Why Nutrition Is So Confusing - NYTimes.com
Gary Taubes has published more of his confusion about science and nutrition in the New York Times. I don't have time to dissect the entire article so I settled on exposing his most glaring fallacy in my letter to the editors, which I reproduce below.
Dear Ms. Abramson and Mr. Baquet,
If put in your positions, I would refuse to publish anything written by Gary Taubes, including his recent piece “Why Nutrition Is So Confusing.”
Taubes writes: " If we understand these disorders so well, why have we failed so miserably to prevent them?" He displays here his typical use of fallacies and misleading rhetoric. The "we" who do understand these disorders well is not responsible for what people eat on a daily basis. "We" certainly understand how to prevent most cases of lung cancer, but those of us who understand can't prevent people from smoking tobacco every day. "We" certainly also understand how to prevent obesity and T2 diabetes, but those of us who understand it don't have any control over the dietary habits of the majority. An abundance of converging laboratory, clinical, and epidemiological evidence supports the conclusion that a whole foods plant-based diet can prevent and reverse these disorders.
However, Taubes ignores this evidence and disparages the work of thousands of scientists, implying that they are dishonest, disreputable, and even unscientific, when in fact he has never done a lick of scientific research himself, nor has he ever engaged in clinical practice, but he has frequently misrepresented the research and scientists, and writes his typical drivel to create confusion so as to promote a diet rich in meat and fat, an eating style which the research I mentioned above has shown to promote both obesity and diabetes.
I suggest these items for your reading list:
My book might also help: Powered By Plants: Natural Selection & Human Nutrition
Don Matesz, M.A.(philosophy), M.S. (Oriental medicine), L.Ac.