Author denounced the keto diet right there in the article.
Author proposed using sound scientific research rather than superstition to analyze diet and nutrition. Maybe he’s shilling for his blog or whatever, but it didn’t seem overt.
The narrative around the development of dietary guidelines bears repeating. This mythology recently killed someone I cared about, a chemist and engineer well capable of analyzing the data, but who couldn’t overcome the fear of fat and salt.
> Author denounced the keto diet right there in the article.
No, he only distances himself of fat-based keto. He is a low carb/keto fanatic. He jumps to conclusions from MyFitnessPal data and hand picked things (like the "1997 satiety index"). And seems to be doing mostly experiments on himself. This is garbage.
It makes me sad these kind of unscientific fads pop up constantly on HN.
Nutrition "articles" on HN always lead to the unholy trinity of conspiracy nuts, arrogant 'I know better than anyone in this field since I'm a smart engineer', and people whose main information sources are quacks on YouTube coming out of the woodwork blathering nonsense.
Well, I don’t know the difference between “keto” and “fat-based keto” anyway. I just bleeped past all that.
It seems the main point of the article is that “official” dietary guidelines are a crock, and that real dietary science is coming along.
Out of all the info, I’m inclined to try to find some kind of moderate position — more leafy vegetables and whole grains, non-factory farmed fish/meat, less sugar, minimal ultra-processed junk. With that, cook tasty food for my family and friends, have a great time together, and never worry about dietary science again.
(1) adjust energy intake and expenditure to achieve and maintain a healthy body weight; (2) eat plenty and a variety of fruits and vegetables; (3) choose whole grain foods and products; (4) choose healthy sources of protein (mostly plants; regular intake of fish and seafood; low-fat or fat-free dairy products; and if meat or poultry is desired, choose lean cuts and unprocessed forms); (5) use liquid plant oils rather than tropical oils and partially hydrogenated fats; (6) choose minimally processed foods instead of ultra-processed foods; (7) minimize the intake of beverages and foods with added sugars; (8) choose and prepare foods with little or no salt; (9) if you do not drink alcohol, do not start; if you choose to drink alcohol, limit intake
> This mythology recently killed someone I cared about, a chemist and engineer well capable of analyzing the data, but who couldn't overcome the fear of fat and salt.
Can you expand on this please?
Someone I know went on the keto diet like it was a religion, and I'm concerned about their long-term health.
Sure. This was an older person, educated in the 50s, and subjected to all the “old wives tales”, scientific pronouncements and popular dietary fads of the 70s and beyond.
The ones that stuck hardest were, on one hand, fears of cholesterol and sodium; on the other hand, the twisted embrace of both fruit and “sugar-free”; and on the gripping hand, the mortal fear of being fat / the holy grail of being thin.
This led to “healthy” meals of barely seasoned steamed chicken breast and broccoli, with fat/sugar-free oatmeal cookies and a bowl of fruit for dessert. Which led to fairly obvious malnutrition, wasting away, lack of resilience, etc.
We’d go out for Mexican or Vietnamese dinners sometimes, and it was fascinating to watch this picky eater ravage a big plate of cochinita pibil or gà nướng.
Fruit is sugar locked in fibre for slower release into the blood which is different from say candy. Other than that sounds like he is on a similar diet to me. Not the worst I suspect. And good ingredients are where it is at. Chicken without seasoning can taste great - get free range organic.
And for flavour whole chicken roasted is unbeatable for variety of flavours. Buying just breasts with skin off will
be more bland.
