Tim Noakes diet is 'criminal'

Jola said:
I did provide the link. You didn't read it, or at best just skimmed it. Also read the references.

The article clearly stated that renal failure was a risk and that this diet needed to be used only for a limited time and under strict medical supervision.

If you are not interested, have made up your mind, and will ignore anything that the experts say : fine, but don't try to act all high and mighty and come up with expansionist statements.

Just do what the others do. Blissful ignorance.
Click to expand...
Renal failure can be caused by dozens of pharmaceutical products that are available OTC and for which no medical supervision (yet alone strict medical supervision) is practised.

I am all for wanting proper information and scientifically premised warnings to be issued but the hyperbole as to danger is simply nonsense.
 
Been doing a HFLC diet for 2.5 years and in the best health of my life.
 
Jola said:
Yes, but the examples that you quote are too recent to have been taken up in our evolutionary biology.

HF was always, going back millions of years, a luxury, and humans are never going to cope well with an excess of fats.

That is why I say, if you want to know what to eat, look at the chimps.

Their diet is not as good as steak, but well, that is how it goes.

In any event, steak production creates too much greenhouse gases.

BTW, chimps and baboons do eat meat, it is just quite limited. ie Low Fat !!!
Click to expand...

The evolutionary divide is horrendously misplaced. Humans can and do cope with large amounts of fat if they reduce the carb intake - we've known this for centuries. We've also learnt that meat and fruit doesn't store too well and how to process foods to make them last longer, we've used lard (fat) as an energy food in winter for centuries and eaten berries in summer.
 
Paul Hjul said:
IIRC Noakes has published more on geriatric health than on super-athletes (but I could be wrong)
O he has also published more on cardiology than most cardiologists

- granted using peer reviewed publication in an academic journal as a proposition for expert status on a particular point is not entirely accurate (and is a little self serving ;) )
Click to expand...

I doubt that the medical profession regards him as an expert on either geriatric health or cardiology. The latter actually became quite clear during his spat with Dalby, who clearly takes a dim view of Noakes's expertise in the field of cardiology.

BTW, Dalby told me that they had discussed this whole issue at a recent international cardiology conference, and that there was a pretty unanimous view that this diet was problematic.

But, of course, the experts on MyBB know better.

Boggles my mind that one could get so much BS concentrated in a single thread.
 
Jola said:
Check your time-line, that is recent history. Maybe try the guys in Siwa Oasis - but even that is too recent in terms of our evolution.
Click to expand...

Siwa. Right, evidently you don't know what Mossel Bay Man refers to.

Grasping at straws much ?
Click to expand...

I'm going to ignore that and give you some time to do a bit of googling. Good night.
 
Paul Hjul said:
The evolutionary divide is horrendously misplaced. Humans can and do cope with large amounts of fat if they reduce the carb intake - we've known this for centuries. We've also learnt that meat and fruit doesn't store too well and how to process foods to make them last longer, we've used lard (fat) as an energy food in winter for centuries and eaten berries in summer.
Click to expand...

You are aware what these practices did to life expectancy in the past millenium ?

Of course, not being snacked on by sabre-toothed tigers did, on the other hand, push life expectancy up.
 
Last edited:
Sodan said:
Siwa. Right, evidently you don't know what Mossel Bay Man refers to.
Click to expand...

Of course I know, but it is too recent to be relevant. You just don't seem to get it.

Try to sleep with an encyclopaedia under your pillow, maybe you will wake up enlightened.
 
and you fail to see how a cardiologist convention - which contains the same peers who accredited Noakes earlier work - having a pretty unanimous view is a problem

Frankly the doctor (complete **** of a human being) whose general medical opinion on these sorts of things I'd take as closest to the mark will say one thing to patients about diet and exercise but can't walk 1 Km without taking a sizable break, drinks far to much and eats more fat that any adherent to what Noakes is advocating and when in a sufficient state to actually discuss the medicine of things will side with the "well we actually know very little" proposition
 
Arthur said:
A little knowledge of the history of science would disincline you from being so dogmatic.

Barry Marshall was dismissed as a quack by the medical establishment around the world. His 2005 Nobel in Medicine induced copious quantities of facial egg on all his establishment detractors.
Click to expand...

Yes, the Barry Marshall story is interesting.

But I didn't get the impression that I was being dogmatic, rather that this applied to number of posters in this thread.

Taking the word of someone who revived an old and discredited diet, and trying to make a thing of it. The mind boggles.
 
One thing that bothers me about Noakes is his habit of reacting hysterically when anyone criticises the diet. Everyone's immediately an industry shill who's been bought and paid for.
 
Jola said:
You are aware what these practices did to life expectancy in the past millenium ?

Of course, not being snacked on by sabre-toothed tigers did, on the other hand, push life expectancy up.
Click to expand...

You do realize that peak life expectancy of humans has been high for a ****off long time and that its average expectancy that goes up. To attribute average life expectancy increases to superior diet is to confuse correlation and causation and to ignore our successes in combating disease. I am quite cool with presenting extreme hedonistic diets (take Henry VIII) and pegging same to diabetes, but a general premise that our colonial economy induced diets are good for us is misguided - and I seriously have no problem with the height of such a diet of eating cows that rove about to cause critical mass to prevent deserts from forming and then are slaughtered as low fat meat and added to processed wheat as cheap cheap burgers ...
 
OrbitalDawn said:
One thing that bothers me about Noakes is his habit of reacting hysterically when anyone criticises the diet. Everyone's immediately an industry shill who's been bought and paid for.
Click to expand...

He learnt how to handle criticism from the best ...
 
Paul Hjul said:
and you fail to see how a cardiologist convention - which contains the same peers who accredited Noakes earlier work - having a pretty unanimous view is a problem
Click to expand...

No, I don't think it is a problem. These guys were trained on different continents, in different medical schools, and in different environments. And I am sure that they can think for themselves.

I do see it as a problem when a discredited diet (Atkins, or whatever you want to call it) is revived by one person, and because of the internet conspiracy mindset, it becomes the in thing. That I see as a serious problem.
 
Jola said:
Of course I know, but it is too recent to be relevant. You just don't seem to get it.

Try to sleep with an encyclopaedia under your pillow, maybe you will wake up enlightened.
Click to expand...

knowledge osmosis isn't real ... :p
 
OrbitalDawn said:
I don't know what that means.
Click to expand...

Noakes has been a medical doctor since before I was born - if you've ever lived with a medical doctor you'd know what that means

Add to being a medical professional that he has been in very sheltered academia and a sporting hero
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X