Comments on: Errors in The Queen of Fats http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/07/21/errors-in-the-queen-of-fats/ Self-Experimentation, Scientific Method, the Shangri-La Diet, etc. Tue, 16 Mar 2010 22:07:42 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.7 by: Ronald Pottol http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/07/21/errors-in-the-queen-of-fats/#comment-267160 Tue, 03 Feb 2009 05:27:51 +0000 http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/07/21/errors-in-the-queen-of-fats/#comment-267160 Infant formula does have requirements for omega 3s, so that is a start. Infant formula does have requirements for omega 3s, so that is a start.

]]> by: DonH http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/07/21/errors-in-the-queen-of-fats/#comment-246963 Mon, 15 Dec 2008 15:51:08 +0000 http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/07/21/errors-in-the-queen-of-fats/#comment-246963 Joel's list of "errors" indicates that he didn't actually read the book for what it is, a history of the investigation into fats as well as how we came to be at the point we are at now. It is not meant to be a scientifically critical review of the research. The errors of early assumptions become obvious as the book progresses. The book would be unapproachable by her intended audience had she relentlessly cited all of the studies that Joel offered as proof of errors. Further, I don't understand his assessment that Alcort is "conflicted". She doesn't set out to prove anything. If she is conflicted, it is a reflection that much of the nutritional advice has been conflicted over the years. The thing that I liked most about her book was that it didn't relentlessly try to push a point of view. She told the story of how we arrived at out current knowledge of dietary fat. The history has been, and continues to be, full of conflicting views and advice. Joel’s list of “errors” indicates that he didn’t actually read the book for what it is, a history of the investigation into fats as well as how we came to be at the point we are at now. It is not meant to be a scientifically critical review of the research. The errors of early assumptions become obvious as the book progresses. The book would be unapproachable by her intended audience had she relentlessly cited all of the studies that Joel offered as proof of errors.

Further, I don’t understand his assessment that Alcort is “conflicted”. She doesn’t set out to prove anything. If she is conflicted, it is a reflection that much of the nutritional advice has been conflicted over the years.

The thing that I liked most about her book was that it didn’t relentlessly try to push a point of view. She told the story of how we arrived at out current knowledge of dietary fat. The history has been, and continues to be, full of conflicting views and advice.

]]> by: maximumgravity1 http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/07/21/errors-in-the-queen-of-fats/#comment-229829 Thu, 23 Oct 2008 02:00:46 +0000 http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/07/21/errors-in-the-queen-of-fats/#comment-229829 I appreciate Chris' comments about high levels of Mercury and other heavy metals in seafood. Having seen countless fishing places disappear on the Easteern Shore of Maryland over a span of about 20 years due to "contamination", it is disheartening to know that some of our best sources of Omega-3's are being corrupted by environmental factors. It gets even more depressing knowing that if we at least catch our own, we know something about the streams, oceans or rivers we pull the fish from. Although it is a bit neive to think that one location on the shore is contaminated, and that 5 miles up the road it is "clean" enough to eat the same fish that swim through the same waters. Without trying to sound like a sponsored plug or shameless self promoting, I am glad to finally find a supplement that is highest in concentration of any omega-3's on the market, and due to their process of extracting the oils almost eliminates all traces of mercury (almost - not quite). The extract comes from the Green-Lip Mussel in New Zealand, which is just recently finding its way on the scene as a very powerful source of concentrated Omega-3 (http://www.mymoxxor.com/ProductScience.aspx?ID=maximumgravity1). This company combines the Green-Lip Mussel with grape seed extract for high levels of antioxidants as well. Here is a purity test of the Hoki Stick oil (the carrier in the gel)http://www.naturalnews.com/moxxor/HokiOilCertificate.jpg Anyway, the point without seeming like I am stepping on your thread with plugs for products is to mention that it is encouraging to see science finally starting to advance in areas that give us the ability to eat healthy foods without fear of becoming victims of our environment. Some great articles on GreenLip Mussel oil http://www.mymoxxor.com/ProductArticlesandResearch.aspx?ID=maximumgravity1 Good info on your blog - keep it coming. I appreciate Chris’ comments about high levels of Mercury and other heavy metals in seafood. Having seen countless fishing places disappear on the Easteern Shore of Maryland over a span of about 20 years due to “contamination”, it is disheartening to know that some of our best sources of Omega-3’s are being corrupted by environmental factors. It gets even more depressing knowing that if we at least catch our own, we know something about the streams, oceans or rivers we pull the fish from. Although it is a bit neive to think that one location on the shore is contaminated, and that 5 miles up the road it is “clean” enough to eat the same fish that swim through the same waters.

Without trying to sound like a sponsored plug or shameless self promoting, I am glad to finally find a supplement that is highest in concentration of any omega-3’s on the market, and due to their process of extracting the oils almost eliminates all traces of mercury (almost - not quite). The extract comes from the Green-Lip Mussel in New Zealand, which is just recently finding its way on the scene as a very powerful source of concentrated Omega-3 (http://www.mymoxxor.com/ProductScience.aspx?ID=maximumgravity1). This company combines the Green-Lip Mussel with grape seed extract for high levels of antioxidants as well. Here is a purity test of the Hoki Stick oil (the carrier in the gel)http://www.naturalnews.com/moxxor/HokiOilCertificate.jpg

Anyway, the point without seeming like I am stepping on your thread with plugs for products is to mention that it is encouraging to see science finally starting to advance in areas that give us the ability to eat healthy foods without fear of becoming victims of our environment.

Some great articles on GreenLip Mussel oil
http://www.mymoxxor.com/ProductArticlesandResearch.aspx?ID=maximumgravity1

Good info on your blog - keep it coming.

]]> by: chris http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/07/21/errors-in-the-queen-of-fats/#comment-195642 Wed, 23 Jul 2008 20:42:45 +0000 http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/07/21/errors-in-the-queen-of-fats/#comment-195642 Elevated mercury levels are of great concern, however safe seafood is available. For the first time there is a company that doesn’t rely on only the age or location of the fish caught to claim that it is lower in mercury than FDA action levels. Safe Harbor guarantees that the fish it certifies is lower than FDA action levels because it tests every large fin fish released under the Safe Harbor brand. For the first time I am 100% confident about the safety of the seafood I eat and buy for my family. All their mercury certification levels are available online, along with details about their testing process and where their product is available at http://www.safeharborfoods.com Check them out and enjoy the health benefits of seafood without worry! Elevated mercury levels are of great concern, however safe seafood is available. For the first time there is a company that doesn’t rely on only the age or location of the fish caught to claim that it is lower in mercury than FDA action levels. Safe Harbor guarantees that the fish it certifies is lower than FDA action levels because it tests every large fin fish released under the Safe Harbor brand. For the first time I am 100% confident about the safety of the seafood I eat and buy for my family. All their mercury certification levels are available online, along with details about their testing process and where their product is available at http://www.safeharborfoods.com
Check them out and enjoy the health benefits of seafood without worry!

]]> by: Cyan http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/07/21/errors-in-the-queen-of-fats/#comment-195044 Tue, 22 Jul 2008 18:14:05 +0000 http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/07/21/errors-in-the-queen-of-fats/#comment-195044 Point 35 is wrong -- unsaturation <em>does</em> reduce the available energy in a hydrocarbon. Kauffman's mistake is that unsaturation replaces H-C-C-H with C=C; he's neglected the energy of the C-H bonds. But Allport is wrong too about the "10% less energy" statement -- I can generate neither a true nor an erroneous calculation that would give that result. Point 35 is wrong — unsaturation does reduce the available energy in a hydrocarbon. Kauffman’s mistake is that unsaturation replaces H-C-C-H with C=C; he’s neglected the energy of the C-H bonds. But Allport is wrong too about the “10% less energy” statement — I can generate neither a true nor an erroneous calculation that would give that result.

]]> by: Varangy http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/07/21/errors-in-the-queen-of-fats/#comment-195024 Tue, 22 Jul 2008 17:18:50 +0000 http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/07/21/errors-in-the-queen-of-fats/#comment-195024 <i>Part of the problem seems to be that those who can write well (such as journalists) don’t understand the science and those who understand the science (such as scientists) can’t write well</i> I think you overlook scientists who don't understand scientific methodology or are not scientific, either intentionally or unintentionally ---- and that is what makes NNT's book valuable BTW. Ostensible unbiased scientists have become High Priests in our society today ---- the masses and the media have all fallen for the argumentum ad populum and argumentum ad verecundiam. Believe me b/c other scientists ("experts") agree with me! You hear over and over and over again. As Crichton has pointed out many a time --- consensus is not an argument for AGW. Semmelweiss is the exemplar. Back to AGW --- skeptics are reviled! Skepticism is the basis of the scientific method. Irony, irony and more irony. Part of the problem seems to be that those who can write well (such as journalists) don’t understand the science and those who understand the science (such as scientists) can’t write well

I think you overlook scientists who don’t understand scientific methodology or are not scientific, either intentionally or unintentionally —- and that is what makes NNT’s book valuable BTW.

Ostensible unbiased scientists have become High Priests in our society today —- the masses and the media have all fallen for the argumentum ad populum and argumentum ad verecundiam.

Believe me b/c other scientists (”experts”) agree with me! You hear over and over and over again. As Crichton has pointed out many a time — consensus is not an argument for AGW. Semmelweiss is the exemplar.

Back to AGW — skeptics are reviled! Skepticism is the basis of the scientific method.

Irony, irony and more irony.

]]> by: Varangy http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/07/21/errors-in-the-queen-of-fats/#comment-195019 Tue, 22 Jul 2008 17:09:17 +0000 http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/07/21/errors-in-the-queen-of-fats/#comment-195019 @seth I don't think so -- RDAs have completely and entirely vilified fats for one small example --- we may not be getting enough saturated fats in our diets --- whatever value they may have is undermined by the false confidence they promote. @seth

I don’t think so — RDAs have completely and entirely vilified fats for one small example — we may not be getting enough saturated fats in our diets — whatever value they may have is undermined by the false confidence they promote.

]]> by: Tom http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/07/21/errors-in-the-queen-of-fats/#comment-195015 Tue, 22 Jul 2008 17:03:53 +0000 http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/07/21/errors-in-the-queen-of-fats/#comment-195015 Seth, you'll be interested in the following review of Taubes, and in Taubes' rebuttal. http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/weight-loss/gary-taubes-responds-to-george-bray/ Rebuttal (pdf file): http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/taubes-response-to-bray.pdf Seth, you’ll be interested in the following review of Taubes, and in Taubes’ rebuttal.

http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/weight-loss/gary-taubes-responds-to-george-bray/

Rebuttal (pdf file):
http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/taubes-response-to-bray.pdf

]]> by: Mike Kenny http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/07/21/errors-in-the-queen-of-fats/#comment-195009 Tue, 22 Jul 2008 16:56:27 +0000 http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/07/21/errors-in-the-queen-of-fats/#comment-195009 It seems the more scientific progress affects our everyday lives, we'll need good writers to explain to us what is going on in terms we can understand. At some point will that be possible I wonder? I think of the health debate, but also the global warming debates and public policy generally. It seems the more scientific progress affects our everyday lives, we’ll need good writers to explain to us what is going on in terms we can understand. At some point will that be possible I wonder? I think of the health debate, but also the global warming debates and public policy generally.

]]> by: seth http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/07/21/errors-in-the-queen-of-fats/#comment-194995 Tue, 22 Jul 2008 16:18:15 +0000 http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/07/21/errors-in-the-queen-of-fats/#comment-194995 "Complete and meaningless fiction"? That goes much too far. The reports issued to support each set of RDAs have convinced me that they are valuable. But there certainly is lots of lobbying as well. “Complete and meaningless fiction”? That goes much too far. The reports issued to support each set of RDAs have convinced me that they are valuable. But there certainly is lots of lobbying as well.

]]>