Obesity and diabetes rates are skyrocketing across the world and the consequences are staggering. How will we stop it? Not by continuing to do what we’re doing, because it’s obviously not working.
We need to question some of our fundamental beliefs that are, amazingly, not grounded in good science.
Enter Gary Taubes and Peter Attia, the co-founders of the non-profit organization Nutrition Science Initiative (NuSI, pronounced “new see”), which launches today. It’s goal is to make sure that the important scientific studies get done. We’re talking about very major studies on for example low carb diets.
After spending some time discussing it with Taubes and Attia at the AHS conference recently I was extremely impressed by their thinking and plans. I do believe that this could change the world.
I’ll write more about NuSI and post a video interview I did with Peter Attia on it. But for now see the video message from Peter Attia (above) and then check out their website:
What do you think?
Also, both Gary Taubes and Peter Attia have posted on NuSI on their blogs today.
46
I and many others salute him and Gary for their vision.
We can't wait to see what comes out of NuSI.
Thanks to you Doc, Peter and Gary my health and the health of my family has improved 10 fold.
Thank you.
Scientific Advisory Board
Board of Directors
Board of Advisors
Our strategy
etc
So all looks good. Looks like some quality unbiased folks..
However when I look at the blog of Peter Attia, NuSI President, Director I find the following,
"Once people start to “get it” with respect to why carbohydrate reduction, or all-out restriction, leads to good things...,"
I mean, is Peter Attia ever going to be able to run a unbiased scientific organization when he starts off with such a narrow vision?
I don't even need to remind you of the other founder's bias, Mr Taubes.
Since so much science is set up to prove x,y, or z, one wonders if any work will be done that looks in directions other than "low carb"...
The entire endevor looks rather suspcious when it come to science.
NOT that the low-fat crowd hasn't been doing similar science and finding what they set out to prove.
Attia also says on his blog the following
"How does the average person living in, say, Japan stay leaner and healthier than the average American while still consuming >70% of their caloric intake in the form of carbohydrates?"
"I don’t claim to know the answer this question, but I’ve got a few ideas."
So will NuSI also be looking at this question that Peter Attia has no answer for?
Some how I kind of doubt it.
Seems we might only get more science that discovers what they set out to prove.
Just saying, I won't be holding my breath for "proof" of what they may be intent on showing is true.
I could be wrong and of course it will take years for results.
Both Peter and I have our beliefs about what we’re likely to find, as do the researchers we’ve recruited to join the effort. As we say in our founder’s letter on the NuSI site, we’re not invested in particular outcomes, we’re invested in establishing reliable knowledge on the relationship between diet and disease and so scientifically-sound solutions to the health problems that beset us. " Gary Taubes
"NuSI is not about me or Gary or low carb or low fat or even “diets,” per se. NuSI is about science. It’s about bringing the rigors of the scientific method, just as they exist in other disciplines of science, to the field of nutrition science. To support NuSI means just one thing: you believe the field of nutrition is at least as deserving of rigorous experimental science as any other field of science, and that our health is too important to gamble based on observations, correlations, best-guesses, or science lacking rigor." Peter Attia
I believe them and even if I didn't you can be sure anything funded by NuSi is going to be scrutinized -- unlike the red meat kills you "science" that's regularly reported.
Removed links.
Each of them dismiss the Asian carb contradiction, even though each admits they can't fully explain it. Then each provides similar theories to possibly explain it, that seem to largely pulled out of thin air conjecture.
As such, with that mindset, I think its reasonable to be skeptical about a organization they co-found. Time will tell.
From what I see, the medical benefits could be significant also for people with autoimmune conditions, frequent infections, mental issues, hormonal changes, cancer. I hope to see a ketogenic diet to be the standard treatment for a person after a cardiovascular event, in a situation when bacterial infection is present or highly possible, for Parkinson patients. It all will be possible only after the stigma of a medical extremism will be removed from LC diets, and it is my hope for NuSI research..
You will simply have to read the studies and decide for yourself if they are giving low fat a fair chance.
I will again refer you to the Diet Doctor's science page on this blog. He has not been able to track down 20 studies that are high quality that give low carb a fair chance.
There are hundreds of studies that don't survive even the most gentle poking...I remember reading a study that said "low carb" was 40% calories from carbohydrate! Of course there was no difference between that and the "high carb," which was 48% calories from carbohydrate.
So, the doctor's studies show 100% of the time, when given a fair chance, low carbohydrate works better for diet and health. If you have alternative studies that show differently, feel free to point them out, and we all together can figure out if they're actually fair. I'm confident that if we find a fair study that shows the benefits of low fat dieting, the Doctor will be happy to post it in his list.
--edited for spelling
Was Darwin biased because he thought that evolution by natural selection could explain the origin of life on this planet? The quality of evidence and the multiple lines of interlocking evidence supported and support Darwin. Every scientist needs a hypothesis that is based on their understanding of the evidence.
Of course people are people so things can get more complicated: problems can include subtle unconscious over-interpretation to outright falsification (maybe driven by money not science). But the test of time and multiple scientists trying to knock down hypotheses helps make science self-correcting.
NuSi has their LCHF hypothesis (I think), and they invite other competing hypotheses. It seems great to put the LCHF hypothesis to the test. Let's see if LCHF can withstand long term isocaloric methodology. Maybe LCHF will pass and maybe it will fail. Maybe LCHF will be modified?
I do have one critique of NuSi's interpretation of the scientific literature on diets--they claim that all of it is inadequate (as if all of the research done is not valuable). I think that there is some compelling, not perfect, evidence in favor of LCHF.
I agree that Attia is an effective spokesperson. Is he from the West Coast? He has that California mannerism about him (calm, open, expressive, articulate but not pretentious). I'm from New Jersey and we have a whole 'nother set of mannerisms.
Did anyone else pick up the fact that they are using researchers skeptical of the hypothesis they hope to test? This is like Galileo asking a couple Catholic priests to test his hypothesis that the earth revolves around the sun.
on other sites? I have a blog based on the same information you discuss and would really like to have you share some stories/information.
I know my subscribers would appreciate your work.
If you're even remotely interested, feel free to send me an e mail.