Eleven charts that show what’s wrong with it.
It’s particularly interesting that the “obesity epidemic” started about the time the pseudo-scientists started recommending cutting back on dietary fat.
Category Archives: Science And Society
Intelligence
Have they found a genetic basis for it?
It was always kind of loopy to imagine there isn’t one. That’s the sort of thing that only a leftist could believe.
Nutrition Science And Climate Science
How they’re alike:
Nutrition science and climate science share some common challenges: complex system(s) and many confounding factors. Severe tests for nutrition science can in principle be done, but they are very expensive and take decades. Severe tests for climate science require better observational evidence, particularly in the past.
When there’s no evidence to falsify what is merely a supposition,we are left with ”magical theories that explains absolutely everything – including diametrically contradictory phenomena, lack of logic and absence of evidence.”
There’s a lot of junk science associated with both.
The Martydom Of Mark Steyn
James Delingpole is envious.
Whole Milk
Helps you lose weight.
The notion that you should drink reduced-fat milk is based on two theories that have zero scientific basis — that calories per se make you fat, and that saturated fat is bad for your heart. They’re both nonsense.
[Update a couple minutes later]
The author still gets that part wrong:
Whole-milk dairy products are relatively high in saturated fat. And eating too much saturated fat can increase the risk of heart disease. So many experts would agree that adults with high cholesterol should continue to limit dairy fat.
I repeat, there is zero empirical evidence that saturated fat increases the risk of coronary disease. It is based on the flawed theory that high cholesterol causes heart disease and that eating cholesterol increases your cholesterol. Again, neither is true.
National Review
No, it is not doomed:
By the likes of The Week, Salon, and Politico in quick succession, we are said to be in “deep trouble,” likely “doomed,” facing a “wipe out.”
This is in part a tale of lazy reporting and even headline cribbing.
None of the writers of these articles ever called National Review. They didn’t ask what our chances in court were, or even bother to get basic facts about the case right. Damon Linker of The Week, the one who got this meme rolling, made rudimentary mistakes without trying to check them, and then lectured us about journalistic standards.
You’d think people who write about media and the law would know, instinctively, to consider this factor: libel insurance.
You’d think that, until you realize that they’re leftist hacks, and idiots.
Is NASA Going Extinct?
The biggest problem with this piece (by a professor of journalism) is its fundamental false premise — that the purpose of human spaceflight is science.
The Lysenkoism Of Climate Activists
More thoughts on the lawsuit by Robert Tracinski.
A “Paid Anti-Climate Science Operative”
Did you know this is what I am?
Steyn went on to quote paid anti-climate science operative Rand Simberg — an employee of the right-wing think tank the Competitive Enterprise Institute…
Me, neither. Guess my checks from Big Fossil Fuel and paychecks from CEI to “fight climate science” keep getting lost in the mail.
What ignorant reporting. For the record, I am not now, and have never been, an “employee” of CEI, though I was once paid by them as a contractor to do a policy paper on space property rights (which has nothing to do with climate change). I’m also continually amused by all of the salivation over the nonsensical notion that this lawsuit will put National Review out of business.
The Calorie-Labeling Mess
Another ObamaCare disaster:
The calorie label clause, buried deep within the ACA’s 10,000 pages, seems harmless enough at first glance. Each restaurant chain with over 20 locations is required to display the calorie content of each food and drink item it serves on signs and printed menus–with vending machine distributors subjected to the same rules. But the regulation also covers “similar retail food establishments,” a clause vague enough to give FDA regulators sweeping power to determine who does and doesn’t have to comply.
FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg admitted that she “actually thought [calorie labeling] would be one of the more straightforward tasks…but little did I know how complicated it would be.” Hamburg’s concerns are hardly unfounded, but it’s small business owners and franchisees—not FDA bureaucrats—that will feel the most pain under the new law.
What’s particularly stupid is that even if they could make it work without impacting businesses so much, it won’t even do any good, because calories are not what make people obese. All part of the Democrats’ war on science.