Taubes, a science writer, lays out a great case for restricting carbohydrates while eating saturated fat in order to lose weight. In fact, Taubes cites numerous studies and actual weight loss programs the world over between 1750 and 1950 which led to a similar conclusion: fat doesn't make people fat; it makes us thin.
But then a curious thing happened in the 1960's, chiefly in the United States. We decided that saturated fat was giving people heart attacks, and therefore fat intake should be restricted while carbohydrates should be increased in the diet. The science behind this assertion, however, was flawed.
We now know that adulterated fats and simple carbohydrates, common in the diet for the past 50 years, are the true culprits when it comes to coronary disease - and a whole lot of other chronic ills.
And yet the medical/ scientific community clings to this shibboleth that saturated fat is the foe, whereas in fact it is the friend. Why?
There is something moralistic here. Fat implies sloth and gluttony, and therefore it is deemed a failure of will.
But overweight is a metabolic disorder. It results, not from eating too much, but from eating the wrong foods.
But the scientific medical industrial complex has invested trillions of dollars and countless careers and reputations in fat-as-the-enemy hypothesis. So renouncing it would be far too much crow to eat.
In the meantime, our population continues to suffer. Our country continues its long, slow decline.
Science, we have always been assured by the scientific establishment, is about the search for truth. Sadly, in this very important case, I think not.
No comments:
Post a Comment