The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
japan carb consumption 1958 84 1999 62 their fat consumption 1958 5 1999 20 okay so if carbs are bad and fat is good their fat went up four fold in this period and their carbs went down about 20 25 so why are they getting sick
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.
the carbohydrate intake in percentage of total daily energy uh decreased markedly from 84 percent in 1958 to 62 percent 1999
this is between if we just look at between approximately 1960 and 2004 um um the uh first of all the uh the total calories went way down went down 31 during this time in Japan the carbohydrate consumption which was 84 percent in 1960 when the the nation was phenomenally healthy went down to 56 percent um by 2004