IB-BWBS ~ It can kill you!

-
No ...

This is not some new version of irritable bowel syndrome.

IB-BWBS stands for:

Intellectual Bullying - aka - Baffling With Bull Shit

It can kill you.  How?  Because you'll follow down a path that someone "smarter" than you leads you ... ignoring your common sense.

Don't do it!!!

Comments

Thomas said…
@carbsane

Amen to that! Care to give any examples? I think some of the bloggers with M.D. after their names might be on the list (not all, by the way). Certainly a medical degree qualifies one to lead the way on diet recommendations, right?
May 29, 2011 at 6:00 PM
Mavis said…
Very true. I try to glean what may be useful for me from the small part of the health blogosphere I travel in, but I don't take anyone's word as gospel. I've learned during the past two years that it takes trial and error and a lot of self-observation to find what works best for you, even if people apparently facing similar challenges say that what works for you will bring you to ruin. A good rule of thumb is, the more strident and absolutist the blogger is about their favored program, the less worthy they are of my attention.
May 29, 2011 at 10:31 PM
CarbSane said…
@Thomas: That was just a general comment having read a number of recent postings/comments that set off my BS detector.

When I hear things like how complicated this is or the obnoxious "you don't understand", it irks me.

But, speaking of MD's, I do find it ironic how many on the internet apparently know it all while blasting other doctors for being misguided.
May 30, 2011 at 5:37 AM
Thomas said…
I respect those with higher degrees but don't find them infallible or more worthy than many others. The degree (any higher degree, really) can also be used to beat the less educated "little people" over the head with, which I find interesting as these "little people" are often more well rounded and happier overall (just my experience). I do respect those who have the courage to say they may be wrong or that they don't know or that are able to change their minds afters upon further evidence.
May 30, 2011 at 11:22 AM
Thomas said…
I just have to add this, which may draw a little criticism from others. I find it hard to stomach those who claimed to be well educated in science (higher degree or otherwise), making fun of or putting down people of faith. Again the latter seem to be much more well rounded and happier in the areas of life that count (having a flat stomach or the strict adherence to a LC or paleo diet NOT being one of them). Faith is an easy target for those who claim to be "evidence based" or "science based", but the "scientist" often has a hard time seeing just how much faith they are practicing, especially in the world or health and nutrition.
May 30, 2011 at 11:36 AM
Anonymous said…
I so wish I had a good BS detecter, I'm learning by trial and error for sure!
May 30, 2011 at 12:47 PM
Mirrorball said…
I think it's funny how a lot people worship MDs and PhDs when they preach their own nutritional dogmas, but other scientists are beneath comtempt, because they haven't realised the obvious truth yet. Their studies are always stupid, obviously so, even though all they know about the study they learned from a newspaper article -- and we know journalists never dumb down or change the information, oh no -- or in rare cases an abstract. On a certain message board, people are trashing this article:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/05/110526204953.htm
because they have assumed it's only about small, dense LDL being bad for you. I've been trying to hold my tongue but it's getting difficult.
May 30, 2011 at 1:28 PM
Sanjeev said…
interesting reading:

http://gordoncook.net/wp/?p=321

There's been a similar criticism in psychiatry, initiated by Paul Meehl's 1954 study (results replicated many times to this day) showing mechanical diagnosis is far more accurate & reliable.

does this sound familiar for long time readers?

"he would be the first that gained weight ... ". Way to base diagnosis & treatment on non-science dude: clinician bias, self-selection bias, confirmation bias.

> physicians are not educated to connect patient data with medical knowledge safely and effectively. Rather than building that secure foundation for decisions, physicians are educated to do the opposite
May 30, 2011 at 2:47 PM
Sanjeev said…
On a certain message board, people are trashing this article:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/05/110526204953.htm

_______________
Why would they trash it, doesn't it support their long held "big fluffy LDL is good, small dense LDL is bad" idea?

Surely they should be dissing the "study cancelled early because niacin for raising HDL does harm" linked earlier ...
May 30, 2011 at 3:13 PM
Mavis said…
Some blogs are trashing that article about the small, exceptionally sticky LDL, while others are using it to confirm their prior assertions. It all depends on your angle.

"Contrarian" blogs and mainstream medicine and research suffer from a lot of the same problems in terms of ego, bias, groupthink, and so on.

As someone without the time, training, or energy to sift through all the research myself, again, after reading and understanding what I can, I have to fall back on what seems to work for myself. I think I have as much chance of being right that way as Dr. Oz, Dr. Ornish, Dr. Atkins, Dr. Davis, Dr. Harris, or anyone else out there. If Dr. Oz ends up with polyps in his colon and Jimmy Moore can't keep weight off, who the hell knows why? Maybe it's their diet, maybe not. Each is a sample of one, like me.
May 30, 2011 at 4:07 PM
Mirrorball said…
They are trashing that article because they think it's not a new discovery at all, as if the researchers were too stupid to know the results of previous research.

I see a lot of this 'Scientists that don't conclude carbs are evil are stupid' attitude and it really pisses me off. I'm a scientist. :P
May 30, 2011 at 4:50 PM
TCO348 said…
Yeah, people always think that scientists are so stupid they've overlooked something obvious. That annoys the hell out of me. I'm not a scientist but if I read about some research that seems to contradict what I know or seems to overlook something obvious I assume that I'm missing something and I'm almost always right about that.
May 30, 2011 at 9:14 PM

Post a Comment

Comment Moderation is ON ... I will NOT be routinely reviewing or publishing comments at this time..