[tacos]

Nonsense. A proper scientific experiment would have controls and independent results and medical oversight and calibrated measurement equipment and a clear definition of what's attempting to be proved.

This is a guy fooling around and blogging for attention. Dangerously so. p=1, no scientific method = anecdata. His conclusions? Pseudoscience. It's dangerous to him personally and it's damaging to society broadly to promote such without caveats. So I'm providing them.

[bosdev]

He has gathered more data than had he not done it, or not blogged about it. You're right that it doesn't meet any scientific criteria for 'fact' yet, but it is data of a sort, and may be a helpful step on the road to the furtherance of science.

[reality_czech]

Wow. I didn't realize "doing random stuff while taking no measurements, and then later writing about it" qualified as "the furtherance of science." A sample size of 1, combined with an attitude of ignorance and machismo, helps explain why "medical remedies" like bleeding people with leeches and giving them liquid mercury to drink endured for hundreds of years despite no actual evidence that they worked or were safe.

Reality check: nutritional deficits lead to cognitive deficits. The Atkins diet is known to lead to heart disease, which Atkins himself died from.