Science journalist Gary Taubes (you’ll admit, a little different from a nutritionist) is shocking public opinion with a book claiming that the Mediterranean diet makes you fat and fruit is the enemy of the line. The book, with the blunt title of “Why do you get fat?” (published in Italy by Sonzogno) also states that eating meat often, especially nice fat meat, would not only be very good for the figure, but would also make you lose weight. You can feast on lard , according to Taubes, who says that the cause of heart disease is not due to animal products and saturated fats, but to carbohydrates.
Now: in fact, in recent times, new studies have undermined the old beliefs of doctors that eating too much protein is bad for you, saturated fats are bad for the heart, meat makes us sick. All true. The problem of Taubes is the so-called “all white or all black”, a problem typical especially of the Americans. Do people consume more sugar today than in the past? And then carbohydrates are the devil.

Taubes is overwhelmed, he himself essentially consumes meat three to four times a day. Spearhead of those who make the Paleo diet but above all the ketogenic diet, Gary Taubes says that  fruits and vegetables are the devil, apart from green leafy vegetables , indeed, there would be an international conspiracy involving public health, vegetarians of all the world conspire to give us a heart attack, it is clear. Eating meat is good and not only, Taubes in his book goes beyond the advice of low carb high fat dieters, and recommends eating as much as possible . There. I would say he exaggerates.

In interviews, when a reporter gave him his example by saying that he eats carbohydrates and is very thin, Taubes said that it is not valid , a bit like the long-term smoker who has not contracted lung cancer. Judging by this answer, this man has logic from his of him. The hypothesis that a greater consumption of meat and animal fats is related to a greater risk of cancer is for Taubes pseudoscience .
Could it be true? Meanwhile, the famous journalist has caught the accusations identical to those made to three quarters of the scientific community: of not being objective in his analysis of him, of having chosen ad hoc information to show to readers to give substance to his theses. Too bad, because dealing intelligently with the clichés about nutrition, meat, cholesterol, fats, can only do us good: but in this clash between high and low carbers, the average consumer is fascinated by those who scream louder.