Nice conversation with a nice and thoughtful man. The fundamental problem in the "healthy lifestyle" debate is that most people don't differentiate between their health and the way they feel. Being physically fit and following a basic common-sense diet will often help people to feel better but, in no way, will prevent actual disease; and, in fact, there is no biologically plausible mechanism by which diet or exercise would do so. We doctors are not in the health business but rather are in the disease business. Our job is to diagnose and, where possible, treat disease. We can neither provide nor maintain health. Most all of the "healthy lifestyle" advice closely resembles that which we received from our parents and grandparents and doesn't require anything more than experience and common sense.
As seductive as the theory about ultraprocessedfood is, there is not much evidence to support it (read Gary Taubes). I feel like the devil's advocate here because I avoid UPF myself but the nutrition research field is such a mess....
There is actually no evidence to support the junk food narrative which is loaded with a lot of junk science. Taubes' book "Good Calories, Bad Calories" is actually two books in one. The first half of the book is an excellent summary of the evidence showing that cholesterol and fats have nothing to do with cardiovascular disease. The second half of the book cites sugar as the culprit and , for evidence, uses the same types of flawed studies he so brilliantly critiqued in the first half of the book.
I find GT's (and others) case against sugar quite convincing. Also, he is asking for more serious and challenging studies. That is why I like that nonetheless he remains prudent about the ills of ultraprocessed food.
I like Vinay and find that Adam offers little value for me but I applaud that this is a site that allows differing views and lets readers do their own thinking.
Dr. Cifu, Thank you for this enlightening conversation. I had seen Michael Easter a few months ago and meant to follow his podcast but somehow forgot him. I will add him today. As an aside, I often read Science Backed Medicine website and I was surprised to see they have a little problem with you. I think it is mostly because of your association with Vinay Prasad and his dispute with masking and covid vaccines. Like you, I think Vinay has many important insights to share but is a little wrong on these items. I wonder if I ever came across Vinay when I was a teaching attending at Northwestern. Probably not because I taught only a tiny fraction of students there! Anyway, as always I really appreciate your insights and I just had these thoughts I wanted to share with you. Bob Perlmuter, MD, FACP
Nice conversation with a nice and thoughtful man. The fundamental problem in the "healthy lifestyle" debate is that most people don't differentiate between their health and the way they feel. Being physically fit and following a basic common-sense diet will often help people to feel better but, in no way, will prevent actual disease; and, in fact, there is no biologically plausible mechanism by which diet or exercise would do so. We doctors are not in the health business but rather are in the disease business. Our job is to diagnose and, where possible, treat disease. We can neither provide nor maintain health. Most all of the "healthy lifestyle" advice closely resembles that which we received from our parents and grandparents and doesn't require anything more than experience and common sense.
As seductive as the theory about ultraprocessedfood is, there is not much evidence to support it (read Gary Taubes). I feel like the devil's advocate here because I avoid UPF myself but the nutrition research field is such a mess....
There is actually no evidence to support the junk food narrative which is loaded with a lot of junk science. Taubes' book "Good Calories, Bad Calories" is actually two books in one. The first half of the book is an excellent summary of the evidence showing that cholesterol and fats have nothing to do with cardiovascular disease. The second half of the book cites sugar as the culprit and , for evidence, uses the same types of flawed studies he so brilliantly critiqued in the first half of the book.
I find GT's (and others) case against sugar quite convincing. Also, he is asking for more serious and challenging studies. That is why I like that nonetheless he remains prudent about the ills of ultraprocessed food.
I like Vinay and find that Adam offers little value for me but I applaud that this is a site that allows differing views and lets readers do their own thinking.
What about John? Do I rank second or third? ;-)
Dr. Cifu, Thank you for this enlightening conversation. I had seen Michael Easter a few months ago and meant to follow his podcast but somehow forgot him. I will add him today. As an aside, I often read Science Backed Medicine website and I was surprised to see they have a little problem with you. I think it is mostly because of your association with Vinay Prasad and his dispute with masking and covid vaccines. Like you, I think Vinay has many important insights to share but is a little wrong on these items. I wonder if I ever came across Vinay when I was a teaching attending at Northwestern. Probably not because I taught only a tiny fraction of students there! Anyway, as always I really appreciate your insights and I just had these thoughts I wanted to share with you. Bob Perlmuter, MD, FACP