.  It's those in the vast vast majority of the human race -- in which there are few if any conditions where humans are intolerant to glucose (including diabetes) -- who dare to condone their consumption that should not speak!

And while we have learned so much about the damaging effects of eating sugar, white flour, starchy carbohydrates, and the supposedly “healthy whole grains,” not everyone is on board with that message yet.  

The definitive nature of statements like this are those that radicalize the LC community.  They use the obvious bad guys of sugar and white flour, and extend that to all carbs.  So here we get the lackluster admonishment:

There are creative ways to share the real health concerns associated with consuming these foods, but sending “hate” messages to a blogger because she includes grain-based recipes in her posts is pretty ridiculous. No, I’m not advocating for eating these things, but she is right that this is indeed the wrong way to go about doing it and “needs to stop.” I’m not sure how she identifies that the traffic is from the “low carb world,” but I’ll give her the benefit of the doubt on that one.

Expand the hate messages to comments sections and the discussion boards of one Jimmy Moore and it becomes readily obvious that yes, he does little if anything to stop it, and does actually encourage it.  Oh yeah, this was a "JK", but here's the exchange about this very topic on his own discussion board:

cropped signatures and screenshot for formatting purposes

Now DFH is one of the nastier contributors over at Jimmy's forum who lobbied for my ouster.  Don't get the guy started on how idiotic intermittent fasting is ;-)  But Jimmy jokes with DFH.  I don't care if there's a "JK" there  ... this is the *real* Jimmy Moore folks.  If he truly thought this sort of thing *needs to stop*, he would have used the opportunity to "educate" DFH on how even joking about it sends the wrong message.

The truth of the matter is that Jimmy and others have no qualms sicking their followers on those with whom they disagree.  Tara Parker-Pope was the topic of some nasty rants in LLVLClue-land thanks to Taubes' publicity stunt, as was Hope Warshaw of the ADA a while back thanks to the coordinated smear campaign waged by the Feinman's Nutrition & Metabolism Society.    I have seen many doctors, authors, scientists and others lambasted in his comments over the years and called all sorts of names.   In a fit of utter hypocrisy, Jimmy closes the post patting himself on the back for his demonstration of respect and civility vis a vis Paul Jaminet:

That’s why I admire Paul Jaminet so much despite my disagreement with him over his concept of “safe starches.”   He could have lashed out at me for my opposition to his position–but he didn’t. In fact, he was quite gracious in his response and even agreed to be on a panel about this topic at the 2012 Ancestral Health Symposium coming this August in Boston, Massachusetts. Although I am no fan of the concept of eating white rice, white potatoes, etc. as a “safe starch,” that doesn’t mean I have to be ugly about it with Paul and vice versa.

Jimmy, the whole data dump post was ugly to start.  You had no qualms posting the often rude replies from many "experts" under the pretense that you didn't have any control over that.  Umm, yes you did.  You could have chosen not to include Jeff Volek's characterization of Paul as a "nut job" ... right?!  Yes, Paul showed a heckuvalot of class in response.  He's also not the kind of militant low carber who's likely to email nasties to your blogger.   Eh ... but at least Jimmy gave Paul advance warning of his data dump.  James Kreiger was offered no such courtesy that I'm aware of.   But at least Jimmy hasn't really joined in on the party ... well, other than to voice his reservations about the safety of Paul advising someone eat rice without the consent of a doctor!   And he was at it last week on Twitter dissing recent podcast guest Dr. Braverman.  I know nothing of this man ... but what's with that Jimmy?  Having opposing or controversial views on your podcasts so you can be all "aw shucks" in the interview and diss them afterwards?  Real class there.  Real class.  The sort of class with which I'm intimately familiar.   You see, Jimmy had no problems letting nasty comments stand after he and his producers misrepresented me and what I said in my own podcast interview.  I never used the words "willful fraud" before that was recorded or aired.  I wasn't a "taunter" of Taubes, let alone did I go on the podcast to "explain" that/myself.  It was supposed to be to discuss the problems with GCBC I had uncovered.  Jimmy & Gary had a nice little smearfest chuckle on the response podcast that, surprise surprise, never addressed any of the issues raised about Taubes' misrepresenting what his references said.  (We did learn he never read one of his references though!)  But I digress ...

Jimmy doesn't encourage readers to write such emails, eh?  How many times has he ended a blog post on the latest study that didn't produce the results he would like to tout posting the official email address of the lead researcher and encouraging his readers to "tell XYZ what you think about their study"?  I couldn't help being reminded of this habit of Jimmy's that he's laid off on a bit but nonetheless is part of his repertoire, because back-when I emailed him about the inappropriate nature of this blog post:  Australian Researchers Conclude That A High-Fat, Low-Carb Diet Puts You In A Permanent Bad Mood! Grrrrrr!   At the time, I thought it was odd for him to post a picture of the scientist, and I couldn't help but wonder what the reaction might have been had he been a less photogenic older person with the look of a crabbier disposition.  Like say the person below right vs. below left.

Jimmy ends his post with this:

Dr. Westman makes a good point. Dieter’s remorse about what they could be having may play a psychological effect on their mood. That’s why most low-carbers don’t count calories or portion sizes. We simply count the carbs, eat to satiety delicious real whole foods, and let the body take care of the rest. A high-fat, moderate-protein, low-carb diet is indeed a great way to go when you want to lose weight, improve your health, and yes, even improve your mood. You cannot underestimate the impact that losing weight can have on lifting your spirits and putting your mood in the right place. It’s idiotic research like this that is intended only to discourage people from healthy low-carb living. And that’s enough to make me cranky! Hee hee!

 Oh hee hee, how funny is that!  Immediately after that paragraph Jimmy writes:

Let Dr. Grant D. Brinkworth know what you think about his study by e-mailing him your thoughts directly at (hotlinked official email for correspondence to peer review journal article).

I cannot stress enough how inappropriate this is.  Really, Brinkworth is not writing articles for the NYT or even Science Magazine.  The study in question was Long-term Effects of a Very Low-Carbohydrate Diet and a Low-Fat Diet on Mood and Cognitive Function , published in the Archives of Internal Medicine (Grant D. Brinkworth, PhD; Jonathan D. Buckley, PhD; Manny Noakes, PhD; Peter M. Clifton, PhD; Carlene J. Wilson, PhD). This study rattled the cages of a lot of low carbers and there were several denunciations about the web, which begs the question:  If LC makes you so happy, why so defensive about a study pretty much nobody else paid much attention to?

I emailed Jimmy at the time about the inappropriate nature of encouraging emails to the scientist (poo pooed that, how dare I tell him what to blog about, he's not going to change for anyone!  What's with the overreaction to any criticism there?) but moreso to point out a potentially embarrassing part of his blog post.  You see, earlier in the article Jimmy quoted comments by Brinkworth, and had this to say:

“Both an energy-reduced, very low-carbohydrate, high-fat diet and a conventional high-carbohydrate, low-fat diet are equally effective for achieving weight loss in overweight and obese individuals,” Dr. Brinkworth explained. “The conventional high-carbohydrate, low-fat weight-loss diet was shown to have more positive effects on mood compared to the very low-carbohydrate, high-fat diet.”

(Seems to me he didn't say LC makes you crabby, but the LLVLCluers did a fine job of demonstrating that by their reaction to this study.)  Jimmy:

Oh REALLY?! What about previous research that shows eating fat improves mental health? Or how about this CSIRO study published in September 2007 that found mood improvements were identical with both the high-carb, low-fat diet and the high-fat, low-carb diet. How does this study by Dr. Brinkworth explain previous evidence that runs diametrically opposed to his from the exact same research institute?

That pink highlighted sentence caught my eye.  In High-Carb, Low-Fat Or Low-Carb, High Fat Diet Equally Lower Weight, Improve Mood And Memory, Jimmy had some nice things to say indeed.   Here's the study:  Low- and high-carbohydrate weight-loss diets have similar effects on mood but not cognitive performance.  Angela K Halyburton, Grant D Brinkworth, Carlene J Wilson, Manny Noakes, Jonathan D Buckley, Jennifer B Keogh and Peter M Clifton.   Whoa, backupaminute.  Who is that second author?  Why none other than Grant Brinkworth!!  Here's how Jimmy ended that blog post:

I was pleased that this research from CSIRO, where researcher Dr. Manny Noakes is doing some fabulous work into ketogenic diets and she was a part of this study, put forth the conclusions that it did because it very well could be the beginning of the end for yet another false stereotype of livin’ la vida low-carb.

“Short-term consumption of a moderately energy-reduced LCHF diet has an effect on the psychological well-being of overweight and obese persons similar to that of consumption of an isocaloric conventional HCLF diet,” the researchers proclaimed.

And that my friends is a beautiful thing! Spread the word!

What?  No "write these researchers and tell them how much you appreciate their work" with an email link?  Nah ... Jimmy only encourages negative correspondence.  Irony of ironies, it was Grant Brinkworth's email that was provided for official correspondence.  So I wrote to Jimmy that his accusation that they had ignored their other research was pretty absurd given that it wasn't only CSIRO study, but that Brinkworth had been a researcher on both studies.  But it gets worse because that former research was NOT "diametrically opposed" to the current study that had Jimmy's boxers all bunched.  The prior study ended with:

In conclusion, the results of the present study indicate that short-term consumption of a moderately energy-reduced LCHF diet has an effect on the psychological well-being of overweight and obese persons similar to that of consumption of an isocaloric conventional HCLF diet. However, there was evidence of a somewhat smaller improvement in speed of processing with an LCHF diet. Further studies are required to determine the replicability of this finding and to determine whether similar outcomes are evident over the long term.

I pointed out to Jimmy that the research he was blasting, rather than ignoring prior studies, was actually an extension of them.  This WAS, by all indications, one of those "further studies" the researchers stated needed to be done in 2007.  Jimmy would have none of that in the email exchange.    I would also note that the effects on cognition went largely ignored.  So then these were praiseworthy researchers, and now?  IDIOTIC.  My what a difference a couple of years makes.

Gossip Tangent Alert!  (Remember, that X is always up there):  It's interesting to note the timing of the older study in context with what Jimmy had to say about it and what was going on behind the scenes for Jimmy at the time.  The 2007 article was published on Sept. 27 ... still relatively fresh off of KimKins K/E plan -- low fat, low calorie, low carb -- which took him down to the low 2-teens (< 215 lbs).  In June of 2007 Jimmy's weight was creeping up, from a prior low of 215 to 248 lbs.  Jimmy's wild yo-yoing never seems quite so bad when he insists on using 230 as his "goal" despite not wearing a waist size pants with a "3" in front at that weight.  He embarked on an effort to lose 50 lbs that year and reach One-derland.  His relationship with KK -- including raking in some big bucks as an affiliate -- was the cause of much controversy in the LC world.  Wanna peek into it all?  Check out this thread on the ALC Forums:  Jimmy Moore Lost 13 Pounds In First Four Days On Kimkins ... Only by July 27 of this year, despite his success on the plan, Jimmy had some 'splaining to do:  From The Bottom Of My Heart, I’m Sorry. 

Before I continue, I first owe everyone–whether you are friend or foe–a very big apology for taking liberties with a highly critical comment of me at my sister web site LowCarbNewsline.com earlier this month. I didn’t simply ignore the comment or even delete the comment in question. I admit that I modified it to be positive and replied in kind. When called on it, I replied it was a joke and did not show the remorse I should have for something I should not have done in the first place.

Not only was this an abuse of my editorial powers at that site, but it was highly unethical and wrong. For that I am truly sorry, and promise that in the future when I find myself frustrated, I will simply leave comments as they are, step away and remember that not everyone will agree with me. If you go to that forum, then you will see I have apologized in like manner there making it clear to everyone that I was wrong and am truly sorry.

Seems like Jimmy is up to the same shenanigans with the comments.  Surely by only posting pro-LC Kumbaya! comments, he's contributing the narrow minded group think that encourages folks to email that blogger with disparaging comments.  The fall of 2007 was when Jimmy's weight problems started.  He started weight training and ate like a power lifter training for the Olympics with extra fat.  He "mysteriously" gained 35 lbs in like 6 weeks ... you've heard the story many times.  One might wonder if his metabolism is indeed broken, if he didn't break it after this blog wolfing down the fat. 

OK ... that tangent over.

So back to crabby low carbers.  In 2009, Fat Head weighed in with some humorous(?) commentary (linked to in Jimmy's post).  So while the memory machine was whirring on this whole notion of nasty comments, idiot researchers and good or bad reporting about what is healthy, Fat Head weighs in on a recent study with a snark-laden post about the following study:  Obesity is associated with hypothalamic injury in rodents and humans.  Most of you recognize that one, because Dr. Stephan Guyenet is fourth author, and his mentor, research director, and corresponding author is Dr. Michael Schwartz co-authored the study.  How does old Fat Head handle this?   Does he link to the study?  No.  Not even an abstract?  No.  For Fat Head, only the best of the best of "science journalism" apparently is good enough for him to unleash a sarcastic rant.  He probably had to search to find an article this short and devoid of science.    Fat Head quotes the first half of the article:

Fatty food linked to brain damage, new study shows

EATING too much fatty food causes brain damage linked to obesity, according to new research.

US scientists found a sudden change to a high-fat diet triggered inflammation in a key area of rodent brains responsible for regulating body weight.

The inflammation produced distinctive scarring similar to that seen in stroke patients - and that brain scarring was then observed in humans who were overweight.

While the research does not unequivocally prove brain damage caused by fatty food is linked to obesity, it provides strong indications for further research.

"It would be unlikely you could injure that part of the brain and not affect the level of bodyweight, because that's what that area does," said Michael Schwartz, who is the director of the University of Washington's Diabetes and Obesity Centre of Excellence. {--- article break occurs here --- I've included the rest below}

"Fast foods are more likely to do this sort of damage."

Most people have a natural equilibrium bodyweight, and although they can lose or gain kilos by adjusting their diet, their body will tend to return to its natural weight once those restrictions are removed.

Thus, obesity is often less a problem of losing weight than of keeping it off.

The brain area that regulates metabolism, the hypothalamus, relies on a hormone called leptin to measure the changes in body weight - and leptin is produced in fat.

"So you have a situation where if you have an inflammatory response in the hypothalamus you need more leptin to do the same job, and the only way to have more leptin is to have more fat," Professor Schwartz said.

The findings are published in The Journal of Clinical Investigation today.

Bottom line, in his exuberance for sharing his sarcastic wit, Fat Head implies that Dr. Schwartz is saying fatty foods cause brain damage -- as in cognition impairing, motor-skills impairing brain damage.  He wants his readers to focus on the words "brain damage" to rile up their anti-scientist bent.  Why not direct the ire at the "journalist", Amos Aikman?  At least for the irresponsible headline?  Nah ... it's much more fun to poke at the scientists, because we know they're all idiots and liars to boot.   I suppose it's just a coinky dink that the authors on that study are who they are.  Not!  Taubes is still smarting from Stephan's smackdown of TWICHOO and we can't have any more splintering of the low carb factions.  Rally the troops!  Rile up the masses ... who cares if you have to resort to ridiculous implications like the conclusions one would draw from Fat Head's post that Schwartz is trying to say that LC diets cause brain damage.  It's all about a desperate attempt to stop the exodus from the Church of Taubes.  Forget that Schwarz was talking damage to the hypothalamus.  These folks can't even objectively look at fat in the diet as ever being detrimental so sure are they that we evolved to eat upwards of 75% fat and by some magic it must be the carbs that accompany it in the SAD that are responsible for every single negative consequence attributed to the innocent fatty acid.  Nah ... Lookie there, his daughters can walk a balance beam and one just got a 98 on a math exam!  Gee ... it's like peering into my own childhood through bologna glasses.  I'm pretty sure that despite eating my fair share of carbs as a child (mostly brown rice, potatoes, beans and Ezekiel style bread when we had it), I also excelled in math and could do far more than just walk the balance beam. 

Perhaps Fat Head is an n=1 example of how a high fat diet or carbohydrate restriction does impact the critical thinking region of the brain.  How else to explain a post boasting about his girls' motor skills and mathematical prowess in response to a study that explicitly looked at damage to the hypothalamus?  Is he using that region of his brain to think these days or something?  Does he have a bumpersticker on his car saying "My Hypothalamus is My Navigator"?  Ahh ... perhaps that is the problem.  Fat Head would like you to believe that the grand conspiracy against your health is grasping at straws lately.  The heart disease scares aren't working.  They tried to scare you a few years ago with all those "LC will make you crabby" studies.  Now the need for the specter of brain damage!  Oh yeah!

To wrap this up, Tom Naughton came immediately to mind when Jimmy posted that blog about hate speech in LC circles.  It's one thing to allow it to foment in the comments sections of your blog (or in Jimmy's case also his discussion board).   For me this is personal, because it was quite another thing when Fat Head joined in with public statements questioning my mental stability and calling me a stalker, because -- gasp! -- I tried to post a few comments to a post of his on a mouse study.  From the first communications with Jimmy regarding my podcast, I shared with him -- I presumed in confidence -- my concerns about my then anonymity and issues I had in the past.  Jimmy promptly violated that confidence and shared the information with Gary Taubes.  There was no reason Taubes needed to know that information.  I knew from the get-go the purpose of my podcast wasn't to give a fair airing to contrary opinion.  And so the LC Lewinsky was set in motion.  Starting with Taubes' sniveling description of how he tried to talk to me and calling me a stalker in his podcast response.  His buddy Tom was onboard and ready on alert to continue that smear.  All three let the free for alls go on in their respective public fora.  All three should answer to their own behavior and lead by example so their followers will see that such is not acceptable behavior. 

Jimmy bemoans that he's been called fat and delusional (angry and a slob of a man) by people who don't know him.  Jimmy, you are an obese man.  It is delusional to not recognize this, it is delusional to not acknowledge the role of the quantity of food you consume (LC or not) in your obesity, and it is delusional to keep seeking some solution to a mystery about your weight when there is none.  But I don't ever recall portraying you as someone with psychiatric issues or mentally unstable.  Those would be the only two things on the list Jimmy could accuse me of.  But when someone lives their life on their blogs like Jimmy does, perhaps he forgets that people do *know* him -- if not personally.  I know all I need to from our brief personal interactions to know that Jimmy is not the happy-go-lucky aw-shucks regular Joe just trying to support his family off of his weight loss success.  He may once have been ....  Meanwhile, if you read the comments on that blog post you notice that he ultimately doesn't feel so badly about what the blogger is being subjected to.

You see, we're all free to eat as we please as adults.  Even to feed our own children as we please (well, some would like to see otherwise).  But for God's sake there's KIDS involved.  How many unintended consequences in the name of the children do we have to endure?  The blogger's sin is in calling fruit layered oatmeal a healthy meal for a child.  Look folks, just because you've beaten your pancreas to a pulp so it can't handle a bowl of oatmeal with some fruit, doesn't mean it's not a perfectly acceptable food for humans -- adults and children alike.  Likely she was talking about a rolled or steel cut oatmeal, perhaps prepared with almond milk or low fat milk with some slices of apple instead of a packet of Quaker Instant Maple & Brown Sugar flavor.  Ya think?  I *get* the arguments about grains, really I do.  But white wheat flour based junk vs. whole grains are really different, and the vast majority of humans over tens of thousands of years now have flourished on a diet containing grain as a staple.  This much cannot be denied.  So please keep your judgmental paws off of those who advocate for such foods (including Weston Price if I'm not mistaken) because we really don't know that raising humans from fetus-hood to adulthood on a your version of a  ketogenic diet is even healthy, let alone healthiER than a whole-foods vegan diet.  I'm not advocating either, or, etc.  Just saying, that the "she crossed the line when she advocated for kids to eat a diet that will make them grow up to be fat and diabetic" crap really has got to go.  The comments like, well, she NEEDS to be set straight -- you know, kinda like all those blogs about how Hope Warshaw was a criminal, add Dr. Oz to that list, etc.etc. -- tell it all.  These folks think they are in the right emailing bloggers like this one and harassing them.  Yours truly gets her own fair share of these even though I don't really advocate for any specific diet. 

The LC Community needs to state their case, forcefully if they must, as to WHY the high fat, moderate protein, low carb diet should be the gold standard for health.  And they have to lead by example.  If they make a good case, the following and recognition will come.  Trying to shout down those with opposing opinions, especially without anything to substantiate your view (Fred Hahn comes to mind, in drone like fashion repeating and repeating how we know diabetics all do better without carbs and the only healthy diet is VLC). 


OK ... Rant over.  Carry on!