Read on Twitter
Nutrition quack list update
This is going to make me persona non grata in many circles
That's fine
Here is the list
Help me add to it and get it up before I get mobbed/sued
BTW, hypesters are also included in the quack column: they are the same thing
This is going to make me persona non grata in many circles
That's fine
Here is the list
Help me add to it and get it up before I get mobbed/sued
BTW, hypesters are also included in the quack column: they are the same thing
Version 2 of the quack list.
Send me more recommendations.
Together we shall build an empire.
Send me more recommendations.
Together we shall build an empire.
Version 3.
Quack list now has two columns.
Send more recommendations.
Together we shall restore order to the galaxy.
Quack list now has two columns.
Send more recommendations.
Together we shall restore order to the galaxy.
Version 4.
Please try to keep recommendations to folks with more than 1000 followers.
Please try to keep recommendations to folks with more than 1000 followers.
Version 5.
I'm off to do experiments and will provide a new update tomorrow.
Keep the recommendations coming.
I'm off to do experiments and will provide a new update tomorrow.
Keep the recommendations coming.
Thank you everyone for your interest in this list.
The plan moving forward is to add more people.
Then I will add explanations on a webpage with hyperlinks.
I am not striving for quantifiable criteria. Instead I will use my judgment and transparently make my arguments.
The plan moving forward is to add more people.
Then I will add explanations on a webpage with hyperlinks.
I am not striving for quantifiable criteria. Instead I will use my judgment and transparently make my arguments.
Two questions:
* Who are some evidence-based low-carbers out there?
* Levels of quack?
3- total BS;
2- mix of BS and interesting stuff;
1- irresponsible use of science/overhype.
* Who are some evidence-based low-carbers out there?
* Levels of quack?
3- total BS;
2- mix of BS and interesting stuff;
1- irresponsible use of science/overhype.
Version 6
Video introduction to the quack/not-quack list
Below I will give explanations, starting with the people who I am criticized the most about first.
Why Peter Attia on the quack side
A few things:
1. If you have recommendations, please send them over DM, as my notifications are overloaded and it is impossible to keep track of everything.
2. I will try to post broad criteria ASAP. Until then, see here for some clarification: https://twitter.com/kevinnbass/status/1296840874568032256
1. If you have recommendations, please send them over DM, as my notifications are overloaded and it is impossible to keep track of everything.
2. I will try to post broad criteria ASAP. Until then, see here for some clarification: https://twitter.com/kevinnbass/status/1296840874568032256
An extremely common request is to separate these two categories into more categories. People are asking for a grey or intermediate category.
In the following two videos, I will explain why this list will remain strictly binary: quack or not-quack, reliable or unreliable:
In the following two videos, I will explain why this list will remain strictly binary: quack or not-quack, reliable or unreliable:
It seems that @ChrisMasterjohn thinks this is personal.
https://twitter.com/ChrisMasterjohn/status/1296969094072279041
https://twitter.com/ChrisMasterjohn/status/1296975668706709504
I don't blame him for taking this personally, but it isn't. I respond to him in this video.
https://twitter.com/ChrisMasterjohn/status/1296969094072279041
https://twitter.com/ChrisMasterjohn/status/1296975668706709504
I don't blame him for taking this personally, but it isn't. I respond to him in this video.
Another comment: Why not just focus on the evidence?
I respond to that here.
https://twitter.com/SFZoe014/status/1297023778187173889
I respond to that here.
https://twitter.com/SFZoe014/status/1297023778187173889
"But X puts out things of value!"
I respond to that here.
I respond to that here.
Why Neal Barnard?
Why David Sinclair?
Version 7
Why has David Katz been added to the quack list?
Because COVID quackery.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/diet-covid-where-vital-meets-urgent-david/
This claim implies that improving diet necessarily improves COVID risk. That this is known.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/diet-covid-where-vital-meets-urgent-david/
This claim implies that improving diet necessarily improves COVID risk. That this is known.
Where did Katz get this? His own preprint epidemiological study.
Yes, he quoted himself, an observational study, still not published, that fruit and veg consumption was linked to lower COVID mortality.
To make a recommendation to the public. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.21.20159350v1
Yes, he quoted himself, an observational study, still not published, that fruit and veg consumption was linked to lower COVID mortality.
To make a recommendation to the public. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.21.20159350v1
Katz has become unhinged since COVID. Maybe in other contexts he might do better, but I consider COVID-diet quackery a huge red flag. Until that changes...
What is the definition of quackery? What are my criteria? Part 1.
How consistent is my definition of quackery with other definitions? How consistent is my definition of quackery with the law in the United States? Part 2.
Why Ray Peat?
Why Nina Teicholz? https://thedietwars.com/the-big-fat-surprise-a-critical-review-part-1-by-seth-yoder/
Why Ted Naiman?
TLDR:
Good luck suing me for expressing my freedom of speech.
Next video up soon, then I have to go do some real work...
Good luck suing me for expressing my freedom of speech.
Next video up soon, then I have to go do some real work...
Why Ted Naiman? (Cont.)
Example of one of his memes.
https://twitter.com/tednaiman/status/1297574317354442752
Please never ask me to take him off the list ever again. I feel dumber just writing this tweet. And he has 60K followers. What universe are we living in?
I need a drink.
Example of one of his memes.
https://twitter.com/tednaiman/status/1297574317354442752
Please never ask me to take him off the list ever again. I feel dumber just writing this tweet. And he has 60K followers. What universe are we living in?
I need a drink.
It looks like @AviBittMD and @DBelardoMD are debating @DeanOrnishMD and @DrEsselstyn next weekend. Entries for those two will be updated pending the content of that debate. https://twitter.com/AviBittMD/status/1297666703455924224
I receive several emails like this every day.
Some of the most prominent nutrition science professors in the world now support me financially and send me their thanks and encouragement.
Everyone warns me to be careful. If you hear anything, please alert me.
I am not stopping.
Some of the most prominent nutrition science professors in the world now support me financially and send me their thanks and encouragement.
Everyone warns me to be careful. If you hear anything, please alert me.
I am not stopping.
Why Mark Hyman? Because of his well-known sales of "detox kits". From his website.
Why Stephen Phinny/Jeff Volek? https://thedietwars.com/phinney-volek/
Why Denise Minger?
Version 8
Please send constructive criticism over DM. I want to know whether you think I am getting it right or wrong.
Encouragement is also great, but if you have objections, I want to hear them loud and clear so that I can course-correct where necessary.
Encouragement is also great, but if you have objections, I want to hear them loud and clear so that I can course-correct where necessary.
Version 9
Here is the Google sheet for version 9:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rCpZSzMyDu_g9Mojfrkxa9j3Z-bgRvz3/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rCpZSzMyDu_g9Mojfrkxa9j3Z-bgRvz3/view?usp=sharing
"But Kevin you are wrong about David Sinclair!" https://twitter.com/DBelardoMD/status/1297765646009167873
Why are quacks so dominant in the current media environment?
Version 10
Why Sarah Hallberg?
Why Kevin Bass?
Why Sarah Hallbert? Part 2. 
https://www.change.org/p/12991092/u/22855898?utm_medium=email&utm_source=petition_update&utm_campaign=351345&sfmc_tk=RUvshVh357nFrlNGvZafzPS35pf9EANzKA8ptGlNqEstCIXRnK%2f2NKsK%2bBxklQAD&j=351345&sfmc_sub=276053913&l=32_HTML&u=62608359&mid=7259882&jb=27
https://www.change.org/p/12991092/u/22855898?utm_medium=email&utm_source=petition_update&utm_campaign=351345&sfmc_tk=RUvshVh357nFrlNGvZafzPS35pf9EANzKA8ptGlNqEstCIXRnK%2f2NKsK%2bBxklQAD&j=351345&sfmc_sub=276053913&l=32_HTML&u=62608359&mid=7259882&jb=27
Someone just reversed a position that they have held for a long time based upon this list and a video.
This gives me an idea for how to change this list to make it more constructive and actionable.
Details to follow.
This gives me an idea for how to change this list to make it more constructive and actionable.
Details to follow.
Denise Minger: a success story?
Or, how I will be formatting the list so that people can get off.
Or, how I will be formatting the list so that people can get off.
Please send information, links, references that show prominent experts engaging in quackery to:
quacksheriff at gmail dot com
I will begin compiling events under each people's names.
quacksheriff at gmail dot com
I will begin compiling events under each people's names.
Why Chris Masterjohn?
Or, how should we understand the role of mechanistic plausibility or personal experience vs. randomized controlled trials in making recommendations for the public?
(We will keep revisiting these points and more when we do the video for Rhonda Patrick.)
Or, how should we understand the role of mechanistic plausibility or personal experience vs. randomized controlled trials in making recommendations for the public?
(We will keep revisiting these points and more when we do the video for Rhonda Patrick.)
The study I cited in the video.
https://twitter.com/kevinnbass/status/1184599630312427520
@ChrisMasterjohn
https://twitter.com/kevinnbass/status/1184599630312427520
@ChrisMasterjohn
Why clinical or personal observation is not an acceptable basis for making public recommendations: the CAST trial. Part 1.
Why clinical or personal observation is not an acceptable basis for making public recommendations: the CAST trial. Part 2.
Why clinical or personal observation is not an acceptable basis for making public recommendations. The role of mechanisms. Part 3.
The CAST trial: https://twitter.com/kevinnbass/status/1298585407257444355
And a link to the original paper in the CAST trial: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejm199103213241201
The endorsements of this thread have been many. Everyone from endowed chairs at Harvard, Stanford, etc. to award-winning journalists.
But here is a comment from a layperson that I really liked.
If you think my opinion is wrong, let's discuss it. https://twitter.com/kevinnbass/status/1298584710726193152
But here is a comment from a layperson that I really liked.
If you think my opinion is wrong, let's discuss it. https://twitter.com/kevinnbass/status/1298584710726193152
Why David Diamond? Part 1.
Why David Diamond? Just because someone is published in an academic journal does not make their work legitimate. Part 2.
Links to the consensus statements discussed in the previous two videos:
https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/38/32/2459/3745109 https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/41/24/2313/5735221
https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/38/32/2459/3745109 https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/41/24/2313/5735221
Version 11
Why http://Examine.com ?
Why Chris Palmer?
Tweets mentioned in the Chris Palmer video:
Version 12
Why Dave Feldman?
Article about Dave Feldman's ideas: https://twitter.com/skinnygaz/status/1298607408848216064
Behind the Curve flat Earth documentary:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behind_the_Curve
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behind_the_Curve
My current thinking now:
I am going to clear the list completely. Then, I am going to repopulate a new list.
This list will have carefully documented statements that I believe to be incorrect.
I am going to clear the list completely. Then, I am going to repopulate a new list.
This list will have carefully documented statements that I believe to be incorrect.
This will make the list both more actionable, as well as not give the impression that I am attacking people.
I'm not attacking people. It's specific statements, patterns of statements, contents in books, etc. that I think are the problem.
I'm not attacking people. It's specific statements, patterns of statements, contents in books, etc. that I think are the problem.
I believe we have a serious problem in the diet and health industries. I think that facts are not accurately represented. I think that speculation and hype often take the place of good sense and evidence. And I want to help make things better.
And I want to do so in a professional and constructive manner.
I am going to spend some time reflecting on this course of action.
If you believe that this kind of list would be inappropriate, I want to hear why you believe so.
I especially want to hear from people who have objections to what I have been doing with the list above.
If you believe that this kind of list would be inappropriate, I want to hear why you believe so.
I especially want to hear from people who have objections to what I have been doing with the list above.
I reserve the right to tweak my plan further over the coming week.
Thank you and may God have mercy on your diet and health guru souls.
