He starts with the statement that our beliefs should be based in science. He then points out some beliefs that have neither been proven nor disproven, calling them myths.

If a person does poorly on a very low carb diet, adds fruit, and does better, this is given as a valid anecdote supporting the contention that a low carb diet isn't for everyone.

But then he has a myth where Drinking Butter and Coconut Oil is a good idea--and the many people doing well on that program--their anecdotes don't count? Besides personal bias, on what grounds is this better than that? As far as nutrient density goes--there's lots of room for various green leafy veggies, that plus small amounts of extremely nutrient rich meats such as liver go a very long way.

People feeling better with fruit, or potato, doesn't mean that they suffered from a carbohydrate deficiency, that remains to be proven. Back to those nutrients again--it's quite possible to devise a ketogenic diet that's nutrient deficient in other ways. And not that hard to design a ketogenic diet that's complete. When somebody does poorly on a ketogenic diet, the problem is--which ketogenic diet is that?



I don't think this is a proven thing. But as long as he includes insulin in there, I don't think it's disproven, either. I'd also like to make that inappropriate weight gain.

Would the binge eating he describes be effective in fattening him if his insulin were in line? (Or would the binge have even occurred in the first place, if he hadn't had some insulin issues in the first place)? I'm not suggesting these things are true, only that they might be.

If he just said that a food doesn't necessarily have to be high carbohydrate to cause weight gain when added to the diet, there I'd agree.