So, an old article this series is reminding me of is Beware of Stephen J. Gould. The claim there is that Gould misrepresents the state of the field, so that he can present himself as the hero triumphantly saving the day with his bold new theory, and that none of the experts in the field take him seriously. I don’t think that’s true of Taubes; I think the “field” is too broad to make narrow claims about consensus, and I get the impression that the best people in nutrition take Taubes seriously, even if they disagree.
I think that Taubes is right that the man in the street gets nutrition wrong, and I suspect further than many professionals who give nutritional advice (such as doctors) do no better than the man in the street. I suspect that Taubes’s theory of obesity is incorrect, relying heavily on sources like this (which I’ve linked before) and this (which I’ve also linked before). But it’s not clear to me that either of those represent the expert consensus in nutrition, and the overarching meta-point of “trust the expert consensus” seems suspect to me still, since the man in the street is unlikely to be good at estimating the expert consensus.
You’re right that there’s some resemblance. In fact, I considered calling this “Beware Gary Taubes.” What stopped me? The fact that frankly, I think Taubes is a lot less subtle than Gould. Portraying “low fat” advice as saying eating less fat is a sufficient condition for losing weight is more akin to the creationist portrayal of evolution as saying humans popped into existence by chance.
So, an old article this series is reminding me of is Beware of Stephen J. Gould. The claim there is that Gould misrepresents the state of the field, so that he can present himself as the hero triumphantly saving the day with his bold new theory, and that none of the experts in the field take him seriously. I don’t think that’s true of Taubes; I think the “field” is too broad to make narrow claims about consensus, and I get the impression that the best people in nutrition take Taubes seriously, even if they disagree.
I think that Taubes is right that the man in the street gets nutrition wrong, and I suspect further than many professionals who give nutritional advice (such as doctors) do no better than the man in the street. I suspect that Taubes’s theory of obesity is incorrect, relying heavily on sources like this (which I’ve linked before) and this (which I’ve also linked before). But it’s not clear to me that either of those represent the expert consensus in nutrition, and the overarching meta-point of “trust the expert consensus” seems suspect to me still, since the man in the street is unlikely to be good at estimating the expert consensus.
You’re right that there’s some resemblance. In fact, I considered calling this “Beware Gary Taubes.” What stopped me? The fact that frankly, I think Taubes is a lot less subtle than Gould. Portraying “low fat” advice as saying eating less fat is a sufficient condition for losing weight is more akin to the creationist portrayal of evolution as saying humans popped into existence by chance.
Why is this comment being downvoted so heavily?
(NOTE: parent comment was at −3 when I posted this)
It seems some topics prompt us to vote for truth status. I wonder if reality will bend to our collective beliefs some day.