las

Welcome all seeking refuge from low carb dogma!

“To kill an error is as good a service as, and sometimes even better than, the establishing of a new truth or fact”
~ Charles Darwin (it's evolutionary baybeee!)

Wednesday, January 23, 2013

More thoughts on the KKKonfederacy of Dunces


The past couple of days, I have been spending my spare time, while I still have a bit more, on some outside/related projects so I apologize for not being as engaged as usual in my comments section.

I must say that the commentary on my last post, William "Wheat Belly" Davis agreed to interview with David Duke personally, is both amusing and appalling to me.  Amusing, because the predictable anonymous advisors have swooped in to offer their unsolicited wisdom on how I should best spend my time and/or what content I should put forth here.  Newsflash!  It's my life, my time and my blog.  The door is up there in the right corner, just click on the X and watch your backside as the door tends to slam a bit ;-)

I am appalled by those comments critical of me for merely posting this information, and/or expressing my opinion that a NYT best selling author should offer up a full explanation for his actions.  I can guarantee you that if anyone in the mainstream had granted an interview to David Duke, their ass would be toast, or at the very least there would be widespread public pressure for them to answer to the circumstances surrounding their actions.  Early on (elsewhere), I even saw defenses of all three for going on his program as perfectly acceptable to spread the Good Word ... after all, neo-Nazis are people too, why should they be deprived of lifesaving nutritional information?  While that latter point may be true, the former simply is not.  When someone like a NYT Best Selling Author and cardiologist such as Dr. Davis it lends credibility to Duke.  It matters not even if they only discussed the book and there was no discussion of Duke's beliefs.  At the very least, they provide content to attract an audience to Duke's promotion of his books and DVDs of his speeches and such.  That is reason enough.  There are appropriate venues for sharing and spreading one's message.  David Duke's radio program isn't one of them.  


Let us not forget that it was Jimmy Moore who brought it to everyone's attention that both Dr. McGuff and Dr. Davis had appeared on Duke's radio program early last year.  But now that we do know, their explanations are incomplete at best.

It is beyond puzzling to me that there has been limited public discussion of this disturbing issue in the Incestral Health Community.  Don't get me wrong, I'm well past being surprised by the amount of rationalizing that goes on in the IHC .... "for the cause", but here we're talking the sort of thing that *rightly* ruins political careers and mainstream businessmen and such.  This is not about political correctness.  It is not up for debate (I hope) that David Duke is what he is:  former GW of KKK, neo-Nazi, white-supremacist, racist, etc. 

If you listen to the interviews with McGuff and Davis, Duke mentions what "we" believe many times.  I outlined that and included a clip of a very iffy exchange in McGuff's case in my previous post.  The I had no idea doesn't cut it when a person repeatedly uses "we".  If Duke had used "I" it might not set off the alarm, but "we" ... who is this "we"?  What group or movement or whatever is Duke speaking of?  Neither seem at all uneasy or concerned over this.  Are these doctors that naive they don't pick up on this sort of thing?  That the term "globalist" doesn't even have them curious after the fact as to who they just gave 45 to 90 minutes of audio to?  Neither bothered to request so much as a link to the final product?  Who on earth does that???  A naive 20 yo who is just so flattered anyone might be interested in their views, maybe ...  Two men a few years my senior?  I'm sorry, I cannot cut them that kind of slack.

Which goes back to whether this issue impacts the value of the science in either book.  It wouldn't in McGuff's case, but since there's more than a whiff of conspiracy in Wheat Belly, such a bias may have come to play there.  In any case, I never signed any sort of pledge that I would only discuss the science here anyway.  This issue is damned serious and damned important and I'm going to discuss it! And I don't care if I'm the only one.  Don't read the blog if it bothers you that much.  Does the IHC really need these ties to offensive political movements?  

We now know that Rodale had nothing to do with the Davis interview.  A busy author granting a long interview to some nebulous character broadcasting from an undisclosed bunker in Europe doesn't cut it.  In McGuff's case we are pretty sure McGraw Hill didn't arrange his interview either, but we know from his own comments that he was provided with examples of this "Dr. Duke's" work.  I think he should come clean what those were.  It makes a difference.  Or do people really not care that recommending his book and thereby supporting him financially will forever lend credibility to David Duke because of that interview.  I guess they don't.

As to Jimmy Moore, I didn't mention him in my last post.  Commenters did.  But I'll discuss him in response to those comments here.  Do I think he's a racist?  I really don't know.  His situation is very different from the two docs' as I laid out in my previous post.  He is a flagrant liar.  Period.  In his case it is BOTH the crime and the coverup.  Because Jimmy should have known it was THE David Duke as he was provided links to davidduke dot com by a listener.  And in his own words, Jimmy tells us he went to those links and perused some articles.  That none of the tabs around the articles had him the least bit curious to check out his "About" -- that mentions the Klan, although not the Ku Klux part -- page before engaging in an email exchange for mutual interviews defies belief.  Jimmy Moore is not blind.  Why he went on the radio show I do not know, but he linked his followers to the interview that began with a 5-6 minute quintessential Duke monologue and was LIVE.   They also engage in global conspiracy dialog that is uncomfortable to say the least.  Jimmy is no 20 y.o. country bumpkin.    He later lied to Doug McGuff and all of his readers by responding to Doug's comments by saying that was "almost precisely" what happened with him.  Just not so.  In his own words in the article he related how just that day he had learned of the Davis and McGuff appearances, yet claimed in comments that Duke had used the docs' names to persuade him to come on his show.  The list goes on.  

Several have told me the neo-Nazi thing isn't a big deal.  In that regard, while I think it is the main story here, in Jimmy Moore's case, his flagrant lying and utter lack of integrity is just as big or a bigger deal. In this regard, it is my opinion, that I express here on MY blog, that the IHC should ostracize Jimmy Moore.  He was given one opportunity at redemption by the LC community just five years ago, but he has not learned his lesson and changed.  

I've been told that there is no financial compensation, even a free cruise, in the deal for those speaking on the LC Cruise.  Yet Robb Wolf is still on the finalized schedule, and Diane Sanfilippo signed on after this whole scandal had broken.  There is definitely no direct financial compensation for going on Jimmy's podcasts -- guests only make money for the host.  Thus the only reason to appear is to sell something.  The Caltons appeared to promote their new book, and they'll be on the cruise.  Both Robert Lustig and Zoe Harcombe were interviewed by Jimmy after this broke ... and appeared to sell their books.  Mark Sisson's appearance was the most overt book ad of all, though I'm unsure when it was taped.  Still, Mark seems to value sales over all else, because he's well aware of the issues surrounding Richard Nikoley vis a vis his unacceptable despicable actions against Melissa and myself, and yet sent him some link love recently ... coincidentally following RN's review of the sauce cookbook he had just come out with. 

Look.  Jimmy Moore's initial responses to questions about linking to David Duke were the honest ones.  His response was that Duke's nutrition views were spot on and he didn't give a shit whatever else was on that website.  There's a lot of that going on.  Jimmy Moore provides an audience and a sympathetic one at that.  Who cares if he has no integrity and links to neo-Nazis and gives credence to them by appearing on their radio program.  Folks have books and supplements and diet programs and whatnot to sell.  

More than one person has linked to instances where Paul Jaminet has linked to questionable websites.  .This is not quite as egregious as linking to David Duke, but it's pretty bad.  He has publicly ignored recent requests for clarification by myself and at least one other person on his PHD blog.  Now I've been linked to another post where he linked to Mangans, and I agree with the commenter here yesterday, that his response was unsatisfactory.  Paul has made the transition into the mainstream with a publisher and stated goal to mainstream PHD.  I emailed him for further clarification and his response left a very sick taste in my mouth.  I honestly don't know what's going on there but if people in the IHC think they can live by a different set of rules than everyone else, they're kidding themselves.  I hear all manner of pronouncements of hopes to mainstream this "movement" ... and perhaps that is part of it.  Swallow your criticism for the good of the movement?  Are we STILL talking like that after what happened with the relatively benign Jack Kruse?  It saddens me to see Paul dig his heels in on this, we'll see where it leads I suppose.  I do agree with Beth (Weight Maven) who commented here recently something to the effect of each situation is individual and to be treated as such in the context of one's overall reputation, actions, etc.  In this regard I have always had the utmost respect and liking for Paul so in all honesty I'm a bundle of mixed feelings on this one.  We'll see what plays out I suppose ....  I know what I would like to see happen, because Paul has pretty much had all the exposure he's ever going to get from Jimmy anyway, and had publicity galore with podcast appearances and such the past few weeks.  But he's his own man and that be that.  

So in conclusion, I just don't get why the IHC is not sidelining Jimmy Moore.  The only reason can be some misguided notion of not harming the community/movement from within.  But what's going on just solidifies why I am calling it the Incestral Health Community ... or should the "C" stand for cult?  Because it seems to be more about growing the ranks of the members who will buy the books and supplements and preach the gospel to the vulnerable that can be easily picked up.  The goal cannot be to mainstream.  It simply can't.  To mainstream the ideas of this community they are going to have to grow a set, nay a huge set, and police their own.  Beginning with sometimes publicly opining on difference one has with the ideas of another member -- not in random tweets or FB comments, but out front and center on the main venue blog.  Or perhaps beginning with not blindly promoting and affiliate linking to someone's book or program just because they are a fellow paleo traveler.  Or perhaps beginning with holding people accountable for their behavior by saying "sorry, I just can't involve myself in your shizzle."  I don't know.  I do know I'll keep blogging on this sort of stuff until perhaps I tire of it myself.  It sure has been a demoralizing month for those of us who believe in some of the purported goals of the IHC but can't swallow the profiteering and such.  Coming on the tail of a positively disasterous year?  

That's just how I feel.

145 comments:

Diana said...

Evelyn,

Quite apart from the total fatuousness of people coming here and telling you what to do with your time (do you tell them what to do with theirs?) is the fact the same people simultaneously defend the fact that Moore/Davis/McGuff (MDM) appeared on Duke's podcast on the basis that the word needs to be spread, and then criticize you for (a) posting about it and posting about the fact that a mainstream newspaper article mentioned the issue. If they believed what they said, why would they criticize you for bringing it up?

Something doesn't add up here. It's perfectly logically consistent for them to say that they disagree with your disapproval of consorting with Duke, but it's not consistent for them to say that they approve of the appearances, and you have no right to disapprove.

I think it's because they know it was wrong, both tactically and morally. If they really felt OK with Moore hanging with Duke, they'd say, "I think it's fine," and be done with it. But they can't, so they attack you and your right to express yourself.

Swede said...

David Duke is a vile human who spouts worthless trash from his mouth and brain. I have no idea why anyone would not want to completely distance themselves from his ideology.

I might read blogs where I don't agree with everything the author stands for, but I would never lend any support to any blogger who holds beliefs that I find morally reprehensible. I certainly maintain friendships with those who carry opposite political ideologies, but I would never maintain a friendship or relationship with a racist anti-Semite, even if he held the same beliefs and diet and health (and the Great Global Wheat Conspiracy!).

Lighthouse keeper said...

Ideology drives diet/lifestyle, most obvious in veganism but you don't have to dig too deep to find paleo's ideological foundations.

Sanjeev said...

> A naive 20 yo who is just so flattered anyone might be interested in their views, maybe ... Two men a few years my senior
_______
In the skeptosphere back in the day[0] one often heard about unskeptical or plain gullible MDs, which often makes me wonder ... If anything I would expect docs in the US to develop keener skeptical skills because of the folks who try to con them for access to "medicines", more of which are controlled in the US than anywhere else.

Addicts, teen roid users, chronic pain sufferers, undercover narcs[0] posing as chronic pain sufferers ...

[0] not so common a complaint in the last 2 years or so. Must come & go in waves.

[1] it's a 70s reference for you young uns.

Sanjeev said...

probably a compartmentalization thing ... the skepticism kicks in where they (the MD) knows they could really get screwed over for being gullible.

anotherdeadletter said...


I tend to think the gullibility is just a ruse. Maybe it's my own cynicism showing.

Duke's audience is, let's be honest, highly likely to be sympathetic to the "Paleo"/LC message. The Government/Monsanto/Joooos are all behind a conspiracy to get everyone addicted to grains and wheat. Duke's audience is a large part of that constituency.

Of course, they can't say that just as they can't acknowledge that for them it's all about the $$$, not about spreading a message. It actually looks better to play ignorant or foolish for them.

Charles Grashow said...

Has William Davis commented on his appearance with David Duke? If he hasn't does that mean he sees no problem with his appearance??

As to JM - "NOTE: THERE WILL BE NO ATLCX EPISODES IN FEBRUARY AND MARCH WHILE I’M FINISHING UP THE WRITING PROCESS OF MY BOOK ON READING CHOLESTEROL TEST RESULTS."

Really looking forward to that - sheesh

river rance said...

I grew up in the deep south (still live here) when segregation was the law “separate but equal” was the term used. We had Klan sympathizers in my town....they hid behind the racist bullies and yucked it up with them hoping not to be a target themselves. It was eventually revealed there were 2 christian preachers, numerous members of the business community, and the worst, the chief of police, all members of the Klan. Many of their family members still live with the shame of their actions. Folks are careful to comment on this blog that they “certainly don’t think Jimmy Moore is a racist or this or that’, and I agree. But I know he is a congenital liar and huckster. Much evidence to prove this.
However, this I do know from his actions surrounding the Duke interview and his flippant remarks defending his actions;like linking to the site and “yep” when asked if that was the infamous David Duke. HE HAS ALL THE CREDENTIALS OF A KKK SYMPATHIZER. Period. Globalization means Zionist to David Duke and his ilk. Moore was in lock step; yes, of course, oh yeah, crap with Duke. Listen to it if you can stomach it. Then Moore, like a 12-yr old trying to defend repugnant behavior after getting caught, justified his actions ‘cause Davis and McGuff also interviewed with Duke. Shame on all three but especially Moore, a white man from the deep south. He knew. He got caught and tried to erase the evidence.
Here’s a copy and paste of just one of 20 or so world wide news stories surrounding the expulsion of Duke from Germany. He was also kicked out of the Czech Republic for his racist behavior. None of these 3-experts could simply google David Duke? I bet they did.

http://tinyurl.com/6qc5mho

http://tinyurl.com/b2jkhv7

http://tinyurl.com/aclyaj2


Rob Wolf & Mark Sisson? Shame on them for condoning and associating with Moore at least until he offers a genuine apology for his irreverent behavior. And Wolf going on a sea cruise with Jimmy Moore? Poor decision and poor behavior.

“In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.” MLK

Harry's Acolyte said...

Robb Wolf has tweeted that he is going to be on the LC Cruise.... saw the tweet just 2 or 3 days ago.

Harry's Acolyte said...

Can't wait to learn what my lipid panel really means!

Seriously, how in the hell can that guy write a book on cholesterol? I'm just as qualified to write a book about Drake equation, and I'm a soft science guy. Hell, I'm more qualified to write a book about the Drake equation than this guy is to write one on cholesterol. I actually had an undergrad class on the Drake equation.

Gah! How in the world could anyone look to that guy for ANY advice, even if he has the hubris to dole it out.

Harry's Acolyte said...

I think it's a ruse, too. I think Big Jimmy often cries crocodile tears.

river rance said...

Don't like strong language so pardon me just this once; Rob Wolf is an idiot. Action speaks louder than words. And,
Dr.KH was right; Jimmy Moore did co-opt paleo. Shame on Wolf for associating and promoting a disgusting bigot like Jimmy Moore.

Charles Grashow said...

http://www.stormfront.org/forum/t865102-3/

"Precommentary by Dr. David Duke — Zionist-driven Globalism in politics, media and finance has not only driven the world to conflict and war, it has driven the spiritual pestilence of Hollywood and frankly, it has also promoted the unhealthy foods and diets that are resulting in hundreds of millions of people developing obesity and a myriad of diseases such as heart conditions, diabetes, cancers, arthritis and other ailments. The Zionist media is fueled by advertising revenue of foods which are bad for you!"

SO - did JM, McGuff and Davis actually LISTEN to the podcast after they did it?? Did they hear the precommentary while waiting to be put on the air?

As to Doug McGuff's apology

http://livinlavidalowcarb.com/blog/if-im-a-neo-nazi-then-i-guess-dr-william-davis-and-dr-doug-mcguff-are-too/17210

"If my being interviewed by this man has offended anyone, I deeply apologize. I apologize to my co-author John Little, I apologize to my wife and children, and all others who have affiliated with me or supported me along the way."

Where is the part about condemning Duke and his views??

"If my being interviewed by this man has offended anyone, I deeply apologize." SO - if you WEREN'T offended McGuff doesn't have to apologize??

echobabies.uk said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
log said...

"Precommentary by Dr. David Duke — Zionist-driven Globalism in politics, media and finance has not only driven the world to conflict and war, it has driven the spiritual pestilence of Hollywood and frankly, it has also promoted the unhealthy foods and diets that are resulting in hundreds of millions of people developing obesity and a myriad of diseases such as heart conditions, diabetes, cancers, arthritis and other ailments. The Zionist media is fueled by advertising revenue of foods which are bad for you!"

Replace Zionist with the word mainstream or even liberal media, and I bet the sentiment expressed in the quoted paragraph above would be pretty close to the beliefs of a lot of Paleo gurus, especially Jimmie Moore. Probably another reason why going on David Duke's show didn't seem like that big of a deal to Jimmie until he saw the reaction.

George Henderson said...

Jimmy Moore actually has the perfect excuse - what would Jesus do? Address the sinners, of course.

If I wanted to get my work published, I could publish it the local Alternative Medicine mag I'm sure. It has some OK stuff and nothing offensive. But it's published by the same conspiracy theorist who puts out Uncensored, which regularly blames Israel, the Obamas, and the Illuminati for everything (and I do mean everything). Personally I'd feel conflicted about being connected with that (but hey, maybe I'm just lazy and rationalizing).
But when I do read the Alt Med rag, I don't judge the authors who write there by anything other than their content. Maybe I think of them as naive, and lacking the thorough left-wing indoctrination of my youth which makes me hyperaware of fascism in any form. But I wonder how many Americans have the benefit of that training.

P.G. Wodehouse did radio broadcasts for the Nazis, during his internment by them, which didn't help the Nazis one bit, but harmed Wodehouse's reputation.

So if someone reads Wodehouse for pleasure, that makes them a Nazi by association, like going on a cruise with Jimmy Moore.
I guess Hugh Laurie and Stephen Fry should have refused to act in the Jeeves and Wooster TV series.
What are they supposed to do to Jimmy Moore, vote him off the cruise?

Melissa Mcewen said...

What is really interested is who gets savaged and why. And who gets defended.

Jimmy Moore gets defended no matter what.

Dr. Kruse gets defended then savaged ...for a fake picture of his lats. Um. Yeah, nevermind the quackery before that.

Evelyn and I get savaged for relatively minor offenses. I said Nikoley's endorsement of Kruse was stupid. Evelyn criticized one of Nikoley's buddies or something.

The point is that no one actually cares about good information or science. It's a social club and the way you are treated is 100% dependent on whether or not you are part of a certain social circle that is almost completely older rich right-wing white men.

river rance said...

I concur. That's exactly why he didn't see it as a big deal because he IS a sympathizer. He's also a liar, a huckster and a bigot. Evidence available for all 3 claims.

Sue Staltari said...

Yes, I am sure most of us knew jimmy would get a pass.

Diana said...

George, You've made some whoppers, but this takes the low-carb cake.

"Jimmy Moore actually has the perfect excuse - what would Jesus do? Address the sinners, of course."

Taking that to its logical conclusion, Jimmy would have gone on Duke's podcast and chastised Duke for his racism & anti-Semitism. He wouldn't go on Duke's podcast to chat about nutrition and afterwards said "I don't care about Duke's racism and anti-Semitism, we agree on nutrition."

You clearly don't have a career interpreting scripture.

HappyHappyJoyJoy said...

Quote from above: It is beyond puzzling to me that there has been limited public discussion of this disturbing issue in the Incestral Health Community. Don't get me wrong, I'm well past being surprised by the amount of rationalizing that goes on in the IHC .... "for the cause", but here we're talking the sort of thing that *rightly* ruins political careers and mainstream businessmen and such. This is not about political correctness. It is not up for debate (I hope) that David Duke is what he is: former GW of KKK, neo-Nazi, white-supremacist, racist, etc.

And this is EXACTLY why IHC will never be mainstream. They can't see that you have to abide by mainstream rules. Normal, mainstream people KNOW you can't go on the David Duke show. Period. No one would even believe a mainstream person didn't know who he was. Do we see Dr. Oz on the David Duke show? Of course not. Why this is "ok" with this crowd is APPALLING!

George Henderson said...

I'm being a bit sarcastic. You'd have to think you were somewhat like Jesus to use that excuse.
These people have plainly not prepared for this situation. Can you suggest others who have dealt with these offers in a politically savvy way?
If Evelyn or Melissa ever go on David Duke, I will defend their right to do so, even if I think they have been foolish.


George Henderson said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
George Henderson said...

So let me get this straight:

Moore and Davis have committed political suicide

- I guess that means you won't be supporting them any more.

They have brought the Movement into disrepute.

- That would be the Movement you've been calling the Incestral Health Community.

It occurs to me that Mr Moore, and for that matter mr Jaminet, are fairly prolific writers and speakers, and I think that, if they are concealing their political views from us, they cannot be very strongly felt ones.

I do find it frustrating that some people in the IHC (so to speak) who have unearthed so much evidence that laissez-faire capitalism is out-of-control and destructive are so implacably opposed to state intervention, mainly because their state traditionally intervenes on the side of said capitalists, and because it has backed the wrong experts in one area. Become a New Zealand citizen, hurt yourself or fall ill, and experience a true socialized health system, where the state agency tries to set fair drug prices. It is possible for a centralized state to rule more-or-less benignly over an unarmed population.

Giuseppe said...

Seems like he doesn't agree with you about this, LOL: http://perfecthealthdiet.com/2010/08/nz-man-left-for-dead-by-doctors-cured-by-vitamin-c/

The political slant is obvious on most of those "paleo" blogs, some are just more outspoken than the others.

PJ used to be a political blogger when neocons were all the rage, about a decade ago: http://brothersjuddblog.com/archives/2003/03/the_worlds_most_powerful_arab.html
(this is one of the most bizarre posts of the lot)

I discovered that old link when he wrote on the notorious right-wing blog Instapundit about his new book, saying that he was a fan.

Diana said...

@Giuseppe,

Instapundit is by his own words a libertarian. You can call him what you want but that is how he characterizes himself. He voted for Romney. Last I heard the Republican party is still a legal entity in the US. The hard core right wing didn't bother voting for Romney - in fact most of them were saying they wanted Obama to win, "the worse it gets the better it gets."

Dennis Mangan is not to my knowledge a white nationalist. He's a hardcore "paleoconservative" who does harp a lot on race diffs. in IQ tests and gender differences. With respect to the latter, you don't have to be a hard core right winger to believe in gender differences, and that the state has totally gone overboard in enforcing equality of results as opposed to equality of opportunity.

This is not specifically a political blog and I refuse to engage in arguments about those concepts, just pointing out facts.

I realize that you don't come here to argue or troll, but I think that some clarifications & definitions are in order. There really are legit. diffs. of opinion on (for example) should all combat positions be open to women, etc.? What can be done to close the achievement gap (an acknowledged & tested difference) between black & whites in academia? And so on.

But there are as they say "red lines." To me, Mangan is someone I'd debate with. YMMV.

Not so David Duke: a Hitler-loving, Holocaust-denying* full-blown paranoid. Again, YMMV. But I think it's wrong wrong wrong to start drawing dots between Duke and Instapundit.

Accordingly, my own feeling is that Jaminet is not in same category as Jimmy Moore, and that Evelyn's case is weakened by even suggesting such. The case being "red lines." Vigorous open debate about controversial subject - fine. Crazy talk - go somewhere else.

*Re the Holocaust denying, it has mutated into something even nuttier & more mean-spirited than ever. An academic whose name I won't mention no longer bothers to deny that the Jews were singled out for slaughter. He claims that the Germans were engaging in an act of self-defense against Jews, who had attacked the Germans with the poison of their tribally based cultural warfare for hundreds of years. I'm not kidding. He doesn't deny it. He is proud of it. This academic has been on the Duke podcast to discuss "Jewish tribalism," etc. It is really wrong to compare Jaminet, Mangan, Instapundit et al with Duke. That's like saying a radical leftist is like Lewis Farrakhan.

cremes said...

Evelyn,

I'm so happy to have inspired you to write another post. I am unhappy that it's yet another screed on how you are so persecuted.

As you pointed out, this is your blog and you can post whatever you want. I do not dispute that. I just wish you would choose to write on topics that were actually informative and helpful.

Reading the (26 as of this writing) replies above, I stand by my earlier characterization that your blog readers are "sycophants." You can do no wrong in their eyes, Miss.

You all deserve each other in this circle-jerk echo chamber. You are the very thing that you accuse the "paleo community" to be.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Currently I'm more concerned/bothered by his or anyone's continued association with Jimmy Moore. But heck, when he got out of prison Jim Bakker built another church so ....

I'm really not concerned about folks' political views per se, I'm struggling to put into words what I'm thinking here, but your (George) view of things is certainly balanced by the Eenfeldt and Lustig types who want nothing more than to replace fictional governmental edicts to eat grains with real edicts to eat their way, or just not eat the way they deem badly.

I guess in a way it's good to know someone's politics b/c it gives a glimpse into their biases that make it into their nutritional advocacy, but since these folks SAY they are interested in good science, I wish they'd keep politics out of it. Most of them apparently could give a damn if their science is correct. Ah well. C'est la vie.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Giuseppe, re: "Having said that, I'm not sure about Dr. Davis. He probably liked the idea of being invited for the first time to speak on a (supposedly) European show and didn't realize in what context his interview would appear." from comment on my other post, I'm not buying that.

Who gives 45 minutes or so of audio "away" to some unknown "Dr. Whoever" ?? I mean the guy has not been wanting for attention for a good long time now. As the Rodale PR said, and he said, he was getting up to 20 requests per day. HOW does this make the cut? That doesn't hold water. And even if it somehow slipped through, why was this broadcast 3 times without him ever knowing where or what commercials or whatever. Nobody is that stupid. I refuse to believe Davis is that stupid, even though he was stupid enough to regurg the sulfuric acid nonsense stuff in his book.

Giuseppe said...

"Instapundit is by his own words a libertarian. You can call him what you want but that is how he characterizes himself. He voted for Romney."

I called it "a notorious right wing blog", which to my knowledge is not a pejorative and accurately describes it. I only mentioned that because someone was asking about a blogger's supposed political persuasion.

"It is really wrong to compare Jaminet, Mangan, Instapundit et al with Duke."

I wonder exactly where you got that impression, because I've never compared those people with Duke. Pointing out that a lot of those blogs have a political bias, that they link to some stuff I and other people find questionable and that this reflects badly on their scientific credibility is not the same thing as comparing them to neo-nazis, I think. Moore's case with Duke is different, and more troubling, I agree.

Woodey said...

Jimmy has a really good dog and pony show going on with his wife that has people wrapped around their finger. You see it with Presidents and their wives. The husband goes out and does his thing, and the wife is portrayed as loyal, devout; a person who wakes up, says her prayers and gets the kids ready for school. Then she spends her day in the garden or some charity event, basically a cover for Better Home & Garden or Good Housekeeping.

Jimmy and his wife do the same thing. He runs around blundering his way through the day, the wife is standing steadfast by his side. She portrays herself as devout, loyal and it works. I sit there and wonder how or if anyone really buys into this, then I see the responses he gets and I get a resounding YES. Truly amazing.

Woodey said...

"circle-jerk" Glad you mentioned that. One of my favorite bands, had the privilege of seeing them in concert.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qP9rbhbWmfE

ps...I'll play a round of butter the toast with you...

Lowcarb team member said...

I’m no 'scientist' Evelyn, but here’s a bit of advice. Reduce the starchy carbs and sugar, reduce the calories, spend as much time exercising as you do running others down, and you will be as slim as a whip, instead of an obese and bitter whinger.

Kind regards Eddie

Woodey said...

I think it's great that Evelyn gets these guys so easily rattled, it really shows how weak the movement is. Their very existence depends on the internet, without the internet the LC/Paleo movement would be dead in the water.

So here comes ONE person (Evelyn) and she makes them rattle their cages and fling poo. If you truly believe in something or something about yourself and another person comes along and tries to discredit or tell you that you are not, you laugh that person off and keep going. Why? Because you are secure in what you believe and nothing can shake that. These guys are not, they know they peddle bull feces and are threatened by any scrutiny they receive.

TBH I like coming on here and poking a stick at the defenders of mutants and watching them react.

Kade Storm said...

I didn't get that impression from you original post. It was quite accurate. I think it's a community with very large degrees of fringe politics that can bring their theories on health into question. Now some of the ideas are just absurdly eccentric with certitude, but then there's the rare disaster piece that is outright appalling. The eccentric stuff is perfectly fine, but the appalling is another subject matter. I think that we all agree on this matter.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Hi Woodey! In my busy ness I have not had a chance to say hello and congratulate you on losing 40 lbs was it? Good on you!

I don't know if I've ever commented publicly on this, but your analogy to the politicians and their wives is quite apt. Christine was out on FTA and FB defending her man against "lies" being told about him by people who "don't know him". There's something very wrong there, because one of the people she bashed was Regina Wilshire, and one of the things Regina did was expose his NuttyK Show for what it is. Christine sits in the audience in Australia as her husband LIES repeatedly describing his regain as a slow and steady one, for which nothing worked. Why he would even do this puzzles me, but he does and has been doing it now for months. For months he has claimed he hasn't weighed under 250 for five years. Lie. For years before that he claimed that he could never shake the "mystery" weight gain end-2007 to mid-2008 he blamed on creatine. And yet he weighed 236 in Jan of 2009. Heck, he even lied to David Duke, saying the lowest he got to was 230. Lie. He began 2007 weighing 220, and he twice got down to 215 (one of those times a little below that). He lied for years about his spectacular health DESPITE his weight. Only now that he lost some of it again, we find out about the health problems. I could go on.

He would be damaged goods in any responsible public arena.

coconutz said...

@ Eddie

Calories don't count on Low Carb. Exersize not required,just makes you hungry.

Diana said...

@Giuseppe,

"I called it "a notorious right wing blog", which to my knowledge is not a pejorative and accurately describes it."

Based on the dictionary definition of the word "notorious" it is pejorative:

famous or well known, typically for some bad quality or deed

do I have to supply the definition? I think I will:

http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/notorious?q=notorious

(Note that I supplied cite for OED, knowing that many of the readers of this blog will not accept an American dictionary as authoritative...)

As for the rest of my comment (about Duke, etc.) you are correct -- and I should have separated the Instapundit part from the rest with asterisks because the comment was more general and not directed to you specifically. I regret the misunderstanding because it did look as if I was speaking to you directly throughout the whole comment.

Diana said...

"Reading the (26 as of this writing) replies above, I stand by my earlier characterization that your blog readers are "sycophants." You can do no wrong in their eyes, Miss. "

What part of "....my own feeling is that Jaminet is not in same category as Jimmy Moore, and that Evelyn's case is weakened by even suggesting such."

did you not read?

Diana said...

@Evelyn, Here is another point of disagreement between us.

Exposing the Duke link, Jimmy's constant lies, the bad science -- all of that is necessary and good. Keep hammering away. I come here for the fun of that, as well as the science.

But in the post, you seem to be lamenting the fact that Paleo/ancestral will never be mainstream. You are pointing a warning finger. Why should you care about them? If they are so inbred, if their science is so bad, it strikes me that you should be happy they will never go mainstream.

IMO their crap has gone worrying mainstream. Low carb IS actually a part of dietary dogma nowadays. Questioning the centrality of calories IS mainstream, at least part of the popular mainstream.

So I am confused that you are warning them that they will never become mainstream, while ignoring the fact that they have. Why would they get fat book deals if they weren't mainstream.

Note: By mainstream I am not talking about credentialed obesity and nutrition researchers. I am speaking about the popular mainstream.

Giuseppe said...

Yes, only realized now that "notorious" is indeed pejorative - I was using more in an ironic way, not to imply that anything "right wing" is bad in itself (sorry, English is not my first language...).

Giuseppe said...

When I wrote that I was thinking about Dr Deans' comment from a few days ago, about how easy it was to end up on a somewhat questionable show while promoting her book. Dr Davis has already got a lot of mainstream media attention, so why would he risk sullying his reputation by associating with those fringe elements? I'm not trying to defend him, it just seems so unbelievable that someone would do that on purpose...

cremes said...

@Diana
"What part of 'blech' did you not read?"

A little superficial and irrelevant disagreement doesn't absolve you from the "sycophant" moniker. But I'm sure it fools some of the rubes.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

@Diana, I wouldn't bother defending anyone from the sycophant charge from an anonymous Wheat Belly sycophant. ;-)

As to: "But in the post, you seem to be lamenting the fact that Paleo/ancestral will never be mainstream. You are pointing a warning finger. Why should you care about them? If they are so inbred, if their science is so bad, it strikes me that you should be happy they will never go mainstream."

Why I care is that they are hijacking what I see to be a legitimate and worthwhile "real food" movement. Jimmy has been working that into his repetitive mantras lately. I also think many answers to the obesity problem is a return to "ancestral" foods, just not necessarily some fairy tale version from the paleolithic where Mark Sisson passes judgment on whether something is "primal" or not.

Inasmuch as the government isn't going to be getting out of the nutrition business anytime soon, I would like to see nutrition basics -- real ones, not dogma driven demonizations of certain foods and entire classes of foods.

I'm also not speaking to the gurus here as much as too the members. Throw out the junk science clowns.

Melissa Mcewen said...

I wonder if "cremes" is one of Nikoley's sycophants. Wouldn't that be ironic? I remember I called one of them a sycophant awhile back and they were angry about it. They are very similar in attitude/writing style as well.

Melissa Mcewen said...

She already did that. You should already know that doesn't work for everyone. Have you noticed it doesn't work for your "team"?

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Exactly. And with all the rationalizing distractions, speaking only of Jimmy right now, folks forget his initial responses to linking to Duke's website (no questions about it there) were "his nutrition stuff is spot on", and something to the effect of "he hails the low carb message and I don't give a shit what his other views are".

But he's complaining about Subway foot long's measuring only 11" on Facebook.

Lowcarb team member said...

Coconutz

Don’t believe everything you read on the internet (OK I am sure you don't). Whatever diet or lifestyle you adopt calories count. Exercise may not be optimum for weight loss (for most folks), but it sure burns up excess glucose and keeps blood glucose numbers down. As for feeling hungry, not my experience when you get it right. Losing weight ain’t no rocket science, but oh how some try to kid people it is.

Kind regards Eddie

Lowcarb team member said...

OK Melissa give me clue, what does not work for our lowcarb team members on our blog?

Kind regards Eddie

anotherdeadletter said...


Why do you have a blog if that simple tenet held true for everyone?

anotherdeadletter said...


@Melissa

These types do seem to have a lot in common. Same style of writing, usually the same grammar mistakes and usually all start posting at the same time.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

I agree, except that it seems even more unbelievable that someone would be so stupid and careless to give someone that much of his time and audio footage to an unknown and not even bother to check out the finished product.

Look, Gary Taubes whined mightily about how he was misteated by Oz and how Oz left a lot of good stuff on the cutting room floor. It is commonplace and happens all the time when people tape segments for programs. I would think that anyone doing so would at least ask for links to the final product, but granting the interview in the first place doesn't pass the smell test.

Have you listened to the interview? There are tell tale signs.

Charles Grashow said...

Re William Davis

http://www.milwaukeemag.com/article/172013-DuketheDeceiver

I don't understand this at all

"Danielle Lynn, public relations manager for Rodale Books, says Duke contacted the author, Dr. William Davis, in early 2012 and claimed to be a "Dr. Duke" from "Europe." Apparently not realizing with whom he was speaking, Davis agreed to tape a segment that aired on Duke's satellite radio show on Feb. 10, 2012, and again on March 12.

Lynn says Davis receives about 20 media-related requests a day, "in addition to other opportunities that we secure for him." But "in this instance, he was contacted directly and intentionally misled about the true identity of the host."

SO - Davis receives about 20 media-related requests a day - I assume he has someone to handle those requests - he probably forwards them to his PR person or to his publisher - BUT in this case when he was DIRECTLY CONTACTED by Dr David Duke he agreed to do the interview!!

http://www.wheatbellyblog.com/press-media/contact-info/

MEDIA INQUIRIES ONLY at this email, please! MEDIA INQUIRIES ONLY! If you are NOT from a media source, your email will be placed in the trash bin.
MEDIA INQUIRIES Email: contact@wheatbellyblog.com

Why did he agree to this particular interview??

Lowcarb team member said...

Have I said “that simple tenet held true for everyone?” but it stands good for most. Personally I have never met anyone that did not lose weight by reducing starchy carbs and calories to the correct level. The correct level varies from person to person. I am involved with a blog to help diabetics gain better control of their diabetes. For over 80% of newly diagnosed type two diabetics, weight is an issue.

Kind regards Eddie

Larry Eshelman said...

I agree with Diana re David Duke vs Dennis Mangan. Mangan's views are politically incorrect but they are not in the same category as David Duke's.

Are we to boycott anyone who links to or refers to an author who sometimes expresses politically incorrect opinions?

Well then, Darwin is on the forbidden list. The subtitle of Darwin's 'Origin of Species' is "On the origin of species by means of natural selection or the preservation of favored races in the struggle for life."

Many modern followers of Darwin explore, and sometimes reach, politically incorrect views based on evolutionary theory. For example, Greg Cochran's and Henry Harpending's 'The 10,000 Year Explosion' is full of politically incorrect statements. As another example, read Satoshi Kanazawa, an evolutionary psychologist. His recent book is the 'The Intelligence Paradox' and his blog is http://bigthink.com/blogs/e-pur-si-muove. The thought police went after Kanazawa for a blog post on Psychology Today and he was forced to suspend blogging for a year.

Mangan's views largely reflect his take on Darwin.

Unknown said...

I have never met anyone who did not lose weight by drinking their own urine three times a day.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

I'm not one of those Eddie. When you have no idea what you're talking about it's best not to make assumptions either.

Lowcarb team member said...

"I have never met anyone who did not lose weight by drinking their own urine three times a day."

I bow to your greater knowledge, I have no experience of urine drinking.

Eddie

anotherdeadletter said...


Oh, boy, Eddie.

"Reduce the starchy carbs and sugar, reduce the calories, spend as much time exercising as you do running others down, and you will be as slim as a whip, instead of an obese and bitter whinger."

Right there you said it and you said it to a person it did not work for. You said it would work for her.

I've never met anyone who didn't get fat by eating fat. I have never met anyone who got fat by eating fruit and vegetables. I've sure met a lot of people who have *claimed* they've gotten fat by eating fruits and vegetables...alongside their doughnuts and ice cream and bagels and fish sticks and pasta which they seem to forget to mention.

You're involved in a weightloss blog, simple as that. Reducing weight helps control T2. You go about it one way, others go about it another. But it's simple, ya know? "Ain't rocket science"? You've got it all figured out, just quit eating carbs and exercise and *YOU WILL* be slim as whip".

Lowcarb team member said...

Agree 100%.

Eddie

Diana said...

@Evelyn,

"Why I care is that they are hijacking what I see to be a legitimate and worthwhile "real food" movement. Jimmy has been working that into his repetitive mantras lately."

I don't think they are. People like Mark Bittmann (NY Times writer), Michael Pollan and Nina Planck aren't taken in by the cult. Those are just the big names that I can think of off the top of my head. Planck you may not know of - she was a bigtime vegan, got pregnant, recanted and was pilloried by the vegan cult.

http://tinyurl.com/aup5jlt

They will never be part of anything that has Jimmy Moore's name attached to it, for a bunch of reasons but esp. because he's a walking fat bomb. His favorite macronutrient is fat, and that is definitely not Pollan or Planck's thing - this is partly cultural - they are heavily artisinal, plant-based, etc.

I really think that Moore is mainly a menace to the already deluded low carb masses - that is bad enough. There are many of them out there.

"I also think many answers to the obesity problem is a return to "ancestral" foods, just not necessarily some fairy tale version from the paleolithic where Mark Sisson passes judgment on whether something is "primal" or not."

I agree about Sisson but again, he's not as influential as Bittman, Pollan, Planck. Also I think that the answer to the obesity epidemic is to prevent it by eating like the Japanese: low-fat, high-carb, moderate protein. That's not the way people lose weight - it's the way you prevent kids from gaining weight. The disconnect between the fact that carbs don't cause weight gain, but too many of them do prevent weight loss - is where the LC cult gets its adherents.

"Inasmuch as the government isn't going to be getting out of the nutrition business anytime soon, I would like to see nutrition basics -- real ones, not dogma driven demonizations of certain foods and entire classes of foods."

At the risk of sounding like a sycophant I couldn't agree more but I don't think that Mark Sisson affects this in any way.

The simple fact is that you are always going to have opportunists who want to get rich off people's misery - that's the American way! The Graham cracker was invented by a minister who thought that whole wheat cured the desire to masturbate. This is America, land of opportunists.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

LCM -- Have you seen pictures from the LC Cruise? An LC get together? Read on LCF? Jimmy's forum?

What does my weight or situation have to do with prominent members of this community going on David Duke's radio program and lying (or possibly so) about it? Stick to topic, eh?

Diana said...

@Everyone -

Aren't we talking about two totally different things here?

Not getting fat in the first place, and losing the weight once you have?

"I've never met anyone who didn't get fat by eating fat." How true, both anecdotally and in the studies. And on the population level - also true. The Japanese eat a low fat diet - they don't get fat in the first place.

But Eddie has a point that once you are fat, controlling carb intake is crucial.

I have to admit that I scoffed at this for a while, but I was convinced by "Dr. Carbohydrate" himself, Dr. Jean-Pierre Flatt that this is true. He also advocates eating a low-fat diet for weight loss purposes, and exercising while in the fasted state.

Everyone's carb level tolerance is different, but the principle is the same for everyone. As is the necessity of keeping to a low-fat diet to prevent obesity. Again, this is only if you need to lose weight. It's a totally different issue with weight gain.

Lowcarb team member said...

I have been remiss, I forgot to mention will power, self control and discipline. It seems some look for scientific explanations. Could it be insulin resistance, could it be a leptin problem, maybe it’s all to do with the Krebs Cycle. Maybe, just maybe, too many people eat too much of the wrong foods and spend too much time on their butts. Ask your Doctor, if getting of your butt and cutting back on eating too much junk, will be good for you !

Kind regards Eddie

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

I would like to know the specifics of how it was conducted. Telephone? Who called whom?

Diana said...

" Exercise may not be optimum for weight loss (for most folks), but it sure burns up excess glucose and keeps blood glucose numbers down. "

When you exercise moderately in the fasted state, and keep fasting a few hours afterwards, you will use mostly fatty acids for energy, not glucose.

If you eat high fat or high carb (either before or after exercising) you will not burn fat. You will merely be replacing the fat stores you've depleted from the exercise, or prevent them from oxidizing.

OK Evelyn, have at me.

anotherdeadletter said...


I don't know, diana. Maybe in respected, academic circles, but among the masses? I've seen Sissoon, Taubes and Wolf mentioned far more than anyone. Granted, I don't think they're long-lasting as their foundations are already cracking, but the name "Paleo" is probably forever tainted. You can't even google paleolithic without a bunch of blog returns.

I tend to think "high carb" is a bad label, myself. Too akin to the fat is bad stuff from the 90s. High natural carb works better for me. /random unasked for opinion

Lowcarb team member said...

Does anyone really care ? It’s a nothing of a story other than here. The US and the UK, and many other countries are going down the tubes. So much of what we hold dear will soon be gone. I have a feeling obesity will soon be sorting itself out, when people will be glad for whatever food they can get. Massive amounts of people are living on food aid and welfare, and the situation is set to become far worse.

Kind regards Eddie

Lowcarb team member said...

Thank you Diana


“But Eddie has a point that once you are fat, controlling carb intake is crucial.”

I was never fat until I was around 58 years of age, 32” waist for most of my life. At diabetes type two diagnosis, waist 40” and 50lb over weight. A chicken or egg situation. Did I become a diabetic because of obesity, or did I become obese because of my diabetes ? I will never know the answer.

One thing is for sure, by reducing my carb and calorie intake, I lost the 50lb and gained good control of my diabetes and weight.

Kind regards Eddie

Paul Jaminet said...

Evelyn, your paragraph referring to me is highly inappropriate. It is bound to give people an extremely misleading impression of my views:

1) It falsely associates me with David Duke and others who have engaged in misbehavior, misbehavior that I have criticized.
2) It approvingly cites your malicious commenter “Giuseppe” who falsely claims I “routinely link to far right nutters' websites“. My blog links only to biomedical and health-related content, never to political content, and it has as many links to left-liberals as to conservatives. I am not aware that I have linked to any "nutters."
3) It states "I [Evelyn] emailed him [Paul] for further clarification and his response left a very sick taste in my mouth." This will naturally lead your readers to infer that I was defending immoral conduct. On the contrary, I didn't defend anyone except myself, and the bulk of my Monday email to you was devoted to an explanation of how, as a Christian, I feel obligated to respond to others' sin.

Let me repeat the main points here so that your readers can judge for themselves.

Ostracism is never the first recourse to another's sin (see Matthew 18). Moreover, an excessive focus on others' sin is itself a sin; it sows discord and division. "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." "Remember the covenant of the Most High, and overlook faults.” (Sirach 28)

I recounted two Judeo-Christian moral stories. One, a Talmudic perspective:

The prophet Isaiah was guilty of a sinfully over-righteous morality, according to later commentary in the Talmud and Maimonides. The Israelites in Isaiah’s time were a sinful nation [Isaiah 1:4], murderers [Isaiah 1:21], with no respect for God’s law [Isaiah 30:9-11], whose slogan was “Eat and drink, for tomorrow we die” [Isaiah 22:13]. Yet when Isaiah says that “I live among a people of unclean lips,” immediately “one of the seraphs flew over to me with a live coal…. He touched it to my lips and declared: ‘now that this has touched your lips, your guilt shall depart and your sin be purged away’” [Isaiah 6:5-7]. According to Maimonides, it was not the uncleanliness that he had gotten from living among the people that had to be purged, but his own words that had to be atoned for. And, according to the Talmud, he was not wholly forgiven until he was martyred at the hands of Manasseh [BT Yevamot 49b and JT Sanhedrin 28c].

Another from the Christian Desert Fathers:

“A certain brother committed an offense in Scete, the camp of the monks, and when a congregation was assembled on this matter, they sent after Abba Moses, but he refused to come; then they sent the priest of the church to him, saying, “Come, for all the people are expecting thee,” and he rose up and came. And he took a basket with a hole in it and filled it with sand, and carried it upon his shoulders, and those who went out to meet him said unto him, “What meaneth this, O father?” And he said unto them, “[The sands are] my sins which are running down behind me and I cannot see them, and I, even I, have come this day to judge shortcomings which are not mine.” And when they heard they set free that brother and said nothing further to him.”

I'll let your readers infer for themselves why I consider these stories relevant to the issue at hand. You characterize these ancient counsels as "Swallow your criticism for the good of the movement." I think you greatly under-rate the wisdom of these counsels. Their point is not "good ends justify bad means" but "let both your ends and your means be virtuous."

Finally, let me conclude by pointing out that I operate my blog and write my book to fulfill a scientific and medical mission. There is no other reason for it. And just as doctors are required to treat injured murders and scientists are ethically obliged to cite the work of immoral scientists, my blog will interact with immoral people in ways that I judge will promote public health and the progress of knowledge.

Best, Paul

Paul Jaminet said...

PS - "murders" should be "murderers".

Charles Grashow said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Charles Grashow said...

Paul Jaminet said "scientists are ethically obliged to cite the work of immoral scientists, my blog will interact with immoral people in ways that I judge will promote public health and the progress of knowledge. "

What are your standards?? How immoral can one be and still be cited by you?

George Henderson said...

@ Diana - "Vigorous open debate about controversial subject - fine. Crazy talk - go somewhere else."
Agreed. As I've said elsewhere, I first encountered resurgence of antisemitic conspiracy theories in a vegan, new age context (where there are depths of double-think that Duke wouldn't need). It seems to come from a pro-arab, anti-American take on recent world events (so it ties in with 9-11 denialists, Gadaffi loyalists, and so on).
It is crazy talk.
I guess ordinary bigotry justified by science (but based on one's unchosen birth state - male/female, catholic/protestant, black/ white, gay/straight, etc.) is a step less crazy, if potentially no less distasteful (bigoted people do change, but crazy-Nazi, not so much). Paranoia that seems justified by events... there are gray areas.

Paul Jaminet said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Paul Jaminet said...

Perhaps "sinful people" would better communicate my meaning. It is hard to find sinless people to interact with. Prudence is the virtue of being able to make sound judgments about which sinful people should be our partners and which should not. I try to choose with prudence. Prudential judgment is not easily distilled to "standards."

anotherdeadletter said...


@Eddie

We agree, I guess. It's not simple at all. So, so many factors play into it. As you said, willpower, metabolism... That's why pointing a finger at a single Food Bully bugs me. I've found that by cutting out a single macronutrient, it works usually when a lot of what a person ate was a junk food loaded with badness.

Personally, I think not enough attention gets paid to the social pressure to eat constantly. Hungry or not. "You must eat breakfast!" Why? If you're not hungry, don't. It's something we in the West seem to have lost. We're constantly in a fed, fat-storing state. Less, more often, IMO, is playing a major part in the obesity problem.

George Henderson said...

The PJ brothersjudd blog Guiseppe linked to doesn't seem far-out or offensive in the context of 2003.
"How immoral can one be and still be cited by you?" is not a question that anyone can answer.
If that mad scientist dude impregnated Octomum with the Neanderthal baby, we would probably all be citing the results, wouldn't we?

George Henderson said...

@ Diana,
"I think that the answer to the obesity epidemic is to prevent it by eating like the Japanese: low-fat, high-carb, moderate protein. That's not the way people lose weight - it's the way you prevent kids from gaining weight."

However, if one looks at the sociological records, there was little childhood obesity (around one fat kid per school) in the period of say, 1940 - 1970 when fats were at about 40% of western diets, and mostly came from butter and meat rather than oil, despite reasonably high sugar consumption.
Oil and childhood obesity were rare as hens teeth in my childhood, most of the other supposedly obesigenic nutrients were present in abundance, and we were of course more active of necessity.

Charles Grashow said...

Paul - you said "my blog will interact with immoral people in ways that I judge will promote public health and the progress of knowledge."

So by saying that you must have standards.

Question - would you cite this if it proved to be successful

http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/george-church-explains-how-dna-will-be-construction-material-of-the-future-a-877634.html

http://cosmiclog.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/21/16629148-help-wanted-adventurous-woman-to-give-birth-to-a-neanderthal-baby?lite

http://science.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/22/16646498-bioethicist-heres-why-creating-a-neanderthal-clone-is-such-a-bad-idea?lite

Diana said...

@Eddie,

Don't want to quibble or pick fights -- I'm glad you agree that self-control and willpower are important. I think we can both agree that knowledge helps a motivated person gain self-control and aids in will-power. You can have all the motivation in the world, but if you are floundering in a sea of bad info, you are not going to reach your goals.

And that is what I see in a lot of low-carb forums. A woman who is stuck at 240 pounds, eating fat and protein ad libitum (macadamia nuts and cream cheese "fat bombs" come to mind, zero carbs, and wondering why she isn't losing weight.

Tragic, no?

Charles Grashow said...

Paul - would YOU agree to be interviewed by David Duke to promote your new book??

Lowcarb team member said...

Hi anotherdeadletter

I agree with much that you say. The comment we eat when we are not hungry because it is breakfast time or lunch time is true in my opinion. I appreciate what you say. How often do we eat because it is a certain time whatever, rather than eat because we are truly hungry. “That's why pointing a finger at a single Food Bully bugs me.” That I also can also appreciate, but for me that applies to a healthy non type two diabetic. Carbs raise BG numbers the fastest and usually the highest. It is a fact BG numbers above 7.8 can cause damage, that’s why I promote lowcarb for diabetics.

I have never said all carbs are evil, or people should not use them in a balanced diet. People like me have a choice, reduce the carbs, or increase the medication. I choose and promote diet over medication, but each to their own.

Kind regards Eddie

Diana said...

@George,

You know, I have to question whether fats were 40% of the western diet. I really do. And in any case, that legendary 40% was 40% of a smaller overall calorie intake.

I am very interested in what people ate during the Great Depression in the US. I know the Depression hit Australia very badly, people lived by hunting rabbits, etc., - what about New Zealand? I know nothing about New Zealand.

My father was a young man during the Depression and reached a weight of 118 pounds on a 5'8" frame. When I asked him what he ate he would tell me, "anything I could."

I will look into this, it interests me.

But we do now that up until recently the Japanese were eating an 80% carbohydrate diet, and that carbohydrates (absent fats and proteins) do not make you fat. Look up J.P. Flatt, the guy who proved this.

Diana said...

"Diana
"What part of 'blech' did you not read?"

Blech you, cremepuff. You don't care about Duke because you agree with him and you don't think he's such a bad guy.

See my answer to you on the previous post.

Simon Carter said...

I would just like to state (before the shitstorm hits) that I am a sycophant of Paul Jaminet. I am also an atheist. Go figure.
Paul, I had no idea that you were a religious person and I have been reading you for years and I enjoy and respect your work. I have a question for you, do you believe in evolution?

Diana said...

@adl,

"I don't know, diana. Maybe in respected, academic circles, but among the masses? I've seen Sissoon, Taubes and Wolf mentioned far more than anyone."

I agree. I wrote the above in response to what Evelyn wrote about the Paleo crowd hijacking the "Real Food" movement. I am often intimidated by the science that is presented on this blog. But one thing I do know about from the inside is the kind of people who run the "Real Food" movement.

Take somebody like Mark Bittmann who writes for the NY Times, or Alice Waters...Michael Pollan. Aren't these the real leaders?

Do you think that any of them, with their artisinal, raw cheese, sourdough, steam those vegetables, keep the fat content to a minimum, philosophy, would ever go for the Paleo theories and for their vulgar spokesmen?

But you mention the masses...fine, that is where the Paleoists have had their greatest success. They are popular among the broscientists. I guess. I don't know what to say to that other than, if it wasn't this shizzle it would be something else. Broscientists are what they are.

I think that in what you might call the prestige Real Foods movement, the Paleoists are not a factor. And forget Jimmy Moore ever breaking into this crowd. Not gonna happen. Part of it is cultural prejudice against a born-again creationist Southerner, which I think is unfortunate. We all have our cultural baggage and I think there are better reasons to shun Moore.

"Granted, I don't think they're long-lasting as their foundations are already cracking, but the name "Paleo" is probably forever tainted. You can't even google paleolithic without a bunch of blog returns."

Great. Doesn't that prove my point?

Lowcarb team member said...

Hi Diana

I have read your blog and seen your photographs. You are clearly in great shape, and a million miles from being obese. If I had an easy answer I would be a very rich man, but I haven’t. I do not believe there are any easy answers. There is no trick diet, but I believe insulin plays a big part in weight gain, or weight loss. I know this is a very contentious subject, but I look to the time before insulin was discovered. What ever calorie amount insulin dependent diabetics ate, they withered away. I believe if we can control our insulin, whether injected or natural, we can control our weight. OK, I know many do not agree.

I also agree whether you are lowcarbing or not, excess calories from any foods will not lead to weight loss.

Kind regards Eddie

Paul Jaminet said...

Hi Simon,

Yes, of course. Our book is based on it!

Paul Jaminet said...

No.

Diana said...

@Giuseppe: de nada. Glad we cleared up our misunderstandings.

@Larry: Glad we agree. I'm very interested myself in evolutionary psychology, although I happen to think that a lot of it is "not even wrong." However I do not like it when people shut down debate because the subjects bring up issues that make people uncomfortable. This, in fact, is what the David Dukes of the world thrive on.

@George: I didn't realize that vegans were also poisoned by the conspiracy mongers but I can't say I'm surprised.

anotherdeadletter said...


But isn't that just looking at a confined timeframe?

Yes, if you are in a fasted state, you burn fat stores. But eventually you have to eat and those fat stores will be replaced unless you eat less, no? There seems to be much evidence that HGH levels are raised while in a fasted state, so that would tend to help replace the fat with LBM, but that would likely only occur with more intense training, which burns glycogen.

Diana said...

@Eddie, Yes, self-control and discipline are important, after good information.

Jimmy Moore in 2005: "I lost a good amount of weight on the Weigh Down Diet because I was allowed to eat WHATEVER I wanted to eat to satisfy my hunger. But my problem with these kind of hunger-based diets is they put the onus of control in the hands of the person trying to lose weight.....But I don’t like having to stop eating when I’m not ready to."

From WoTE:
http://weightoftheevidence.blogspot.com/2012/12/so-much-for-cake-let-them-eat-steak.html#comment-form

river rance said...

Christine has all the elements of being Jimmy's "beard".

paleotwopointoh said...

I got fat drinking carbs. I lost the weight reducing my carb intake.

I didn't gain my excess fat eating fat at all.

George Henderson said...

@ Diana, try this: http://nelliebswartimerationing.blogspot.co.nz/2012/11/butter-rationing-in-new-zealand.html

Has anyone here actually gone to Japan and eaten what the Japanese eat? Also, don't Japanese have high rate of high blood pressure or strokes or something?
If anything, eating rice for carbs is probably healthier than eating wheat. Where did I hear that first? Oh, that's right, Jaminet and Davis.

paleotwopointoh said...

When I was slim, I sure didn't eat low-fat. My mostly slim family tree doesn't eat low fat (black Americans with healthy dollops of Irish and Native American blood). They eat fatty meats, cook with lots of animal fat, and tend to take physically active jobs. The fat ones eat a lot of sugar and starch plus the fatty meats and sit around being physically inactive.

Low-fat ain't necessarily where it's at.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Whoa up there.

Point 1: How did I associate you with Duke? I absolutely did not and your response is inflammatory and misrepresents what I wrote which was: "More than one person has linked to instances where Paul Jaminet has linked to questionable websites. .This is not quite as egregious as linking to David Duke, but it's pretty bad.

Point 2: I don't see Giuseppe as malicious and I didn't cite him by name based on what he wrote in response to my previous post. Between my email and comments here I believe this makes at least half a dozen people who have sent me links. I'm expressing my opinion and I do believe your response in that link really does leave much to be desired. Everyone deserves a seat at the table except the corrupt and the dishonest -- that is what you wrote in the comment I linked to in my post. So I guess that's unless they have a podcast for you to appear on, then that doesn't matter, eh?

Point 3: It was not my intent to leave that impression and for that I apologize. This is why I sought public clarification, as did at least one other person, on your blog, but took it to email when there was no response. The lesson in Christianity and judging me when you said I was out of line to even inquire (that's how it came off, I'll gladly publish our email exchange if you feel I misrepresented you) made me sick. Sorry. I am a person of faith but I am sickened when I see Christianity used to excuse some and lecture others. It is hypocritical.

Let both your ends and your means be virtuous? What if ones means are not virtuous? That is what I'm talking about here with respect to Jimmy Moore.

You wrote: "In a corrupt age, I have to consider anyone with the courage to present unpopular views and the integrity to be honest and forthright to be worthy of being part of mainstream discussion, regardless of the content of his views. Only the dishonest and corrupt should be excluded from discussion. The rest of us should look for common ground and work together to achieve something valuable, whether or not we have points of disagreement."

That sounds an awful lot like you would give anyone who behaves responsibly in their relationships-- business and personal -- a seat at the table no matter how irresponsible or immoral those relationships or their beliefs are. But dishonesty or corruption would be your straw. Well Jimmy Moore has broken that straw too many times to count and he has done it flagrantly this time again.

As to the last paragraph. Wow. Just wow. I never heard that about scientists before. A doctor must treat all who seek their assistance, so a scientist I suppose could be obligated to address all science presented to them(?) It doesn't translate for me. I see no obligation for scientists to go forth and spread their good word however immoral .... sounds like religion and the role of a missionary to me, not a scientist. I can see if your mission is to change the minds of the immoral with improved knowledge, but that must always be balanced with the credibility you impart when you associate with a person. Oh well, we disagree. We are each entitled to our opinions.


Charles Grashow said...

http://livinlavidalowcarb.com/blog/10-critical-issues-the-paleo-community-must-address/17579

4. Negative bloggers

Speaking of negativity, it seems the Paleo blogosphere has become inhabited by several individuals who have made it their sole purpose in life is to spread lies, rumors and hatred about various people within the community who are fully dedicated to the mission of the Paleo lifestyle. I’ve been blogging at “Livin’ La Vida Low-Carb” for eight years and realize that this kind of thing just comes with the territory when you put yourself out there sharing information about your life. The funny thing is you’d expect vegetarians and vegans to act this way towards bloggers who are promoting animal-based foods as part of a healthy diet–but not people who purport to eat a low-carb and/or Paleo diet. While most of my fellow low-carb and Paleo health bloggers are providing some truly outstanding information and encouragement to their readers, there are a few who do nothing more than spread negativity and dissension in everything they do. In my opinion, these people don’t add any value to the Paleo community and are like a cancer that spreads within if left unchecked. If you can’t add anything positive to the conversation, then I just don’t have the time or energy to waste on you. It would behoove the people in this community who want to see Paleo become more widely accepted by the mainstream to stop giving these negative nannies the attention they so desperately crave and whose true motive is to halt the progress that has been happening. It’s okay to disagree, but being disagreeable in the process benefits nobody.

George Henderson said...

Props, Simon.
If I could save 3 theological works from the Deluge, they would be, in chronological order:
Maimonides: A Guide for the Perplexed (brilliant diet section BTW)
C.S. Lewis: The Screwtape Letters
Christopher Hitchens: god is not Great; how religion poisons everything.

They all appeal at different times. I don't feel like being an aetheist or a christian or anything else all the time, anymore than I feel like listening to jazz, or to opera, or to stoner space rock all the time.
So sue me.

anotherdeadletter said...


What carbs did you drink?

What sugar and starch do they eat?

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

I have never been, but I have cohabitated with Japanese students (e.g. not Americanized), witnessed the foods in the cupboards and such of my father's Japanese tenants through the decades (these families come here for 2-3 years then go back, the men are somewhat Americanized but the women who do the cooking are generally not, the kids sometimes get fatter if they stay more than a few years because they are eating more fat with their American friends), and I shop in the local Asian markets regularly as I Iove their produce and various specialty items (not to mention I know what kind of fish I'm getting when it's live from a tank!).

You heard that first from Jaminet and Davis? Chuckle

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

This man has no shame. When you lie in people's faces Jimmy, they're going to notice!

anotherdeadletter said...


@Diana

Thing is, when you're dealing with health it's the masses that count.

We'll have to see how it plays out, I suppose.

Unknown said...

The latest Jimmy post is one of the funniest things I've ever read.

an3drew said...

Wait..... you two had an email exchange and Paul Jaminet included "two Judeo-Christian moral stories"?

LOFL

coconutz said...

@ Eddie

ahh guess my internets snark didn't come through.

Of course I believe exersize and calories matter.
But if you have read ass hat Jimmy Moore,President of the "Paleo/Low carb Government Conspiracy Movement" over the last few years you wouldn't come away with that impression.

And I'm not anti LC either, It worked as a short term hack for me, dropped 50 lbs fast.

Diana said...

@Eddie,

"You are clearly in great shape, and a million miles from being obese."

In high school I weighed 190 lbs (13 st/6??). I got fat eating fat bombs of carbs/fat, in huge amount, in other words, binge eating on sweets. Stopped the binging, lost a good deal of that.

Thank you, by the way.

Diana said...

"I got fat drinking carbs."

Can you be more specific?

Diana said...

@adl LBM - lean body mass? Please explain.

coconutz said...

I'm still laughing !
After all that has transpired, why any serious person would want to associate themselves with this moron baffles me.

river rance said...

Jimmy Jimmy Jimmy! Please you are killing me!
misogynistic warning….beautiful,strong,independent,black, women….uh oh. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmfVFJBZUBA

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

When you realize this guy wrote it in all seriousness it's positively hilarious.

George Henderson said...

@ Guiseppe,
the vitamin C issue is one of medical judgement and "best practice" guidelines. I don't claim the semi-socialized system is perfect, and the NZ one has been somewhat diluted since the 80s, but that it can protect citizens from predatory capitalism if so decided, or from starvation or from adverse health effects from smoking, toxins, or infectious disease, better than the laissez-faire system that preceded it.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

OK ... So I went out into the cold and ran some errands and all that jazz. Couldn't get the scientist's ethical obligation to cite immoral scientists out of my head. The closest I can come to that making any sense is that if I am researching something I have an obligation to include and cite where appropriate the scientific works irrespective of the morals of the scientist. That is fine. Usually you don't get linked to white power and misogynistic sites on peer review journals though. I must have missed the part where any of us are scientists though. I was a research scientist in my "past life" and bring that experience to this blog, I consider much of what I do here -- present stuff aside -- to be research of a secondary review nature, but scientist? Sorry. You are not one either Paul, and to the best of my knowledge never have been, though that is your wife's profession.

I see Jimmy has published his to do list for the paleo community to clean up its act. LOL.

river rance said...

And Rob Wolf wants to go on a sea cruise with him! Mark Sisson wants to podcast with him? This truth is crazier than hollywood fiction..it's a male bathhouse…. one dysfunctional human….and yet they continue to hang on to Jimmy Jim as he drags them down. Crazy…funny…no….shameless!

Sanjeev said...

> I have a question for you, do you believe in evolution?

Almost all religious people do; Do you know any religious person deny that cows have been bred that produce more milk?

The major objection that a small group of religious people have is that the evolutionary process called Darwinian natural selection applies to human beings.

Yes, there are some that deny any form of evolution. They're rare.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

I figured it out. It's going to be a Victory Belt book promo event. Robb Wolf, check. Diane Sanfilippo, check. Jimmy Moore on cholesterol(??!!??!!) check!

IlliterateDesertSlaves said...

'Does anyone really care?' says the guy with 12 comments. lol

Jaminet says "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" then proceeds to write 8 or so paragraphs criticizing Evelyn.

"I think you greatly under-rate the wisdom of these counsels."
I wonder if this is the same counsel of sexually repressed goat herders who wrote volumes of lunatic, misogynistic, bigoted texts full of wise stories of stoning women & abusing children.

"Finally, let me conclude by pointing out that I operate my blog and write my book to fulfill a scientific and medical mission. There is no other reason for it."
Are you on drugs? You sell a book you. and clearly have a religious agenda to preach and save the world from sin...or sumthin.

The Ultimate Paul Jaminet Translation: I am so narcissistic that I can't even see my own bullshit. I cherry pick ancient texts to show you how fucking special I am, but deliberately leave out Leviticus and other vile hateful texts because my whole self righteous argument would fall apart.

Paul Jaminet just revealed why more Americans are turning away from religion in larger numbers & faster than ever before. This dude is the David Wolff of paleo nutrition. White Power!

Sanjeev said...

Now that you mentioned it, Rob Wolf reminds me of Gopher.

others in the paleosphere could round off the rest of the cast

Sean Croxton (bartender), Stephanie Ruper (social director), the occasional bearded freethemisogynist guest star[0](the occasional unlikeable *ssh*le),

I'll take suggestions on which paleo "stars" to match up with the doctor (Ziegfried from Get Smart) and the Captain

[0] I'd prefer he guest star[1] in this show:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blHwaFzzbkQ

[1] scholars don't use footnotes footnotes to best effect [2]

the guest star never survived the introduction
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=iwU9M9sjrDk

[2] for jokes [3]

[3] running jokes actually ...

Giuseppe said...

I don't see where Evelyn has ever said that she agreed with my comment, except for that part about the defense being unconvincing. Also, if that's all it takes to be branded as a "malicious commenter" you must live in a bubble. If the intent is to take that diet to the mainstream, I doubt one does himself any favours by associating with some of those people, especially when the diet is so far from the mainstream to begin with (I showed the PHD blog posts about wheat to some of my friends here in Italy and they dismissed it as some "chemtrail conspiracy blog"). I just re-read that comment thread I linked to now that it ended up on the paleodrama tumblr, and a commenter says, among other things "You link to Dennis Mangan alot. You do realize that he is a white nationalist racialist conservative?". I stand by my comment. I also remember ending up on a site full of racist pseudo-science when following a link on your blog in the past; I had wanted to point it out in the comments, but considering those past responses I realized that it would just be a waste of time. With that, and the links to quacks like Mercola, I just gave up on the whole thing, although I still bought the book. And please, spare us the morality tales, that's just weird.

Kade Storm said...

Well said, George!

"The major objection that a small group of religious people have is that the evolutionary process called Darwinian natural selection applies to human beings."

But it does, and so that major objection is an issue and I do run into more than my share of individuals who I'd consider very 'reasonable', who then suddenly say, "Well! No. It defies my sacred text." There's more of them than I'd like to imagine, and yet I hear that they're far and few. Perhaps we should swap worlds for a day.

Ali Sohail said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Diana said...

@ADL - What could be more "the masses" than THE BIGGEST LOSER? Who is bigger in the weight loss for the masses guru-world than Jillian Michaels? Her mug is everywhere. Frankly I do not understand the economics of the publishing industry - it strikes me that they pay insane advances for books that often end up in the remainder bin, which is what I think will happen to Zoe Harcombe's crappy book. But you can't argue that TBL makes money. And that Michaels is very successful.

And what do TBL and Michael's espouse? "Eat less move more." I think ELMM and CICO are mainstream. They are just very hard to practice in our society but I think most people know that they are the core concepts of weight loss.

Customized to the individual, I hasten to add. That's crucially important. And I'm not a big fan of either TBL or Michaels - just sayin'.

Kade Storm said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Kade Storm said...

George,

With regards to the Japanese rates of blood pressure and stroke. There is the thing about their salt and iodine intake, which are astronomical compared to what's considered our RDA. This is largely due to their seaweed intake. Now if we pair these factors with other rising changes in health habits and declining markers--westernisation of diet and habitual lifestyle and such--one could explain why their rates in those two areas have risen. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3204293/)

Sanjeev said...

I sometimes slip into thinking we occupy the same world.

I should have made a clear separation here as the blog is US based and most of the commenters appear to be US residents - yes there are a lot of creationists in the US and nearly every one's objections are religious.

In Canada they're mostly limited to Alberta, and as I understand it their numbers are exceedingly small in Britain & Australia but their influence is reported as increasing in Britain at least.

Simon Carter said...

Hi Sanjeev, I have to completely disagree with your statement that "they" are rare. Here is an extract:
"Science denialism is a Louisiana problem, but it’s also an American problem. America needs an attitude adjustment when it comes to science. We have creationist school vouchers. Nearly 60 percent of American biology teachers are not teaching evolution properly. Almost half of Americans believe that the Earth was formed in the last 10,000 years. Tennessee has a creationism law based on Louisiana’s and other states may soon follow suit. A member of the U.S. House of Representatives Science Committee called evolution, embryology, and the big bang theory “lies straight from the pit of hell.”"
Here is the full article, http://www.csicop.org/specialarticles/show/against_louisianas_creationist_lobby

Diana said...

@George/Kade,

Have a look at this article:

"Nonetheless, differences among individual humans in their symbionts do seem to make differences in how they digest food—individuals appear to differ in their metabolism depending on just which microbes they have. In addition, some microbes are found only in particular peoples where they appear to play a unique role. In some Japanese populations lives a gut microbe that has stolen genes from a marine bacterium; those genes help the bacterium to break down seaweed (such as that encountered in sushi rolls). How you digest food depends on which microbes you have and which microbes you have differs from one person to the next."

Etc.

Link:

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2012/08/27/the-hidden-truths-about-calories/

The business about intestinal length blew my mind!!

@Kade -

So, the Japanese are adapted to eating seaweed, but the other stuff that comes with it may not be so great. Also, their salt intake has to do with their huge consumption of pickled/fermented items - usually touted as being so healthful. They are, but there's a cost....

@George -

I wonder if different populations aren't adapted to different fat intakes. The US and NZ aren't incredibly different in terms of food culture. We derive from similar founding cultures. In rural parts of the US, lard sandwiches used to be common.

They also dropped dead before age 60, for the most part. Maybe the lard sammies had something to do with that (along with smoking, poverty, general malnutrition.....)

Kade Storm said...

Or maybe we do occupy the same world but have a different appraisal of the issue. Simon's got the idea of my concerns.

Although I do agree that they're a minority and the aggression of this movement is only so noticeable because in the long run, they seem to be in decline.

Sanjeev said...

> iodine intake, which are astronomical compared to what's considered our RDA. This is largely due to their seaweed intake.
___
Don't let this scare you off eating seaweed: most seaweed (including the regular stuff one finds in North American Asian grocery stores, Nori or Wakame), doesn't have a lot of iodine.

The big outlier is called Kombu, which does have a lot. Wakame does have a lot of sodium too, so not something to eat every day in large amounts.

Diana said...

@Simon,

Like a lot of non-Americans, you mistake the part for the whole. Most of the creationism you refer to tend to be rural and/or Southern.

Csicop reminds me in a way of the Southern Poverty Law Center - the anti-hate vigilance group. While they do good work, they have an interest in exaggerating. SPLC would have you believe that it's "next stop Nuremberg laws" here in the Benighted States of America.

It's not. Nor is the UK a bastion of enlightenment values. Is it? I've heard of Stephen Lawrence, baby P and the rape recruitment gang in that small town whose name now escapes me.

Don't judge us by our worst. I don't judge your lot that way.

Peace out.

Kade Storm said...

I am responding here because I acknowledged Simon's post as resonating with my concerns.

I don't see this as a US problem. I see it as a general problem, period, and one that is going away. Having that said, in the UK--aside from foreign minorities who even dislike identifying themselves as British while living here under the protection and benefits of a British life--most aren't into religion in the same numbers from a percentage stand point. If anything, it's the British cultural tolerance policy that allows some of the aggressive minority groups to further their agendas, but I am not going to blame an otherwise decent policy for some small short falls that are inconsequential in the long term. It's only the purtanical types who show aggressive resistance, and unfortunately, more of them are found in places that are larger and more diverse.

Simon Carter said...

Hi Diane, you are assuming I am British, I am not. I have lived in the United States for 24 years. I wasn't judging Americans. I find people are the same everywhere, most good, some bad. I think creationism is bullshit and do not think it should be taught in public classrooms. Unlikely to happen in New York City, but it is really happening in this country. I admire that young man.

Simon Carter said...

And Diane, I also think your blog is great. I am also trying to puzzle out my own answer. Happy Hunting!

Diana said...

@Simon,

Yes, I did assume you were British. Since you say "you have lived in the US for 24 years" I'll assume you aren't US-born - not that there is anything wrong with that.

But seriously - I do react strongly to condescension towards Americans based on small sample size, I admit it. I worked for Brits early on and it traumatized me.

I think "America" is a fiction, really - it's a combination of a lot of small 'countries', very diverse, as I've already said on another comment, and in every one of them you have a bewildering combination of rube/sophisticate. Our political system is designed so that well-organized minorities can have a major effect on the system, which is sometimes a good thing, sometimes bad.

If there is one criticism non-Americans can justifiably level at America it's that one country should not have all that power. Even if the US were comprised of saints (and it's not), that would not be good. Eventually our power will collapse, and the weakest will be hurt, alas.

OK, I'll get off my soapbox now.

As to the weight thing, I am slowly stumbling towards enlightenment. My big insight this month is that weight gain isn't the same thing as weight loss. Duh.

Thank you for your comment about my blog. It's just me experimenting on me, myself and I.

Melissa Mcewen said...

Paul, doesn't it worry that it brings your readers a mere two clicks to something like Roissy's site (Chateau Heartiste) where they can get these misogynist sex tips: "After you’ve shot your whey protein-boosted load across her chest, admire your handiwork for a bit, get up, grab a towel, and throw it in her face while saying 'You’d better clean yourself off, babe.' This is catnip to chicks. I don’t know why. Just run with it."

I think the average Christian would object to such a site as well.

Also please let us know what original health-related content people like Mangans and Nikoley bring to the table that you are so courageously linking to, besides them promoting your own site/book. I really doubt the Judeo-Christian leaders of yore would have associated with such people without at least denouncing their behavior. I don't recall people like Elijah treating Ahab with such deference or Moses the Pharoah. Forgiveness is a far cry from openly abetting.

Woodey said...

@Evelyn

HELLO,

I am doing really well and am in the middle of some big changes in my life. I am transferring from Washington State to Eastern Washington where I will major in Psychology. I'm eyeballing getting a Masters in criminal psych, but that can change. Also I have officially lost 60 lbs, 43 of it from Weight Watchers. I am so glad I decided to stop with weird diets and pseudo science based ideas on how to eat. All I have done is eat less and move more, as a result I have lost more weight in four months of Weight Watchers than I did in one year of Paelo/LC.

I see you are still dealing with the mutants who defend mutants, some things will never ever change. How dare you call out con men and people who try to make a buck off of well meaning people trying to get healthier. LOL the lunatics in the institutions are the ones who are the happiest.

I do remember reading some of your past posts on Jimmy and his weight, I am not surprised to hear he is lying about that now as well. As shown by Australia, people are still buying into his "gee whillickers" attitude. I am interested to know if there has been anything coming from the Tom "All scientists are liars unless they agree with me" Naughton camp in regards to this David Duke fiasco. No greater way to commit status suicide than to hang with a neo-nazi, ex KKK Wizard. Since Tom and Jimmy are pals it would be interesting to hear what he has said.

I'll keep you posted on how things are going and I will say it again, I thank you so much for the time and effort you put into this blog. It is very refreshing to have a place that is a voice of reason amidst all the rambling.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Copied from another thread for Charles Grashow:

http://evolutionarypsychiatry.blogspot.com/2012/01/glorious-cause.html?showComment=1326155087183#c4967345134944599625


"And yes, I removed Perfect Health Diet from the "Of Like Minds" list at the right (probably temporarily - depends on my mood) after one too many posts praising Dr. Mercola.

I can't do it. I can't have my blog linking to direct endorsements of frauds. Paul isn't an MD and is not in clinical practice. He can give clinical advice on his blog whereas I, as an MD, cannot due to ethical and legal obligations. He can feel free to consider the fringe of alternative medicine "on the same team" whereas I cannot. I can't be on the same time as quackery because I am one phone call away from the front lines of the gun-shy primary care doctors. I think Paul and Shou-Ching are amazing and thoughtful, but they never went through the humbling experience of clinical medicine training. As many times as we are right, we are wrong."

"Once doctors such as myself are linked with the lunatic fringe, we are done for. Credibility, critical thinking, and scientific evidence are harsh mistresses. I can have my little mistakes, but if I post anything showing major fallacies of critical thinking, I'm done for. As it should be. I'm a Harvard-trained physician, after all. There are certain expectations, even in my hobby of a blog.

I'll try not to be blinded by science. I'm not going to praise paleo for the sake of paleo (eat a g$$d%#@^ed banana already, and I don't have time to hunt and kill a boar).

Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. Life is good and only getting better without the processed food, without the seed oils. Let's protect it, nurture it, and not shove it out into the rocky shoals of the lunatic fringe too soon."

Boxoffice Babu Rao said...

latest

www.tollywoodpolitics.com

www.bollywoodindiaboxoffice.com

telugu

Anonymous said...

Neat blog! Is your theme custom made or did you download it from somewhere?
A design like yours with a few simple adjustements would really make my blog shine.
Please let me know where you got your theme. Kudos

Feel free to surf to my website: reputation management for doctors

Qamer Syed said...

nice your site thanks for sharing love you all team good work keep it up

WiFi Hacking

WiFi Hacker

Password Hacker

WiFi Hack Password

Qamer Syed said...

nice your site thanks for sharing love you all team good work keep it up

Hacking Softwares

Facebook Hacking

Password Hacker

Facebook Hack Password

Qamer Syed said...

nice your site thanks for sharing love you all team good work keep it up

Facebook Hacking Softwere

Facebook Password Hacker

Facebook Fan Page Likes

Hack Facebook Password

Anonymous said...

Jin is the name I enjoy be called with an individual can call me something you like.
Pennsylvania is release place I have been residing in and I have everything that
i need here. I work for a data processing officer having
mentioned that i have planned changing thought. What her friends her
love is to play handball but she can't make sure it
is her profession.

my blog; Mia Parking

Post a Comment

Moderation is currently on. Thanks in advance for your patience.

Found something helpful today? Please consider a small donation. Thank you!

Where to now?

align="middle" align="middle"

align="middle" align="middle" align="middle"