Maggie's Farm

And yet, in two of the most broadly-based studies ever undertaken, precisely the opposite proves true. Meat and eggs inflame arterial walls, and cutting them out entirely, along with oil, leads to weight loss and the restoration of health.

But religion being what it is, food fads shall persist.

They are the latest consensus, actually, and in one case, was nation-wide in the single largest such study in history, which showed precise regional correlation between diet and health.

But your "carbs", are they egg-bearing like pasta and cake? Have dairy in them, or refined flours like store bread or pizza? Are they processed and do they contain oils and sweeteners?

Of course they do because that's the definition of carbohydrates in the West.

Yet, are they consumed with meals filled in with meat, dairy, and other processed foods? They are, aren't they? As you refer to them they're never plant carbohydrates and they're never consumed isolated from the things that do in fact inflame arteries, gain weight, and make you sick, those being the processed elements, animal agriculture, and additives. And in that context, where "carb" is slang for the other unhealthy American dietary fad that is our Epicurean, hedonistic, oddly patriotic, corporatized animal agriculture, they do indeed create dysfunction.

So your doc, having been by your lights completely wrong once before, can make an abrupt change of advice and you, being all scientific, can accept it this time because it aligns with your lifestyliing lifestyle and then assert it to others as if it were valid.

But it's not. A plant-based carbohydrate diet is without question the best way to restore both healthy weight and health itself and it's documented to be so. What you're actually referring to is a deeply unhealthy diet - you've almost certainly never tried or researched the plant diet - that requires a fixed, fairly stabilized level of ketosis in order to keep the weight off, which it does rather well, and then a highly energetic level of unnatural physical stress in order to keep the tone up.

But the brain and body burn sugar, BD, and despite the bad advice that fruit is flavored sugar, only plants and fruits contain the complexities and natural relationships between an enormous array of constituent components and nutrients found necessary throughout human evolution, quite evidently and scientifically.

There never was a paleo period of anywhere near enough duration, if at all, to constitute the evolutionary whole of human history and therefore justify the paleo food fad. The Paleo diet, in addition to being the most roundly and soundly condemned diet in medicine, has also been historically debunked.

American anti-carbohydratism is as faddish as it is stupid on its face. Strip your modern "carbs" of the rich, animal-centric, BD-style Italian cookery's "carbs", replace with real complex natural carbohydrates, leave out all the meat, cheese, eggs, and oils, and monitor your health, even without all the medicine-balling popular among stalwart individualistic conservatives and other Republicans.

It's your choice - and they have all but completely lost the plot, by the way, these quasi-rightist obsessionaries. It'd be nice if they'd not misinform others about the general topic by relying on pop press releases and neo-wives tales..

Then drink soda pop and cure cancer, Strawman.

Of course, what I said is not what you reframed it into, in yet another installment of your many odes to your amply airy opinion.

At any rate, if food is as irrelevant as you claim, first take it up with the paleo religionistas.

When culture is linked to health, then, as you food faddists say, genetics is linked to health. And if genetics and culture are linked - which health studies amply shows they are and which empirically we know them to be - then the question becomes, are you saying there is no link between diet and health?

Because if there is no link between diet and health you've just made a claim against the paleo fad, weight being part of health. From there it's a small step to link a convoluted definition of "carbs" to health, which again the paleo faddists do 24/7.

The question isn't whether I find a link between diet and health, it's if you do, because as far as I can tell, you're taking up both arguments - both faulty, by the way - against the third, excluded claim that the plant diet is both paleo and healthy...even as data shows.

How long before MDRs are out the window, do you figure? Just curious how deep the dissonance first for and then against and then for official advice runs, is all...

And expanding on nutrition against common myths and wives tales serves what purpose. Wind? Remember, familiar blinders are as they're reaffirmed, and valid challenges to them shall be ignored, as you just have.

Will yet other input alter that view? How, exactly? Let me ask you: Does it seem sensible that with western disease being what it is, diet simply shall play absolutely no part? Why, because it's a dogma?

How could that be, exactly, when it plays every part with regard to weight per the paleo faddists? That's the second (and final) time I ask, because it's your contradiction, not mine, and it's not my denial.

See my point? This being a casual public board, you're here to assert and reassert a reality that you wish to believe exists. I'm simply curious to explore the denial. Or if, like BD's doc (very likely per special animal agriculture interests whether he knows it or not) y'all can reconsider and adopt abrupt change.

In other words, your opinion really matters, "plain and simple". Airy, I believe I once called it.

It's almost like I can predict your bias, isn't it, even/especially when you refuse simple questions and repeat contradictory myth.

So again, why exactly should I present you evidence you deny could ever exist? And do you really think conversation with you can ever be fruitful?