Paleo™ *IS* a Fad Diet

... or rather a collection of fad diets.

I remember back in 2009 when I found the LC online community and one of my wishes at the time.  Quite simply, I wanted to be able to tell my doc I was eating a very low carb diet most of the time and not have him/her gasp and presume I was eating caricaturistic Atkins.  You know -- pounds of bacon, steaks and butter on a stick (or by the stick).  Despite the prevalence of TWICHOO, there was (and is) a goodly sized body of scientific literature in support of low carb diets.  The problem with this body of work is that it doesn't answer the burning questions regarding whether the diet is healthy in maintenance over the long term.  I think the longest study on VLC was done by Dr. Eric Westman's group at Duke.  It involved diabetics following a VLC weight loss diet for 6 months.  

In the end one is left to look to observational studies on human diets and "success stories".  Here is where one finds dearth and delusion.  The observable human cultures consuming over 50% calories as fat are statistically zero, let alone upwards of that.  Those that are, such as the ubiquitous Inuit, genetic adaptations aside, also (a) inhabit a rough cold environment and (b) consume cold water mammals with a nutrient profile like nothing most of us consume. 

So when someone thinks LC, they are going to think Atkins.  And all that entails including knock-off diets like Protein Power and others that mostly come up with new gimmicks for why low carb works (when it does within limits).  There was a guy named Justin who used to go by the name Hogsfan at Jimmy's forum.  I remember arguing once about the image of Atkins as a fad diet and how that was misguided and he said something like that Atkins himself with his first book was responsible for that.  At the time my memory of reading Atkins for the first time over 10 years before had faded.  I've since re-acquired a copy of his 1972 book which was the one I remember reading.  Sure enough, though I had recalled some sensational claims, I was pretty shocked how over-the-top it was.  While he was ultimately a calorie guy (Yes he was!  He just claimed you peed them out as ketones) he loved to tell tales of folks eating thousands of calories of bacon and eggs and steaks and losing weight.  The bottom line of it all is that Atkins loved to play the renegade and fed off the sensationalism.  .... And profited handsomely.  

So Hogsfan was right and Atkins will FOREVER be a fad diet.  The latest ads like this one  aren't helping matters moving forward.  (Free Cherry pickin' Martini to the first commenter to point out the biggest wrong thing in that ad!).  And ... so too, will be Paleo™ (or Paleoish™).  The "big guns" are besides themselves over recent criticism from the scientific community, and one of the biggest complaints is that these scientists and such apparently haven't taken the time to educate themselves about Paleo™ by reading diet books.   Look ... PaleoFX is a couple weeks past, but c'mon.  Look at what came out of that gathering.  Pictures of plates of fatty meat along with the more questionable chocolate covered bacon and such, cooking demos from a zillion cook books, and a Victory Belt "booth" with a table that was about to collapse under the weight of all of those books.  

All of the books ... each on their own with some merit, but the biggest problem being that Paleo™ (and I include Primal in that) is not even the relative monolith that low carb is/was.  But you have your spartan fare paleo (Cordain/Paleoista/Wolf book) and then you have restrictive Practical Paleo and Sisson stuff (not represented at PFX because the man thought the last one was a fuck show  ← his words, not mine).  Eating Disorders are NOT paleo and yet they abound in this community and it is downright scary sickening at times.

But whatever it really is, however ill defined, Paleo™ has been "trademarked" and I don't mean by Loren Cordain.  I don't know if some of the people within "the movement" are capable of seeing it or not, but Paleo™ looks from the outside to be more faddish than Atkins if that is even possible.  I don't think that can change, but if there is any hope that it can, that is up to the movers and shakers to recognize and represent.  And respect ... respect the real science.   


Charles Grashow said…
Here's a 2 year study AND a 4 year follow-up (so we're talking about a 6 year diet study?
Weight Loss with a Low-Carbohydrate, Mediterranean, or Low-Fat Diet

This study of mostly men in Israel took place over a two-year period. The participants were overweight or mildly obese, with BMIs averaging around 30 to 31. They were divided into three groups and given fairly intensive counseling on how to help them follow one of the diets. All study participants worked in the same place, and the workplace cafeteria developed special menus for the three groups that corresponded to the diets they were put on. Offerings were color-coded to make following the assigned diet during the day easy.

The three groups followed one of the following diets:

1. Low Fat Diet: A calorie-restricted diet with a maximum of 30% of the calories coming from fat, 10% from saturated fat, and 300 mg of cholesterol daily. "The participants were counseled to consume low-fat grains, vegetables, fruits, and legumes, and to limit their consumption of additional fats, sweets, and high-fat snacks."

2. Mediterranean Diet: A calorie-restricted diet with a goal of a maximum of 35% of the calories from fat, including 2 to 3 tablespoons of olive oil and a few nuts each day. The diet was to be "rich in vegetables and low in red meat, with poultry and fish replacing beef and lamb."

3. Low-Carb Diet: Based on the Atkins Diet, it began at 20 grams of carbohydrate per day, gradually increasing to 120 grams per day "to maintain weight loss." Calories, fat, and protein were not restricted. "However, the participants were counseled to choose vegetarian sources of fat and protein and to avoid trans fat."

Of those who finished the 2-year study, the low-carb diet edged out the other two diets, with a sustained average 12 lb. loss compared to 10 lbs. for the Mediterranean diet and 7 lbs. for the low-fat diet. Although the vast majority (86%) of the participants were men, the women had more weight loss on the Mediterranean diet.
Four-Year Follow-up after Two-Year Dietary Interventions

At 2 years, the adherence rate was 85%, with evidence of distinct dietary patterns in the three diet groups. After 2 years,1 the mean weight loss was 2.9 kg in the low-fat group, 4.4 kg in the Mediterranean group, and 4.7 kg in the low-carbohydrate group. In addition, we found that there was a significant diet-induced regression in volume in the carotid-vessel wall.4 After the 2-year intervention was completed, we followed the participants for 4 more years

We next performed an intention-to-treat analysis across the assigned diets, with 4-year follow-up among 259 participants (80.4% of the original group and 95.2% of those who had completed the 2-year trial). At 6 years after study initiation, 67% of the participants had continued with their originally assigned diet, 11% had switched to another diet, and 22% were not dieting (P=0.36 for all comparisons). During this follow-up period, participants had regained 2.7 kg of weight lost in the low-fat group, 1.4 kg in the Mediterranean group, and 4.1 kg in the low-carbohydrate group (P=0.004 for all comparisons).

The groups were further apart at the 2-year mark, with the low-carb group sustaining an average of 12 pounds lost at that point (10 for the Mediterranean group, 7 for the low-fat group). By the six-year point, those group retained 3.7, 6.8, and 1.3 lost pounds respectively.
Charles Grashow said…
Low-Carbohydrate Diets and All-Cause Mortality: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies


Low-carbohydrate diets were associated with a significantly higher risk of all-cause mortality and they were not significantly associated with a risk of CVD mortality and incidence. However, this analysis is based on limited observational studies and large-scale trials on the complex interactions between low-carbohydrate diets and long-term outcomes are needed
Nigel Kinbrum said…
"23 pounds in just 6 weeks." Did she have a limb amputated? She wasn't that heavy to start with. Or was it £23 she lost? ;-p
Maybe Dr Bernstein could provide some data about whether VLC is sustainable. I would think that if type 1 diabetics can maintain such a diet, then people with more normal metabolisms should be able to do it IF THEY WANT TO.
Sorry, my caps key got stuck just then.
Just a hunch but, if you are told to do something by a doctor, something that it hadn't occurred to you to do for yourself, and that you had no real desire to do before, you are not going to see as good an outcome as if you had decided to do that thing for yourself.
Nigel Kinbrum said…
Do people with "normal" (whatever that means) metabolisms need to eat VLC? Sedentary people almost certainly benefit from eating LC.
Anonymous said…
Have you ever considered about including a little
bit more than just your articles? I mean, what you say is valuable and all.
However imagine if you added some great graphics or videos to give your
posts more, "pop"! Your content is excellent but with pics and clips,
this blog could undeniably be one of the very best in its field.
Wonderful blog!

my web-site - Get More Info
carbsane said…
Relevance here? I didn't question sustainability and surely those with powerful motivation (irreversible beta cell destruction) certainly would be more inclined to such a diet. I've seen Bernstein, he looks to be practicing some degree of calorie control as well. IAC, this does not speak to whether such a diet is prudent for those with functioning pancreata who want to maintain that function.

As to your hunch, then we don't want LC to go mainstream, eh?
carbsane said…
This notion that sedentary shouldn't eat carbs seems misguided to me. I do think overall intake and a mixed diet is not so good for the sedentary. But a Fuhrman style diet should do very well for a sedentary person I would think.
markgillespie said…
Yes, it's a bit cheeky to have her claiming that weight loss while having very small print at the bottom of the screen saying 1-2 lbs per week is more typical, and even that depends on what you eat and how much exercise you do!
carbsane said…
Charles, do you even read this blog? I've posted about this Shai study many times.

Even the original study wasn't so low carb after around 6 months (according to self report) .
Nigel Kinbrum said…
I just re-watched the video full screen and only then noticed the tiny white writing on a mixed background (including white objects) that was there for 6 seconds.
Nigel Kinbrum said…
I'm not suggesting that sedentary people shouldn't eat carbs at all (that's VLC). "Real food" carbs aren't a problem for sedentary "normal" people.
Radhakrishna Warrier said…
"Comments and Reactions". What is a reaction? Is it a reply to a comment?

carbsane said…
I think it's when someone tweets or shares a post. But I do like the "voting" on comments.
carbsane said…
I'll reword -- I think a case could be made for the sedentary to restrict fat more than restricting carbs.
Anonymous said…
What's Taking place i am new to this, I stumbled upon this I've
discovered It positively useful and it has aided me out loads.
I am hoping to contribute & help other users like its helped me.
Good job.

My blog: Visit This Link
Nigel Kinbrum said…
You'll have to prise the cheese from my cold, dead hands! :-D
I have discussed this with Nigel on his blog. Going by this notion, even the very fit folk--during rest days--would be burning mostly fat.

What I am not sure of, however, is whether that means dietary fat would be the more appropriate fuel. There's plenty of success stories in the high carbohydrate-low fat camps. Not to mention, with the Peat-inspired movement that has taken momentum in recent years, there's a case being built for an oxidative metabolism that would stave off what they consider the 'stress' elements of relying on fat for fuel.
Charles Grashow said…

So - if Atkins, Paleo, etc are ALL fads AND you continually bash AH then WHY are you presenting at the next AHC??

You will be interacting with people who - from the e-mails - really do not like you. Your photo will be plastered over the web and you will be mocked and made fun of.

SO - why go?
desmondindalkey said…
"Smoke gets in your eyes"
desmondindalkey said…
Paleo TM is among other foods is anti-legume

Ancestral - theoretically - would include pre-1900 peas & beans.

My guess is Evelyn might do a Matt LaLonde.

(Just please excoriate soy, except for fermented.)
LWC said…
Did you watch the debate between T. Colin Campbell and Westman? In it at one point Westman notes (at least I think he did, it was said almost as an aside and pretty quickly) that long term very low carb diets can be "tricky" to manage, but that it can be done. He didn't say what was tricky about it.

As for Paleo diets, eliminating grains and legumes eliminates every major cuisine. That's quite a dietary hairshirt to don. Even low carbers can have a traditional meal (Italian, French, Chinese, Mexican, Japanese, Spanish, Russian, whatever) if they count those carbs in their daily total. Counting isn't the same as eliminating. (I was a very bad low carber for a very short period of time a very long time ago.)

To justify the paleo pain and deprivation, the perceived dangers have to be extreme. Grains and legumes can't just be calorie dense or high in carbs, they have to be seen as damaging or even poisonous to humans. And the science doesn't support that. (I have never followed any version of paleo.)
Charles Grashow said…
Here's the video

Or this link
Charles Grashow said…
Yes I read your blog but DO NOT EXPECT ME TO REMEMBER a post from 2010

Take a chill pill
Amy Klimt said…
Just curious what you mean by "restrictive" with regards to Practical Paleo vs some of the other books. To me, that one comes across as less neurosis-inducing than a lot of the others.
Anonymous said…
Great post.

Feel free to surf to my weblog Air Jordan
Anonymous said…
This excellent website certainly has all the info I
wanted concerning this subject and didn't know who to ask.

Check out my blog post: black labrador golden retriever mix
carbsane said… This sounds restrictive. I've been reading Diane's stuff on FB here and there and when fruit is considered cheating to me that's neurotic. I also wonder how many 21 day sugar detoxes (implying that sugar is toxic) one must do per year.
carbsane said…
Haven't had a chance yet. I'm not really interested in vegan vs. LC.

"As for Paleo diets, eliminating grains and legumes eliminates every major cuisine. That's quite a dietary hairshirt to don. Even low carbers can have a traditional meal (Italian, French, Chinese, Mexican, Japanese, Spanish, Russian, whatever) if they count those carbs in their daily total. Counting isn't the same as eliminating. (I was a very bad low carber for a very short period of time a very long time ago.)"

Good point though some will say that the 80/20 rule covers that. Which is to say all of this stuff will kill you but not if you eat it only one week out of every month ;-)
carbsane said…
Charles, AHS is NOT Paleo™ ... though it is interesting how the paleos are trying to co-opt that label even though it sounds less cool. Ancestral does not even denote an evolutionary perspective per se.

You probably need a little less of listening to the made up stories of some bloggers with their value judgments, overstated importance and name dropping. They don't know what AHS is about. I have criticized the organization but the reason I submitted my topic was to contribute to the goals of that organization in the past and those have been valid criticisms. They have a difficult task to try to embrace the science and incorporate, for lack of a better word, enough celebrity to maintain their purpose of keeping it lay-friendly and to draw the audience. That's not easy. I'm not sure it can even be done. My topic is specifically ancestral health related. It need not have a TM slapped on it, but to a one, the paleo diets brand legumes as not only "not paleo", but toxic and to be avoided. I won't specifically be addressing that , rather focusing on the positives or rather role and value of legumes to humans around the globe (and back tens of thousands of years).

" Your photo will be plastered over the web and you will be mocked and made fun of."

Why Charles? And what would this say about those who do?

As to who likes me or not, that's irrelevant as well, though there are significantly fewer people that I look forward to meeting as a result of the past few months. But Robb Wolf and Mark Sisson are not AHS. Still, yeah, it is a consideration to spend my money and time to travel to a conference for a 20 minute speech when there will be few opportunities to socialize with folks I want to be around. We'll see.
Charles Grashow said…

You are not listed as a presenter - what's up with that?
Charles Grashow said…
Please delete my previous comment - you are listed - my bad
Nigel Kinbrum said…
Rice, brown, long-grain, cooked is a whole grain and contains "only" 21g of carbs per 100g (after subtracting the fibre).

It's too carby for induction, but it can fit into the carb allowance for OWL & maintenance.
John Smith said…
Paleo is as dead as fried chicken, which is very disappointing because I never did manage to sell any ebooks and nobody ever hired me to be their Life Coach.

I almost sold a copy of my ebook "Better Health By Drinking Urine" but the would-be purchaser demanded a refund because he had incorrectly assumed that the book would be about drinking your OWN urine.

My game plan is to wait for the next fad diet to spring up, change the titles to my 39 ebooks, and see if they are a better fit. It took me almost a day and a half to write them all up so I am hesitant to abandon my "sweat equity" in them.
Haliah said…
Quoting Evelyn: "Still, yeah, it is a consideration to spend my money and time to travel to a conference for a 20 minute speech when there will be few opportunities to socialize with folks I want to be around. We'll see."

Hey Evelyn,

I read your blog often, but am not a commenter, but had to post something here after reading this. If you think you may back out, you should probably do that today. Honestly, speakers should not accept an engagement - which takes away slots from other potential speakers - if they don't plan on attending an event. It's irresponsible, and it will undermine your credibility.

Also, there are people who have bought tickets to the event - such as myself - and who will be buying airfare and a hotel room for their stay, who made such plans because of speakers they want to see. When speakers bail because they change their mind on whether the venue is "worth it," then they are letting down not only potential speakers who could have filled that slot, but every person who bought a ticket to hear that speaker.

I have spent years helping a particular institution organize conferences, and every once in a while, someone backs out because they decide it isn't "worth it." I can tell you that it is a huge headache for organizers, who end up having to refund money and write personal letters to disappointed attendees. Why any invited, and accepted and then advertised speaker would even consider this as a valid path boggles my mind.

I am not a hater, nor am I a follower. Of anyone, for that matter. I enjoy many blogs that deal with things related to "ancestral" health and diet, and I do eat and enjoy legumes, and wanted to attend your talk. If you aren't going to present, you should let the organizers know today so that they can fill your slot with another speaker.

Every time I spend money to hear someone, and then find out they didn't think the audience was "worth it," it tells me that the speaker didn't value me, and the rest of the audience, as an interested and educated listener. You sent in the proposal. You accepted the invitation. To not show up because you are having second thoughts is immature, irresponsible, and a waste of other people's resources and time.

I did. Well, actually, I thought it was a dead give away and that Atkins has never really been anti-grains or whatever, just about a cap on carbohydrates.
H. Marks said…
Did I miss something? I thought Charles was a CS supporter. Strange world we live in...
Anonymous said…
Yesterday, while I was at work, my cousin stole my apple ipad and
tested to see if it can survive a twenty five foot
drop, just so she can be a youtube sensation. My iPad is now broken and she has 83
views. I know this is completely off topic but I had to
share it with someone!

Here is my webpage: Recommended Site
Sanjeev Sharma said…
he probably has points of agreement and disagreement. That's mostly a good thing - it's how scientific consensus building works for EG.

As long as we stay civil, 'sall good.
Sanjeev Sharma said…
didn't work out too well at Slashdot. I've forgotten specifics but voting can be gamed severely.
Carson's Corner said…
I support Evelyn always and enjoy this site but I never, ever thought she would follow through with this. I felt from the time she announced it that she would ultimately withdraw.
Carson's Corner said…
As you've now seen, she is listed. But I do see that Robb Wolf is listed and only has a bachelor's degree. Not poo-pooing that per se but he tries to present himself as a man of science. Gotta have a bit more than an undergraduate degree if you're going to hold yourself out as an academic, Robb.
Anonymous said…
Thanks for the good writeup. It in truth was a enjoyment account it.
Glance complicated to more introduced agreeable from you!

However, how can we keep up a correspondence?

Also visit my homepage: great english golden retriever breeders information
Anonymous said…
I blog often and I genuinely appreciate your information.
This article has really peaked my interest. I will book
mark your site and keep checking for new information about
once per week. I subscribed to your Feed too.

Here is my website ... visit for goldendoodle dogs facts
Anonymous said…
Hey just wanted to give you a quick heads up.
The words in your post seem to be running off the screen
in Ie. I'm not sure if this is a format issue or something to do with internet browser compatibility but I figured I'd post to let
you know. The style and design look great though! Hope
you get the problem solved soon. Thanks

Look at my weblog ... more helpful hints
Bris vegas said…
"...However, this analysis is based on limited observational studies and large-scale trials on the complex interactions between low-carbohydrate diets and long-term outcomes are needed."

In other words an opinion not supported by facts.
Bris vegas said…
A US bachelors degree is a complete and utter joke. The quality and depth of learning is absolutely trivial.

The US awards doctorates for degrees (eg medicine, dentistry, and pharmacy) that are considered to be undergraduate degrees everywhere else.
ajdunbar said…
I once lived in a suburb with thousands of elderly Greeks who had migrated to Australia in the 50s and 60s. The shops were full of traditional Greek foods. These Greeks had gardens and ate a traditional Mediterranean Diet.

You would assume that these elderly Greek people were robust and healthy. Nothing could be further from the truth. The obesity rate was close to 100% for the women. There were hardly any old Greek men at all.

It is obvious to a casual observer that the Mediterranean Diet is a myth. It only works where people have a limited food supply and are very physically active (eg 1950s Crete). Otherwise it just creates fat unhealthy people.
ajdunbar said…
"The Eat-Like-You’re-Poor-But-Not-21st-Century-Poor,
Poor-Like-In-Early-to-Mid-20th-Century-Greece Diet sure doesn’t have the
same bestseller potential as the “Mediterranean Diet,’ does it? As NPR
quips: These days, you have to be wealthy to eat like a Mediterranean
peasant. Hmm, the Peasant Diet; is that copyrighted yet? …"

Read more:
carbsane said…
@Haliah, I am in contact with the AHS folks regarding this unique situation, and that is all I will say about that. To you as an attendee I would say this: AHS is not like other conferences you've attended. Before it became clear I would be unable to attend last year, I faced the possibility of not being able to make the entire conference. As such, I was checking the schedule to see if it would be still worth my while if I had to miss the first day and/or leave on Saturday -- I had certain talks in mind to attend. The tentative schedule was missing quite a few names and had new ones vs. the speakers listed back when I purchased my ticket in March, and changed significantly in the final weeks. As did topic titles. There are some presenters this year who still do not have topics listed, I don't know what's up with that. One of the organizers himself backed out of AHS12 fairly late in the game, though he was able to substitute a colleague in his place. If you go to the program site today, they say there is a possibility of Friday night sessions. Us presenters were not informed of this when we submitted proposals by Jan 15 and were given only around a week to confirm in March. So there's a lot of fluidity with this organization. The only compensation presenters receive is the presenters' dinner and admission to the conference. This and a largely volunteer staff keeps costs to attendees down but I'm sure it factors in to this fluidity. I suspect that this is ONE of the reasons PaleoFX did not sell out until the very end, and even then Mat Lalonde had to back out at the last minute. I've not heard of any widespread requests for refunds and such or backlash as a result. This is all publicly available information upon which all should base their decisions on whether to attend the symposium.

@carson's corner: You don't know me.
Anonymous said…
I every time spent my half an hour to read this weblog's articles daily along with a mug of coffee.

Feel free to surf to my homepage - クロエ財布
James Meade said…
You're a nutter, Grashow. Actually, you're a troll.
H. Marks said…
Well it's a fairly major defection, so that's why I asked...
Pochy said…
I am sorry for leaving that stupid comment on your latest post but i admire you. America has great schools, you just need to know where to look. Also, to blog blog. Americans have to learn Biology or Chemistry as an undergraduate before you learn medicine. And Medical Education in the UNited states is not the cesspool the europeans think it is.
carbsane said…
I'm not sure about your other comment if it was edited, etc. I don't agree with all of it but it's not stupid (or did I miss something?).

Kurt Harris (an MD) and I are around the same age (he's a few years older). I was surprised to learn from him in a discussion we had how many MD's didn't come from science backgrounds. As a bio major there was always the presumption I was pre-med and most bio majors at my school were -- many chem majors too. At that time you really didn't see many engineers, physicists or totally unrelated majors getting into med schools (or apparently so I thought). But GPA ruled and that GPA from a more rigorous university in a competitive major was important. The admissions for med school are quite lax nowadays compared to late 80's early 90's. Not good, IMO.
Lol. The Europeans think stuff and only Americans know this stuff? Wow. I should totally refer to my buddies across the pond to tell me what I am thinking. I once resided there and its culture was a strong part of my upbringing, so does that mean I can also pre-cognate for Europeans?

I can sympaathise with every reason to feel outraged when stupid comments like the one by Bris vegas are made. However, becoming so defensive to the point where one reciprocates another individual's generalisation with an equally baffling generalisation, pretty much sabotages any credible ground altogether.
@Pochy Lol. The Europeans think stuff and only Americans know this stuff? Wow. I should totally refer to my buddies across the pond to tell me what I am thinking. I once resided there and its culture was a strong part of my upbringing, so does that mean I can also pre-cognate for Europeans?

I can sympaathise with every reason to feel outraged when stupid comments like the one by Bris vegas are made. However, becoming so defensive to the point where one reciprocates another individual's generalisation with an equally baffling generalisation, pretty much sabotages any credible ground altogether.
Pochy said…
I'm not saying BongBong is wrong. I think BS/MD programs are a great way to learn medicine from American Universities. I think Europeans are generally better educated but not necessarily better doctors.
Well, I am saying that the moment someone collectivises the way he does, they become the farthest thing from right. I like good doctors. I've seen good doctors from every corner of this ball of mud, it spares me the nonsense of looking for a doctor based on nationality when I can just identify a good doctor. I don't enjoy people who employ intellectually crippled generalisations as a compensation for educated discretion and discrimination, I've seen these types who are keen to just paint its all with the same brush from every corner on the same ball of mud. Collectivisation never works wonders when it comes to these kind of topics, and I'd rather not legitimise it by trying to argue false dichotomies with someone making such empty statements.
Pochy said…
I know it doesn't. I am not saying UK Doctors Bad or US Doctors Good. In fact, i am angry at the Ultra Protectionist system known as American Medicine. I did not mean to generalize, i am sorry.
Pochy said…
I like some of Kurt Harris' ideas and demeanor. I just don;t like it when they blame people like Keys and Stamler without reading their biographies or their works. Its a sad state when American Medical Schools are now claiming that GPA's are becoming less important and the "Whole" applicant is more important. Its just a marketing ploy to make sure America gets more doctors. I hope Medical Students become MUCH MORE SCIENCE-Based. Thats why i like 5- year programs like Harvard New Path and Harvard Health, Science and Technology. Or Research Fellowships.
Pochy said…
Do you mind if i email you?
carbsane said…
Email me any time -- carbsane at gmail dot com. I didn't see the original comment.
That is rather decent of you, especially when I consider the general internet backdrop of trolling and fighting, which would be my generalisation and intellectual transgression to bear. I had a bit of a strong response to the whole matter because similar nonsense has sprung up in the past. Having that said, do I regret some of the fervour on my part, so I hope that there are no hard feelings. Cheers.
carbsane said…
Thank You Sanjeev!
carbsane said…
He has earned himself the second ever ban here at the Asylum. The first being Razwell.

I'm not going to tolerate internet trolls who post one thing here and then trash me elsewhere. Don't have the time for those types of games.
Haliah said…
Hi Evelyn,

What I don't understand from your comment is why you applied to speak this year since you have so many issues with how it was run last year? Presumably you understood that you wouldn't be offered compensation for your presentation? That's not out of line with these kind of organizations and events. Speakers usually feel that they are getting a good value, payment enough one might say, for the exposure to their work and the media they receive for being a speaker.

I've organized several conferences of about the same size - and quite a few much larger - and though many of these events were of the same "payment is in the form of exposure" type, we didn't have speakers back out excepting in a small handful of cases, most of which were due to bona fide emergencies. The very small number of speakers who bailed because they didn't feel like attending can be counted on less than the number of fingers on one hand, and all of those people lost out on more than airfare and hotel and time due to their behavior and the ill will it generated, I'm willing to bet.

I don't recall last year's AHS schedule changing in the ways you suggest. I couldn't attend as I had a prior commitment (event I was coordinating over the same week/end), but wanted to go. I don't recall such an exodus of big names and replacement speakers. Can you remind me of who bailed?

carbsane said…
Hi again,

In regards to your last paragraph, since I was keeping tabs on the speakers/schedule last year I noticed the last minute shuffling and changing. It was over a year ago now but Lucas Tafur comes to mind as he was someone I was interested in going to see. Brent Pottenger himself bailed sometime in July or maybe June. There were others. I recall that Nora's talk title changed as did, if I'm not mistaken Stephan's and maybe LaLonde's. There had to be more that bailed because of time slots that opened up I just don't know who everyone is so the names didn't register, same for talk topic switches. Taubes and Attia were late editions to share 40 min and ended up with 40 min a piece. The Latin Outreach panel was shifted to a less favorable slot and was down a participant or two. As it turned out, they never formally disinvited Kruse so he backed out before that came down leaving a vacancy (and more balance) for Kresser on the Safe Starches panel.

Regardless of what various people want to believe, there was one reason only for my not attending AHS12 - my husband switched jobs, a development unforeseen until May and would not be able to attend. Lapse in employment and bennies factored into financial considerations in addition to safety concerns. Some people are utterly ridiculous thinking that just because anyone blogs they are somehow obligated to spend $1K and upwards to attend these events. I sold my ticket at cost and refunded any donations that were specific to attending AHS.

As to the rest, I will be posting shortly in answer to your questions here and to set the record straight on other wild and grossly inaccurate speculations vis a vis presenting at this year's conference (not you). In addition to this situation there are other developments on that front that factor into an ultimate decision and the organizers well understand the extenuating circumstances involved here and have expressed their desire and hope that I will still be able to attend and present. My decision will be a considered one and and not just based on not feeling like going, I can assure you that.
Anonymous said…
Thank you, I've recently been looking for info about this topic for a while and yours is the best I have found out till now. But, what in regards to the bottom line? Are you positive in regards to the supply?

Here is my blog post; diets that work fast for women
Jonathan Doe said…
I noticed that you stated that you were low-carb "most of the time". Did you occasionally binge on sweets and then blame your failure on the low-carb diet?
carbsane said…
No. Binge is something I haven't done since my 20's. I ate VLC at the time as my default diet and just ate normally on vacations or a nice dinner out, etc. I didn't gain weight doing so, and often found my clothing loser a day or so after. Chronic low carb really tanks my metabolism. Seems that's more the norm than the exception.
Anonymous said…
bookmarked!!, I really like your web site!

My web page ... diet plans that work fast
Diana Moon said…
OK, your perspective. Paleo is a term of art, it's not something that anyone owns exclusively.

Dr. Melvin Konner (one of the originators of Paleo) is not a fraud, and I'm sure that anyone can have a spirited discussion with him as to what Paleo is, that as a scientist he would moderate his views given solid evidence. Why don't you check out his blog? He doesn't blog often but he has one, and he responds to comments. He would be a great person to discuss these issues with.

Paleo is not the same thing as low carb, or is it now, low protein/low carb, having gone back to the Kekwick origins. It's a starting point to think about how people can optimize health, not a religion (to me, I realize that it is, to some). And that's where I bow out.
carbsane said…
Hi Diana, note the TM there because I'm speaking specifically to what has become of that diet with all the various books, cook books, blogger variations, etc. Here is his 1985 paper:
jeffH said…
I didn't even know what a paleo diet was before today. But it closely resembles my diet. And it is a result of my years worth of research and just understanding how the body works. We were meant to eat meat and vegetables. This doesn't mean eat bacon. Anything processed at all is poison. The only exception is a cow being butchered, thus processed at a meat packer. But I am normally referring to store bought foods that are processed. CLEAN MEAT and vegetables are what we were meant to eat. Grains are always used processed. Flour is a drug just like sugar. The body sees it that way and hates it. Veggies are full of the right kind of carbs. So are fruit. provided its heirloom variety.