When you are told to "trust the science" remember that the science told us that bread and pasta should be the #1 component of our diets. This was taught at schools for decades.

submitted by Chipit from derwi.tk

all 32 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]Chipit[S] 8 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

According to this, pasta alfredo is health food.

[–]proc0 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

This is still having a huge effect on society. People really eat this way and don't know that carbs should be your at the very top where fats and oils are.

[–][deleted]  (4 children)

[deleted]

    [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

    They were setting us up for when the average American can't afford high quality animal protein anymore.

    [–]trident765 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

    I used to get steaks all the time from the grocery store. Now I no longer get them because they are so expensive.

    [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    Same.

    [–]thefirststone 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

    Actually, it was always government propaganda.

    [–][deleted] 9 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    Yes, the Keys hypothesis was never anything else than that: a hypothesis. But he was a loudmouth, gathered support among his weak-willed fellows, and already this was politics, and not science anymore.

    50 years before him, Weston A. Price observed that worldwide, by far the healthiest people were all carnivores. This was superbly documented and very scientific, but it didn't make profits for Big Agrifood.

    [–]jet199 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

    If you work 14 hour days down a mine or on a farm this is fair.

    [–]Chipit[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    The USDA's Food Pyramid dates to 1992.

    Why are you defending the corruption of the supposedly impeccable scientists when they were obviously bribed by the food lobby to publish harmful results?

    [–]Airbus320 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

    That's why they eat rice in Asia

    [–]jet199 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    But then Asian research is used to decide what's best for westerners who have both different lifestyles and genes.

    Much as happened disastrously with covid.

    [–]trident765 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    I wonder how many people have died from obesity and diabetes because the USDA told them to stuff themselves with carbohydrates. Anyone who thinks the crony capitalist system is here to save lives is a fool. When they are not held legally accountable, they will neglect the health and safety of the people. And since the pharmaceutical companies are granted immunity from being sued for vaccine side effects, we have no reason to believe they have any reason to care about the health and safety of the people.

    [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (17 children)

    One can read about the history of nutritional science, here, about food pyramids, here, about the history of nutrition guides, here, about the history and development of science, here, and about the USDA, here. Are there problems with the history and development of science, nutritional science, and government agencies? Yes. Are those problems due to science? Not necessarily. It's simple: we know more about nutrition because of science. More importantly: if we do not want to trust scientific research, who do we want to trust? The church pastor? An authoritarian politician? A corporation? Political action committee funded websites?

    [–]Chipit[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (15 children)

    Science lied to us because they were bribed by the food industry. Duh.

    Science can and will lie to us, up to and including causing mass deaths. How about the Tuskegee Experiment? The Stanford Prison Experiment? Piltdown Man? Cold Fusion? Theranos? The Lancet study on autism relationship to vaccines?

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (14 children)

    Science is not a person.

    People and corporations occasionally commit fraud with the help of misinformation and disinformation. Science is used to correct these people.

    [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

    Obviously you've never met Johnny Science.

    These aren't fringe beliefs though, there really was... is something afoul with nutritional science for a long time although it is a very difficult field to study. It wasn't an honest mistake carbs were pumped as healthy, as it's not an honest mistake veganism is sold as a more healthy alternative.

    [–]thefirststone 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    I knew Mr. Wizard. And Johnny Science is, sir, no Mr. Wizard.

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Yes - I think this is a very important topic of discussion. No - I'm afraid I've not had the pleasure of meeting Johnny Science.

    [–]Chipit[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

    The scientists, who are people, commit fraud. Sometimes this fraud harms a huge number of people.

    We will end up discarding decades of scientific research because it's not replicable. It's called the "Replication Crisis". The thousands of people who committed this fraud are all scientists who were practicing science.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis

    A 2016 poll of 1,500 scientists conducted by Nature reported that 70% of them had failed to reproduce at least one other scientist's experiment (including 87% of chemists, 77% of biologists, 69% of physicists and engineers, 67% of medical researchers, 64% of earth and environmental scientists, and 62% of all others)

    [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

    Again - here's the implication that science and scientists are generally fraudsters. OK, from now on, I'll only believe what you tell me.

    [–]Chipit[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

    The science says that 67% of medical researchers have failed to reproduce an experiment. Would you trust people like that? Do they deserve your trust?

    [–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

    That happens with cutting edge science. The initial findings are interesting because they stand out. Often in the first paper they're misinterpreted, or not completely understood.

    That's why science only becomes settled after replication and preferably development of the underlying theory.

    [–]Chipit[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

    But the "science" can't be replicated. We're not talking a few papers, we're talking 67-87%. And these are legitimate "scientists" doing this. We are in a Dark Age.

    [–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

    The scientific community is aware of the replication issue. Established science is established by replication and reproduction. Cutting edge science is speculative and most often refuted in part or entirely over the next few years.

    Fraud is a different problem. But fraudulent work can't be replicated or reproduced either.

    [–]Chipit[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

    If a study cannot be replicated, then it is not science.

    Why are you defending these malicious actors?　

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    Really? 1500 scientists - on a topic that they normally don't work with - eg. replicating the exact complicated experiments of others, which is impossible in most cases - though in any event they're working on their own highly specialized research. Good thing there are 9 million scientists in the world who can help corroborate - though their own versions of experiments - the value of any specific scientific discovery. If we're going to be skeptical of the information we read about, science can help. [Edit - removed the last sentence.]

    [–]ShalomEveryone 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    who do we want to trust?

    Memes, duh!

    [–]IkeConn 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

    We are from the government and are here to help you.

    [–]thefirststone 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    you're blinding me with sciencerayguns of truth