Talk:Gary Taubes

Evidence against the Carbohydrate-insulin model
Useful links that can be added later. John66 (talk) 06:05, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * A review of the carbohydrate-insulin model of obesity A review of the carbohydrate-insulin model of obesity
 * The Carbohydrate-Insulin Model of Obesity Is Difficult to Reconcile With Current Evidence
 * Why the carbohydrate-insulin model of obesity is probably wrong: A supplementary reply to Ebbeling and Ludwig’s JAMA article
 * Always Hungry? It's Probably Not Your Insulin

John66, see:

https://www.myoleanfitness.com/gary-taubes-sugar-obesity/ Carb Myths Busted (talk) 20:28, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Protein and bone loss
This article states that: "the high amount of protein recommended by Atkins leads to acidic urine. Professor of Nutrition George Blackburn noted that "there's no dispute that an acid urine leaches calcium out of bones."" Although this was previously considered plausible, the current expert consensus contradicts this assertion. In fact, dietary protein intake above currently recommended levels may help to reduce bone loss and fracture risk, especially at the hip, provided calcium intakes are adequate: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/05/180515105645.htm


 * The removal of total misinformation by an IP editor is not "edit warring" or "vandalism". The real wikipedia acknowledges that the acid ash hypothesis has been thoroughly discredited:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acid_ash_hypothesis
 * If anything, higher protein intake (≥ 0.8-g/kg body weight/day, i.e., above the current RDA) is associated with higher BMD. The editor "GrammarCommie", the person that repeatedly reverted this edit, has admitted in several other talk pages to being underweight, which is an important risk factor for low bone mass. Any licensed physician can corroborate this fact, so "GrammarCommie" is the last person you want to ask for advice on how to slow the rate of age-related bone loss. &mdash; Unsigned, by: 94.209.44.170 / talk
 * I never referred to myself as an expert, I merely told you to take it up on the talkpage. I also never refereed to your edits as "vandalism" (Please apologize for falsely stating that I did...) I did tell you to take it to the talkpage before removing sourced content. 03:46, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, my apologies for putting the word vandalism in quotation marks. It is quite clear, however, that my contribution was considered counter productive and possibly disruptive. Any unbiased reading of the literature contradicts this "sourced content" that you are referring to (see the above expert consensus) and you don't have to be an expert to draw this conclusion.
 * Very well, I cede to your position. I shall remove the section myself. 16:14, 29 October 2019 (UTC)