> Does anybody here doubt that chronic evasion enforced by tribal conformity
> can win for a long time against empirically based reason? Have the eating
> habits of the average USA citizen reached rock bottom after obesity has
> finally (whew what a battle) become acknowledged as a chronic disease? No.
> Evasion continues. Preventable hypoglycemia, diabetes, heart disease and
> cancer continue to increase incapacitating and destroying the lives of
> younger and younger people as the appalling US diet plumbs new depths
> (only matched by electric music). Possibly the worst outcome of is that
> heath care in the US is inevitably predicted to steadily be less and less
> affordable as people chomp their way into an early junk food grave only
> because it correctly reflects this awful market reality.
>
> How can any intelligent member of the general public reconcile the billions
> spent on scientific research with the _continuing absurdity_ of the average
> American diet? What we see here can only be explained as limiting reason to
> what remains politically acceptable. A classic example is the popular Atkins
> diet which actually encouraged overweight (i.e. chronically ill) people to
> poison their system by entering ketosis forcing off a few kilos without
> removing the artery hardening risks known to be associated with excess
> animal products. How could any responsible adult advocate such insanity?
> Atkins hid the fact (or did not now) that he had heart disease which was
> only discovered after he was said to have died by accident.
>
> http://www.pritikin.com/eperspective/specialissues/pritikinatkins/ind...
>
> It is still possible to read reams and reams of utterly biased nonsense re:
> carbs Vs fat and protein battle which has finally resolved itself into: what
> we meant to say all along was COMPLEX carbs and not just carbs (duh).
> Meanwhile, advocates of a rational diet based on evolutionary theory (eating
> a wide range of natural unprocessed foods in season which mostly consists of
> high fiber vegetarian products all of which remain low G.I) mostly enjoying
> good health look on in wonder and amazement as flabby gilled "experts" spit
> venom at each other over something so obvious. I am beginning to come around
> to thinking that Peter's AEVASIVE psychology (which I do not understand)
> must have some truth to it.
>
> Regards,
>
> John Edser
> Independent Researcher
>
> e...@ozemail.com.au