Ron > Taubes' book is a wonderful read. It squares with the perspective
of most people on this list. However, it is viewed with disdain in other
venues. I have seen it called "junk science" and have seen Taubes
labelled "not a real scientist" among other put-downs. The fact remains
that I agree with what he has to say, and I like his ability to present
his perspective as a competing theory. From my bias, it is "true" while
the low fat paradigm is "false".

Ron, I don't believe there's any need to use quotation marks around
those words.  A thorough examination of the evidence, which is exactly
what Taubes gives us in this book, very seriously calls in question the
conclusions of the last few decades of nutritional "science" (a more
appropriate use of quotation marks).  The enterprise has been an abject
failure supported by shoddy method. 

The reaction to Taubes is hardly a surprise.  I am not suggesting evil
on the part of those who criticise him.  It's very, very difficult to
change paradigms, especially those we've invested so heavily in.  We are
all subject to this law.  Let's hope, though, that there are sufficient
numbers who take him seriously to cause a long overdue revolution in how
we think about nutrition.  A revolution with Cordain's "paleo template"
at its central and first principle.

One more thing and I'm done.  We all need to keep in mind that, as
complex and powerful as Taubes' argument is, he's only telling half the
nutritional story.  Low carb is man's dietary past and a tremendous step
towards health.  But we also need to pay attention, even in low carb
foods, to the effects of foreign proteins and other non-paleo foods on
our health.   Celiac and gluten intolerance spring immediately to mind. 
But all other autoimmune diseases are caused by this evolutionary
dietary divergence.  And there's good evidence for a host of others
(heart disease, cancer, etc.)


Jim Swayze
www.fireholecanyon.com