As was my tradition, in December I restore old favorites from years. This year we will look back at 2016
Two weeks ago, Kevin Hall and I had our comment on the diet published in The Lancet. It is not surprising that we have upset some peoples – mainly the lower classes. Some of us have accused us of being low fat cheerleaders. Others we promoted a "purpose"to low carbohydrate diets.
While I can't speak for Kevin, I can honestly say I'm okay with low carb diets. For some people, it is a transformer and our office is happy to work with their patients. I also have nothing against low fat, Old, intermittent fasting, vegan, gluten free or any other diet that has a name.
What matters most to me and what has been the focus of our commentary is whether or not a person prefers his or her chosen diet to maintain it. Food is not just fuel. Food is comfort, food is a celebration and food serves as the foundation of a huge part of our social life. Regardless of whether one diet or another diet offers a person a few pounds of weight loss (or even if it provides specific health benefits), it becomes important if one prefers the style of diet to eat enough with it for good.
As noted in our track, every diet out there has its long-term success stories, and so they move forward, if you see someone out there suggesting that diet is the best (or that your diet is the worst), you are sure to have an agenda. Their agenda may simply reflect an n = 1 culture of "this worked for me so that's what you need to do"may reflect basic post-market rationalization or reflect genuine sciences and studies that lead to greater short-term losses or potential health benefits. But if they can't wrap their heads around adhesion (which is an individual an expression of whether or not you like what you eat and don't miss out on), as the most critical element of any diet's long-term diet, their ideology shows.
Interim efforts will only give temporary results, no matter how exciting the results will be in the short term.