other sites like examine.com??

I would not really recommend this site. They are prime examples of what I call "pseudoskeptics".

They parade themselves around as skeptics, but fall to just as many fallacies, myths, and pseudoscience as any of us.

Since they employ different writers, they even contradict themselves, such as in the case of sodium limits.

 

I think their fallability is especially apparent when they nitpick Why We Get Fat from Gary Taubes.

They start with the CICO hypothesis for which there are dozens of counterexamples, the simplest being protein calories of course.

They claim that low carb merely decreases appetite, even though we know you lose calories from excreted ketones, and heat from thermogenesis, and low carb has many beneficial metabolic effects.

They refer to the sodium limits, which are flawed in the first place, and not applicable to diuretic diets such as keto.

They fucking argue from The China Study, Campbell's non-peer reviewed opinion piece, of all things.

They argue from studies on epileptic children, even though we know those are flawed because of the confounding influence of anticonvulsants, and the processed, formulaic, highly flawed nature of the diet they eat.

They quote that stupid mortality study that was debunked over and over again.

They recommend a "moderate" diet, even though we know carbohydrates and fat interfere with each others' metabolism, and you have to choose one.

They recommend to choose low calorie density foods, even though only the diet as whole matters, caloric density is irrelevant.

In short, by trying so hard to paint Taubes' hypothesis as pseudoscience, they engage in and spread at least EIGHT pieces of fallacy, myth, or pseudoscience. They never ever evaluate their own arguments with skepticisim.

 

Pseudoskeptics plain and simple.

/r/nutrition Thread Parent