Nutrition Science Skepticism

They do link to another article https://reason.com/2023/10/14/take-nutrition-studies-with-a-... where they discuss how nutritional studies in general provide very little in the way of truly evidence-based knowledge of the kind you'd expect from other medical fields.

Downvoted for opening with a (double) argument from authority.For your "more scientific" view, you offer assertions without citing any supporting evidence. So, as is, your statement is an opinion, as is so much nutritional advice.Hope your startup is based on more logic and less conventional wisdom than shown here.

Anyone stating a truth like this around nutrition is over confident, if not completely disingenuous. No one has a complete picture of this.https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=7789746717773890744...

Your hypothesis is incorrect, or at least not justified by the data. The whole field of human nutrition actually is in a very bad place. Most of what we think we know comes from low quality observational studies which don't rate well on the evidence based medicine scale.By all means let's continue research. But people generally shouldn't rely upon most of it when making dietary choices. A better approach is to conduct your own n=1 informal experiments and determine empirically

Nevermind PhD, all MD education on nutrition is based on weak science--almost no clinical trials to support current recommendations: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19177014

In what sense is nutrition science a joke?

The OP did not say that proper nutrition is a waste of time, but rather nutritional medical research is flawed, so advice coming from said research is not useful.

Huh. Judging from the replies here, maybe the diet angle isn’t as common knowledge as I thought. If you think the science is unclear on this, I recommend listening to / reading Dr Caldwell Esselstyn, Dr McDougall, and Dr. Michael Greger (nutritionfacts.org). The latter has a non profit that reads 60k research papers annually and produces videos and materials explaining the findings.

Nutritional advice is rarely supported by strong science, so "mostly true" for both headlines is easily possible, given the weak evidence for each statement.

Nutrition is not a solved problem and this person definitely hasn’t solved it.This article is just bad, it attempts to be authoritative on a subject that has bedeviled researchers for decades.It doesn’t meet Hacker News criteria for ‘new and interesting.’ There isn’t anything new here, the tradition of news publications writing up health advice (which always contradicts the most recent previous article) is a long and boring one.Pure nonsense. Seriously.