We decided to drive up to Santa Ynez for a weekend holiday wine tour. We left last night in hopes of getting up here in time for the Delta IV launch out of Vandenberg, but it was scrubbed for a technical issue. The good news is that it’s rescheduled for an earlier launch tonight (1006), and we’ll still be up here. The weather is clear, and it should be good viewing of a night launch if it goes. It’s the first time in many months that we’ve traveled just for pleasure, with no business. Back to the grind on Monday.
[Update after the launch scrub]
Well, that was disappointing. We had a great spot on Ocean Avenue to view, a clear sky, and it aborted seven seconds before liftoff. No word on cause yet.
…are just plain wrong.
Nice to see op-eds like this.
This article is sort of amazing in its complete lack of discussion of the keto revolution, and its old timey referrals to “diet” and “exercise” and calories.
Why they are so loud.
This is one of the many reasons I hate going out to eat. In fact, last time we went out, it was on a patio on a pier, listening to the waves, which was quite pleasant.
Myths versus facts, from Nina Teicholz:
I think the larger question is why we are seeing such a sudden rash of anti-keto stories. So many of them quote no experts [sic] sources and do not provide citations for their claims. Skeptics with little acquaintance with the diet are quoted exclusively instead. From a journalistic perspective, this lack of balance of viewpoints and the failure to back up claims with evidence falls below basic reporting standards. Offenders on this list include even the Harvard School of Public Health, which recently published more than one unsourced, one-sided article on the keto diet (This is in addition to the Lancet Public Health article cited above, by Harvard researchers, which suggests that a low-carb diet kills you). These stories could reflect lazy reporting or they could very well be scare tactics to steer people away from the keto diet. Why would reporters or scientists at Harvard be doing such a thing? That’s material for another post. Stay tuned.
I’ll look forward to her thesis.
It may be genetic. Well, if it is, it’s not a gene I carry. Coffee is terrible.
Potentially wonderful news on that front. I do think, though, that diet is underutilized in fighting it, and that much of it has been caused by scientifically terrible, bordering on criminal, nutrition advice for decades.
A fraud is exposed, but it’s a much larger problem:
Data dredging is fairly common in health research, and especially in studies involving food. It is one reason contradictory nutrition headlines seem to be the norm: One week coffee, cheese and red wine are found to be protective against heart disease and cancer, and the next week a new crop of studies pronounce that they cause it. Marion Nestle, a professor of nutrition, food studies and public health at New York University, said that many researchers are under enormous pressure to churn out papers. One recent analysis found that thousands of scientists publish a paper every five days.
I liked this:
“P-hacking is a really serious problem,” said Dr. Ivan Oransky, a co-founder of Retraction Watch, who teaches medical journalism at New York University. “Not to be overly dramatic, but in some ways it throws into question the very statistical basis of what we’re reading as science journalists and as the public.”
You don’t say.
It goes far beyond nutrition. A lot of drug research is based on this sort of thing as well, including the statin scam.
Maybe it should just stop giving it.
To paraphrase Inigo Montoya: It killed my father. It should prepare to die.