Low Carb Fraudsters – Part 1
Low Carb Fraudsters – Part 1
It has become pretty clear that Low Carb has become more than just a method of restricting calories (although low carbers often deny that bit) in order to lose weight and is becoming a cult. Anyone on social media who questions the exaggerated claims or cherry picked nonsense from low carbers gets attacked by their followers. This often includes swearing, shamming, personal attacks and rarely includes anything factual. The problem is if people don’t call out the bullshit more and more people will fall for the hype and miss out on the reality that Low Carb is just a way of restricting calories and calorie restriction is what causes weight loss.
Lets look at some of the craziness from the main low carbers
My guess is whoever was on the till was either a, a drug dealer, or b offered her a Snickers because they though she might be a hungry Jimmy Krankie.
A consistent trend in all things low carb is the conspiracy, the big, big conspiracy. Many, if not all, Low Carbers continue to claim that official food guidelines are written by Big Sugar and make people eat processed sugars etc. Official guidelines have be telling people to eat less sugar for 40 years. There is a claimed anti-low carb agenda that simply does not exist and it is rare for low cabers to actually quote any guidelines that they are against and when they do they always take them out of context.
Lets look a some real guideline examples, the USA 2010 Guidelines are clear on carbs:
Carbohydrates
Carbohydrates contribute 4 calories per gram and are the primary energy source for active people. Sedentary people, including most Americans, should decrease consumption of energy-dense carbohydrates, especially refined, sugar-dense sources, to balance energy needs and attain and maintain ideal weight. Americans should choose fiber-rich carbohydrate foods such as whole grains, vegetables, fruits, and cooked dry beans and peas as staples in the diet. Low-fat and fat-free milk and milk products are also nutrient-dense sources of carbohydrates in the diet and provide high-quality protein, vitamins, and minerals. High-energy, non nutrient-dense carbohydrate sources that should be reduced to aid in calorie control include sugar sweetened beverages; desserts, including grain-based desserts; and grain products and other carbohydrate foods and drinks that are low in nutrients.
And
Intake of sugars is increasing Since the early 1990s, Americans have increased their calorie intake. This increase has come largely from an increased intake of carbohydrates, mainly in the form of added sugars. Added sugars are sugars and syrups added to foods in processing or preparation, not the naturally occurring sugars in foods like fruit or milk. In the United States, the number one source of added sugars is non-diet soft drinks (soda or pop). Sweets and candies, cakes and cookies, and fruit drinks and fruitades are also major sources of added sugars. Intake of a lot of foods high in added sugars, like soft drinks, is of concern because children, adolescents, and women who consume these foods consume less of more nutritious foods like milk. Some foods, like chocolate milk, presweetened cereals, and sweetened canned fruits are high in vitamins and minerals as well as in added sugars. These foods provide extra calories along with the nutrients. These foods are fine if you need the extra calories. However, if you eat lots of beverages and foods high in sugars, you may get less of the nutrients you need for good health. So choose sensibly to limit your intake of sugars. And brush your teeth or rinse your mouth with water after eating foods that contain sugars.
And
Weight control. Children and adults have increased the amount of sugars they consume. This has contributed to higher caloric intakes. Foods that are high in sugars are often high in calories but low in essential nutrients. When you take in extra calories and don’t offset them by increasing your physical activity, you will gain weight. As you aim for a healthy weight and fitness, keep an eye on serving size for all foods and beverages, not only those high in sugars.
The USA 1990 Guidelines State:
And
The USA 1980 Guidelines State:
and
and
and finally
In the 80s and early 90s there was a clear aim to reduce teeth decay as part of the guidance for reducing sugars, but it would be hard to say other negative elements of sugar were completely ignored. Swapping fats for carbs is shown as a way of decreasing calorie consumption (1g fat is 9 calories, 1 g carbs is 4) which is a practical strategy rather than a carbs are better than fats argument. At no point are people encouraged to eat sugar or processed foods. Regardless, there has been a consistent message for 40 years to reduce sugars and simple carbohydrates. If there is a conspiracy then it has never been an overly effective and has been getting less effective over time.
While regularly mentioning Big Sugar conspiracy low carbers completely ignore the lobbying by, as an example of many, the Meat and Diary Industry. In many countries the Meat and Diary Industry have had, or continue to have support from the tax payers. The British Milk Marketing Board used government (ie tax ) money to promote the consumption of diary products from the 1950s. Most countries have a dairy council to promote the consumption of milk which directly benefits the beef and cattle industry. Not surprisingly many low carb friendly (biased) scientists have worked with/for dairy councils. Have a look at this Conflicts of Interest statement for a study run by low carb For Profit organisation Virta Health.
This isn't a low carb conspiracy, but this isn't science either. There is absolutely no way that scientist who sells low carb books are going to run studies that are not biased towards low carb. What I mean by that is you can set up the study in such a way that it will favor a low cab diets such as not controlling protein/calories, not measuring for variables that you know will be worse on a low carb (LDL, lean muscle mass) using a low fibre high carb diet. Or simply leaving the bits you don't like out of the final study report. Low Carbers happily point fingers at pro sugar studies (and quite rightly if the study has been 'polished' or biased) but they never, ever see it in the pro low carb studies. A bad study is a bad study.
What you do see is that the low carbers all help each other to sell books and other products. They all quote each other, reference each other and use organisations like Virta Health, the Noakes Foundation and NuSi to appear neutral. This is a mutual back slapping club of the highest order. Make no mistake there is a lot of money involved here with Virta Health having investments of $37 million, NuSi in excess of $7.5 million and Gary Taubes boasting in the media of a big advance on his last book, The Case Against Sugar, which payed his living costs for 4 years. This is just one giant circle for making money and more and more people want a piece.
Last but certainly not least:
If you really love low carb and have lots of money to spare. Why not go on a Low Carb cruise?
Low Carb Cruise
If that is not a Cult Cruise' then I don't know what is. I would love to see the dinner menu.
It has become pretty clear that Low Carb has become more than just a method of restricting calories (although low carbers often deny that bit) in order to lose weight and is becoming a cult. Anyone on social media who questions the exaggerated claims or cherry picked nonsense from low carbers gets attacked by their followers. This often includes swearing, shamming, personal attacks and rarely includes anything factual. The problem is if people don’t call out the bullshit more and more people will fall for the hype and miss out on the reality that Low Carb is just a way of restricting calories and calorie restriction is what causes weight loss.
Lets look at some of the craziness from the main low carbers
My guess is whoever was on the till was either a, a drug dealer, or b offered her a Snickers because they though she might be a hungry Jimmy Krankie.
A consistent trend in all things low carb is the conspiracy, the big, big conspiracy. Many, if not all, Low Carbers continue to claim that official food guidelines are written by Big Sugar and make people eat processed sugars etc. Official guidelines have be telling people to eat less sugar for 40 years. There is a claimed anti-low carb agenda that simply does not exist and it is rare for low cabers to actually quote any guidelines that they are against and when they do they always take them out of context.
Lets look a some real guideline examples, the USA 2010 Guidelines are clear on carbs:
Carbohydrates
Carbohydrates contribute 4 calories per gram and are the primary energy source for active people. Sedentary people, including most Americans, should decrease consumption of energy-dense carbohydrates, especially refined, sugar-dense sources, to balance energy needs and attain and maintain ideal weight. Americans should choose fiber-rich carbohydrate foods such as whole grains, vegetables, fruits, and cooked dry beans and peas as staples in the diet. Low-fat and fat-free milk and milk products are also nutrient-dense sources of carbohydrates in the diet and provide high-quality protein, vitamins, and minerals. High-energy, non nutrient-dense carbohydrate sources that should be reduced to aid in calorie control include sugar sweetened beverages; desserts, including grain-based desserts; and grain products and other carbohydrate foods and drinks that are low in nutrients.
And
Intake of sugars is increasing Since the early 1990s, Americans have increased their calorie intake. This increase has come largely from an increased intake of carbohydrates, mainly in the form of added sugars. Added sugars are sugars and syrups added to foods in processing or preparation, not the naturally occurring sugars in foods like fruit or milk. In the United States, the number one source of added sugars is non-diet soft drinks (soda or pop). Sweets and candies, cakes and cookies, and fruit drinks and fruitades are also major sources of added sugars. Intake of a lot of foods high in added sugars, like soft drinks, is of concern because children, adolescents, and women who consume these foods consume less of more nutritious foods like milk. Some foods, like chocolate milk, presweetened cereals, and sweetened canned fruits are high in vitamins and minerals as well as in added sugars. These foods provide extra calories along with the nutrients. These foods are fine if you need the extra calories. However, if you eat lots of beverages and foods high in sugars, you may get less of the nutrients you need for good health. So choose sensibly to limit your intake of sugars. And brush your teeth or rinse your mouth with water after eating foods that contain sugars.
And
Weight control. Children and adults have increased the amount of sugars they consume. This has contributed to higher caloric intakes. Foods that are high in sugars are often high in calories but low in essential nutrients. When you take in extra calories and don’t offset them by increasing your physical activity, you will gain weight. As you aim for a healthy weight and fitness, keep an eye on serving size for all foods and beverages, not only those high in sugars.
The USA 1990 Guidelines State:
And
The USA 1980 Guidelines State:
and
and
and finally
In the 80s and early 90s there was a clear aim to reduce teeth decay as part of the guidance for reducing sugars, but it would be hard to say other negative elements of sugar were completely ignored. Swapping fats for carbs is shown as a way of decreasing calorie consumption (1g fat is 9 calories, 1 g carbs is 4) which is a practical strategy rather than a carbs are better than fats argument. At no point are people encouraged to eat sugar or processed foods. Regardless, there has been a consistent message for 40 years to reduce sugars and simple carbohydrates. If there is a conspiracy then it has never been an overly effective and has been getting less effective over time.
While regularly mentioning Big Sugar conspiracy low carbers completely ignore the lobbying by, as an example of many, the Meat and Diary Industry. In many countries the Meat and Diary Industry have had, or continue to have support from the tax payers. The British Milk Marketing Board used government (ie tax ) money to promote the consumption of diary products from the 1950s. Most countries have a dairy council to promote the consumption of milk which directly benefits the beef and cattle industry. Not surprisingly many low carb friendly (biased) scientists have worked with/for dairy councils. Have a look at this Conflicts of Interest statement for a study run by low carb For Profit organisation Virta Health.
This isn't a low carb conspiracy, but this isn't science either. There is absolutely no way that scientist who sells low carb books are going to run studies that are not biased towards low carb. What I mean by that is you can set up the study in such a way that it will favor a low cab diets such as not controlling protein/calories, not measuring for variables that you know will be worse on a low carb (LDL, lean muscle mass) using a low fibre high carb diet. Or simply leaving the bits you don't like out of the final study report. Low Carbers happily point fingers at pro sugar studies (and quite rightly if the study has been 'polished' or biased) but they never, ever see it in the pro low carb studies. A bad study is a bad study.
What you do see is that the low carbers all help each other to sell books and other products. They all quote each other, reference each other and use organisations like Virta Health, the Noakes Foundation and NuSi to appear neutral. This is a mutual back slapping club of the highest order. Make no mistake there is a lot of money involved here with Virta Health having investments of $37 million, NuSi in excess of $7.5 million and Gary Taubes boasting in the media of a big advance on his last book, The Case Against Sugar, which payed his living costs for 4 years. This is just one giant circle for making money and more and more people want a piece.
Last but certainly not least:
If you really love low carb and have lots of money to spare. Why not go on a Low Carb cruise?
Low Carb Cruise
If that is not a Cult Cruise' then I don't know what is. I would love to see the dinner menu.
Comments
Post a Comment