When it comes to the diet issue, I still see no reason to trust you (Tenet) over the many books I've read on the topic and my personal experience. I've known lots of extremely healthy raw food vegans. I know this is a major controversy and I'm comfortable with taking a side. Most of your refutations I've heard refutations for. Bottom line is that there's a controversy, a difference of opinion. My views on raw food veganism were not conventional. Your views on "listen to your body" are also not conventional. We both have/had extreme views and both views have incomplete evidence. They are both theories waiting for better confirmation. They're both pioneering. You have the mental complex distortion indicating that my views will kill people. I have a mental complex distortion indicating that your views will kill people (listen to your body for most people means eating cake and cheetos for breakfast).
Ultimately, I don't really want to spend a lot of energy trying to resolve the "what to eat" question and I do want to leave it to the science experts. Hence, me dropping out of this debate. However! I'm happy to let my previous arguments stand. If they are refuted, so be it. Let people decide on their own. I was presenting a point of view, let it stand or fall on its own merits.
There are people who blindly obey crazy people on message boards. My moral position is that those people are responsible for their own health even if I make a passionate argument telling them to drink antifreeze. Maybe people like me should be locked up. If you lobbied the government to criminalize the promotion of fad diets I might support you. But I think your fad diet would probably get the axe as well. How do you respond to Gary Taubes? You seem strangely confident for someone who is theoretically attached to observable facts. The field is nutrition is nothing if not controversial.
Ultimately, I don't really want to spend a lot of energy trying to resolve the "what to eat" question and I do want to leave it to the science experts. Hence, me dropping out of this debate. However! I'm happy to let my previous arguments stand. If they are refuted, so be it. Let people decide on their own. I was presenting a point of view, let it stand or fall on its own merits.
There are people who blindly obey crazy people on message boards. My moral position is that those people are responsible for their own health even if I make a passionate argument telling them to drink antifreeze. Maybe people like me should be locked up. If you lobbied the government to criminalize the promotion of fad diets I might support you. But I think your fad diet would probably get the axe as well. How do you respond to Gary Taubes? You seem strangely confident for someone who is theoretically attached to observable facts. The field is nutrition is nothing if not controversial.