Have we become stupid to the point that we need the Internet to tell us what to eat? What were we eating for millenia before we invented nutrition experts? Is this article of relevance/interest to HN?
The very cornerstone of dietary advice for generations..."
...is being challenged because:
Critics have pointed out that Dr. Keys violated several basic scientific norms in his study.
It's a cautionary tale worth telling no matter the discipline. Studies are often accepted without much challenge because we assume that rigorous controls were in place. But the adage of "Garbage in, garbage out" remains a fundamental truth. I think that is what is relevant and interesting to HN readers.
Corporate advertising and marketing to a large extent. As an example a traditional breakfast might have been porridge or some bread or eggs. The the like of Kellogg's came along and I grew up with "Frosties - they are great" on TV all the time. Large heaps of carbs with sugar all over them are not healthy. The UK government wanted to ban advertising junk to kids but Kellogg's who spend ~us$100 million a year on ads here freaked out and hired lobbyists and the government backed down. So we need the internet to counter this. I don't know if this article is of relevance to HN. I find it quite interesting.
Your making the assumption that because one guy is skinny he is healthier than the other. The 2nd picture (Darker Skinned) is a Maasai Warrior and the other are Mascho Piro. They will probably have different diets and do differencing amounts of exercise daily, but just because one is thin and one is not as thin, doesn't say anything about health.
Both look healthy to me ;) The problem is that since we do not have the means to conduct the scientific experiments ourselves we rely on experts and public agencies. Hard to tell if either is working unbiased. So, in lack of certainty and trust, I rather just eat as my grandparents did. So far so good!
The very cornerstone of dietary advice for generations..."
...is being challenged because:
Critics have pointed out that Dr. Keys violated several basic scientific norms in his study.
It's a cautionary tale worth telling no matter the discipline. Studies are often accepted without much challenge because we assume that rigorous controls were in place. But the adage of "Garbage in, garbage out" remains a fundamental truth. I think that is what is relevant and interesting to HN readers.