Reply to Thread

Guest, we'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the Diabetes Forum Survey 2025 »

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Deleted member 532959" data-source="post: 2640696">It's not my favourite website, by any means. I have various disagreements with certain of their information as I do with many in the vegan and plant-based movement(s), including most of the doctors. Their being vegan doesn't give them a pass in my book; quite the opposite, in fact. While I generally have a high intolerance for misinformation, I hold these people to a much higher-standard.That being said, and in spite of my misgivings, they're helping an ever-increasing number of people to improve their health. So I do what I've advised others here to do i.e I separate the results from the narrative. Just because you got well ditching carbs (fats, in the case of the plant-based crowd) doesn't mean it was the carbs (or fats) that were the issue. A more nuanced and, dare I say, wholistic approach would be to look at all the other commonalities that might offer clues as to why such distinct and contradictory approaches could workAnyway...The reason I post links to their site is not to suggest that people should follow the plan, nor to assert that their community's increasing roll-call of success stories is proof of the inefficacy of the low-carb protocols. Again...quite the opposite (Ironically, I think theat low-carb is more successful than likely the majority here do). I post to remind people to keep an eye out for the black swans. Actually, I prefer levitating dogs, myself (Essentially, If you were to claim that dogs cannot levitate, I'd only need to show you one levitating dog for one to (hopefully) re-consider one's world view.But that doesn't always follow. One could, instead, seek to dismiss what is in front of one's eyes. Some will cry 'Anecdote!' And yes, anecdotal evidence is not very robust, relatively speaking. But interestingly, the value of anecdotes is normally dependent on how closely it comports with one's current world-view. Low-carbers tend to be far more accepting of low-carb anecdotes, and the same applies on 't'other side'. I personally agree with the notion that 'One levitating sheep is an anecdote; many levitating sheep(s) is data' <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" />  Anecdotes are data points, from which to hypothesise and then test with more robust scientific enquiry. They are not in and of themselves the end-point, nor are they being put forth as rigorous science. As for cynicism? I am/was very cynical; Nihilistically so, in fact. And while I used to 'wear' it as a badge-of-honour,  I have come to view it as an insidiously negative and destructive force in my life. Fortunately, 'healthy skepticism' has served as a good halfway-house between outright cynicism and outright gullibility. Skepticism cracks the window on cynicisms' closed-mindedness, letting important fresh air/perspectives in.These days, it's getting more and more common for people to take cynicism to its other natural conclusion - conspiracy thinking. It's not just the wholesale dismissal of studies on the grounds of whoever did the funding, or the complete dismissal of people's work because they dare to put a price on it. But in the case of the MD program, there seems to be the inference that slick marketing/presentation somehow confers dishonesty. I would find it no surprise that the majority of people here would be skeptical of MD's results. That's not a criticism, in any way. It's natural that people would be skeptical of something so different to their own current view-point. But there's a difference between that skepticism and the inference (And I know this wasn't your particular position) that because the MD program is coming from the perspective of the wfpb movement, and because of the slickness of the presentation, that the veracity of the testimonials should be questioned. Are all those people lying, or or they fake accounts/testimonials generated by Cyrus and Robbie? (This is rhetorical. I know this wasn't you accusation) If you happen to believe the testimonials are real (And I tend to believe most here, including you, are rational enough to believe so), then wouldn't the next stage be to start trying to work out what are the commonalities between two (seemingly) completely diametrically-opposed protocols, such that both can bring about such good results for those who are truly compliant?  There is no voodoo/magicmagic to their program in the same way as there is none with the low-carb approach. Both approaches eliminate the same issue, but just come at it from opposite sides.Anyway...I believe that the space left by the (current) lack of robust science should be filled with honest inquiry, rather than outright dismissal (Your mileage may vary, of course)...............Was going to post a short video of David Unwin relating a story about telling his grand-daughter about black swans, but I can no longer find it on Youtube. Perhaps I was dreaming it?</blockquote>

Verification

Top Bottom

Search

Search

Reply to Thread