You can find many who say there's 'good quality evidence' for many things. Have you any idea how little evidence there is for most of these 'many' things? As Sally says, most studies prove nothing. And as I keep saying, if the macros are wrong, everything else follows. If, for example, a low fat diet can be implicated in Alzheimer's, then it follows that any study done is looking at chocolate on top of a low fat diet. Whereas chocolate in a high fat, low carb diet might be unnecessary.
There's little or no evidence for the big things we are told to eat / avoid. Why would we believe the little things?
'Little evidence'? The link I gave said "good quality evidence". The very fact that it gave a specific amount of dark chocolate shows how defining/detailed the studies are!!!
'Little evidence'? The link I gave said "good quality evidence". The very fact that it gave a specific amount of dark chocolate shows how defining/detailed the studies are!!!
I think maybe I am not able to make this clear enough for you to understand me. And I am unable to watch the link at the moment (laptop being repaired. Tablet in need of it!). What were the studies? Because I very much doubt that they are addressing the points I made above. Were the studies named? Referenced?
I keep asking for studies that disprove what I am saying. So far, no one has come up with anything. I am happy to argue this on the basis of science.
I think maybe I am not able to make this clear enough for you to understand me. And I am unable to watch the link at the moment (laptop being repaired. Tablet in need of it!). What were the studies? Because I very much doubt that they are addressing the points I made above. Were the studies named? Referenced?
I keep asking for studies that disprove what I am saying. So far, no one has come up with anything. I am happy to argue this on the basis of science.
It was a programme not an article, so doesn't have references! I gave the relevant info in my post # 25. It was a responsible BBC programme designed to sort out the wheat from the chaff from food stories in the media, i.e. get behind the headlines and assess what is true.
I don't understand your points e.g. macro? I would suggest that omega 3, i.e. fish oils are far more relevant in combating dementia - all indications point to this - than a general low fat diet.
It was a programme not an article, so doesn't have references! I gave the relevant info in my post # 25. It was a responsible BBC programme designed to sort out the wheat from the chaff from food stories in the media, i.e. get behind the headlines and assess what is true.
I don't understand your points e.g. macro? I would suggest that omega 3, i.e. fish oils are far more relevant in combating dementia - all indications point to this - than a general low fat diet.
I have certainly never recommended a 'general low fat diet'.