The Carb-Sane Asylum

. Lori H. Barrett original Perhaps we should chip in and buy the print for Nina Teicholz? I recently noted yet another "error" made by Nina Teicholz, author of The Big Fat Surprise .  This time it was in an editorial in the New York Times , unsurprisingly blasting the report of the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee. As much as I am no big fan of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, CSPI, their  Executive Director Michael F. Jacobson  wrote an article in response to this same editorial for the Huffington Post.  It has been pretty widely shared and well received:   Distorting Nutrition Facts to Generate Buzz

Part I : Discussed the reporting and makeup of the study diets in Shai et.al.  Bottom line, if intake reports are to be believed, the "high fat" group in this study DEcreased absolute fat intake by a few grams to 70% of baseline intake depending on the reporting used. The study:    Weight Loss with a Low-Carbohydrate, Mediterranean, or Low-Fat Diet Nina Teicholz on Nightline,  link to full story Will the Real Applicable Clinical Trial Please Stand Up! In this installment I am going to discuss how Nina Teicholz couches the Shai study and then dismisses another study for reasons that apply equally, if not moreso, to her favored example.  Keep in mind that both in The Big Fat Surprise , and in her media blitz promoting the book, Teicholz makes reference to Keys' bad science contrasted by the definitive, conclusive, rigorously controlled clinical studies from the past decade.