Maybe its time we push back a bit more on MAHA and some of their "science." It doesn't have to be nasty or a war, but a lot of what influencers are pushing is harmful.
How the wheel of scientific and human history continues to turn. Louis Pasteur, best known for his work on bacterial pathogens and the development of treating milk by heating to reduce the pathogenic load, was also vilified early in his career by established scientists who did not believe in germ theory. However, through diligent, well designed, and repeatable experimentation, Pasteur and his method of pasteurization overcame the "groupthink" of the mid 1800s. Much of food safety that current society enjoys is the result of this work.
The raw milk advocates ask an interesting question; is there a nutritional and associated health/survival benefit of raw milk as produced in the 2020s? They are neither right nor wrong, but they do have to do the unbiased scientific experimentation to find that answer. Otherwise, the raw milk crowd are but the flat earthers of nutrition and food safety science.
Joshua: For once, we seem to agree on a topic. The whole raw milk scam is just that, and it demonstrates the flaws in Kennedy's approaches to public health. By the way, adults do not need to drink any milk to be healthy. Throughout human history, milk intake was mostly restricted to infants and children.
I am very familiar with the scientific method. I trained under Franz Halberg at the University of Minnesota, and Franz started the field of chronobiology. I have previously mentioned my CARB syndrome theory, and it is just that--an unproven theory that would be challenging to prove using present-day science. I use the theory because it seems to consistently result in better outcomes based on empirical observations. If someone has a theory that consistently gives even better outcomes, I will use their theory. In the real world, we must use the theories that seem to give the best empirical results until we have access to controlled studies. I know it's a bit messy, but that's how the real world works.
I agree that food that is a chemical and we eat way too much processed foods and sugar. I agree with your theory there. I think RFK Jr. is correct there as well. The more we learn about gut health - there is less and less room for those who think our diets containing these artificial nutrients are innocuous. As a horseman, I remember as a kid feeding horses “sweet feed” which was the equivalent of equine junk food. Today you can use it as a treat. We see “metabolic syndrome” in horses all the time now. Same for type 2 diabetes in adults. Your theory on CARB syndrome might have merit for sure, but I appreciate your couching it as a theory. If there is a problem in “traditional” science is that it is hard to get theories tested in the traditional way. That is 100% true.
Also agree 100% that milk for adults is not needed. Cow’s milk today is basically about volume. A better milk if a person needs to drink milk is goat’s milk, the molecules are smaller and contain more nutrients. Grass fed cow’s make better milk (and meat) with more omega components, but we grain feed most production animals - that is truth that MAHA seems not to get. These folks have a point that a lot of what is available to us on store shelves is not “good” food, then they take a hard left turn into crazy town with the science and alternatives.
I agree with your perspective. We have a home in Greece and spend part of the summer there. It's much easier to eat a whole foods diet in Greece, and their grocery stores are much different than ours. I developed my CARB syndrome theory by actually measuring the body composition of every patient at every visit for decades. Over time, I noticed a strange correlation between certain brain dysfunction symptoms and changes in body composition. When I suppressed these symptoms using some targeted supplements, within a few weeks, their body composition would start to improve regardless of their caloric intake, and their brain function would also improve.
In 2003, my letter to the editor was published in the NEJM, where I challenged the experts about the foolishness of using BMI to diagnose and treat obesity. 20+ years later, the experts are finally catching up to me!
How the wheel of scientific and human history continues to turn. Louis Pasteur, best known for his work on bacterial pathogens and the development of treating milk by heating to reduce the pathogenic load, was also vilified early in his career by established scientists who did not believe in germ theory. However, through diligent, well designed, and repeatable experimentation, Pasteur and his method of pasteurization overcame the "groupthink" of the mid 1800s. Much of food safety that current society enjoys is the result of this work.
The raw milk advocates ask an interesting question; is there a nutritional and associated health/survival benefit of raw milk as produced in the 2020s? They are neither right nor wrong, but they do have to do the unbiased scientific experimentation to find that answer. Otherwise, the raw milk crowd are but the flat earthers of nutrition and food safety science.
Thanks for this. Great comment. Thanks for reading my article and providing the history of a great man who saved millions of lives.
Joshua: For once, we seem to agree on a topic. The whole raw milk scam is just that, and it demonstrates the flaws in Kennedy's approaches to public health. By the way, adults do not need to drink any milk to be healthy. Throughout human history, milk intake was mostly restricted to infants and children.
I am very familiar with the scientific method. I trained under Franz Halberg at the University of Minnesota, and Franz started the field of chronobiology. I have previously mentioned my CARB syndrome theory, and it is just that--an unproven theory that would be challenging to prove using present-day science. I use the theory because it seems to consistently result in better outcomes based on empirical observations. If someone has a theory that consistently gives even better outcomes, I will use their theory. In the real world, we must use the theories that seem to give the best empirical results until we have access to controlled studies. I know it's a bit messy, but that's how the real world works.
I agree that food that is a chemical and we eat way too much processed foods and sugar. I agree with your theory there. I think RFK Jr. is correct there as well. The more we learn about gut health - there is less and less room for those who think our diets containing these artificial nutrients are innocuous. As a horseman, I remember as a kid feeding horses “sweet feed” which was the equivalent of equine junk food. Today you can use it as a treat. We see “metabolic syndrome” in horses all the time now. Same for type 2 diabetes in adults. Your theory on CARB syndrome might have merit for sure, but I appreciate your couching it as a theory. If there is a problem in “traditional” science is that it is hard to get theories tested in the traditional way. That is 100% true.
Also agree 100% that milk for adults is not needed. Cow’s milk today is basically about volume. A better milk if a person needs to drink milk is goat’s milk, the molecules are smaller and contain more nutrients. Grass fed cow’s make better milk (and meat) with more omega components, but we grain feed most production animals - that is truth that MAHA seems not to get. These folks have a point that a lot of what is available to us on store shelves is not “good” food, then they take a hard left turn into crazy town with the science and alternatives.
That’s what drives me crazy.
I agree with your perspective. We have a home in Greece and spend part of the summer there. It's much easier to eat a whole foods diet in Greece, and their grocery stores are much different than ours. I developed my CARB syndrome theory by actually measuring the body composition of every patient at every visit for decades. Over time, I noticed a strange correlation between certain brain dysfunction symptoms and changes in body composition. When I suppressed these symptoms using some targeted supplements, within a few weeks, their body composition would start to improve regardless of their caloric intake, and their brain function would also improve.
In 2003, my letter to the editor was published in the NEJM, where I challenged the experts about the foolishness of using BMI to diagnose and treat obesity. 20+ years later, the experts are finally catching up to me!
I had the same experience living in Portugal. And not was the food better it was significantly less expensive.
Check this out: https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/47/27/3456/8661792?utm_source=etoc&utm_campaign=eurheartj&utm_medium=email&nbd=36052415165&nbd_source=campaigner