Re: Another low carb article bites the dust
markd_at_toad-net.com
Date: 07/29/04
- Next message: Mirek Fidler: "Re: Whole dietary patterns vs. reductionist approach"
- Previous message: Jan: "Re: Protein counting"
- In reply to: Mirek Fidler: "Re: Another low carb article bites the dust"
- Next in thread: tcomeau: "Re: Another low carb article bites the dust"
- Reply: tcomeau: "Re: Another low carb article bites the dust"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 29 Jul 2004 14:04:00 GMT
"1) article gets posted
2) article gets debunked because of commercial connections or just
because it is anti-low-carb.
You are omitting step one and ignoring the "anti-low-carb" part."
The responses are too often not debuncking at all with regard to science
but with to what degree it agrees with some nutrition theology belief
system. Thus they miss the science step and are then mostly not worth the
effort to read. A post for or against some theme can have merit if the
science is there. When the bulk of a response is an attack upon a person
then by definition it is worthless and gets tossed. Someone on some
mailing list or such I read has a sig line that goes somelike:
"I don't debate with an unarmed person"
which tells the tale nicely. If conspiracy and attack upon persons is all
some can do then not debating them is a mercy toward them and a saving of
time for all.
- Next message: Mirek Fidler: "Re: Whole dietary patterns vs. reductionist approach"
- Previous message: Jan: "Re: Protein counting"
- In reply to: Mirek Fidler: "Re: Another low carb article bites the dust"
- Next in thread: tcomeau: "Re: Another low carb article bites the dust"
- Reply: tcomeau: "Re: Another low carb article bites the dust"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
|