Peter Attia· MD
nutrition epidemiology is a dead science and it's time to bury the corpse gary taubes has been very critical nina t cults you many others have pointed out that perhaps this is just a worthless waste of time and misleading
Loading…
We can't find evidence that holds up here. Proponents are reasoning from mechanism or analogy rather than direct human data, and the most credible skeptics raise objections we can't dismiss.
nutrition epidemiology is a dead science and it's time to bury the corpse gary taubes has been very critical nina t cults you many others have pointed out that perhaps this is just a worthless waste of time and misleading
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
they they tend to be concentrated in boston it seems yeah there's nothing there's there's a little school out east there i forget the name of it it's in cambridge is it yeah okay anyway yeah i think i've heard it yeah i think i've heard of it and uh there are other places that believe this but it's probably strongest in boston — that sort of seem to be the defenders of the status quo that say nutrition epidemiology is imperfect as all tools are but it is still a very valuable tool there's