I was asked by Gary Taubes for an interview for his new book in December. At that point I was still open to being collegial with the low carb community. Earlier, for instance, I had corresponded quite a bit with Nina Teicholz. Gary wrote this is why he contacted me.
Before responding to Gary, I re-read Good Calories Bad Calories. I had been contacted by important people before (David Ludwig for instance, who seems to be a great guy and super smart), but I still thought of Gary as THE leader of low carb. 2/21
So I was shocked, flattered and a little confused. Gary wrote that he wanted to interview me about why I become WFPB after being low carb. But what could I offer him that he did not already know? So before responding, I started reading GCBC again, wanting to understand this. 3/21
I'm going to tweet interesting facts from it. And from the papers it cites that are interesting enough to look up. 2/n
Here's one. In this study in Sardinia, soldiers had a greater survival if they were short. At 70 years of age, the shorter men (<160 cm, or about 5'3") lived 2 years longer than men taller than 5'3". tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.108… 3/n
80% of Alt Nutrition gurus commit one of two mistakes: 1. Blinded by desire for recognition and sometimes even resentment or jealousy (as toward successful relatives), they're biased toward claims that undermine the establishment and inflate their sense of self-importance. 1/4
They will systematically misread science if it allows them to gratify their egos in this way. This is actually sad and I'm 100% not making fun of it.
2. They just do not understand the work that the best scientists put into their publications. 2/4
If most Alt Nutrition gurus understood the hard work that scientists actually do in peeling back layer upon layer upon layer of questions as they think about and write up their work, they would shit themselves. 3/4
cellular aging, increase disease risk, and reduce longevity. The bare minimum requirement is around 30g/day, but safer is around 50-70g, with 70g being on the high end of the minimum. Avoiding significantly exceeding an average of 70g/d protein is probably the best approach (2/5)
from a longevity standpoint. Caveats: 1. After a certain age, increasing intake may be reasonable, because muscle loss in the elderly becomes a cause of poor health and mortality risk. 2. Contrary to what some plant-based people say, significant muscle growth is probably (3/5)
[Above is adjusted for age (left) and multifactorially (right). Latter: age, total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, triglycerides, apoB, BMI, hypertension, DM, smoking, lipid-lowering therapy, and, for women, menopause and HRT.] 3/n