James Krieger: Welcome to the Internet, a few years late

Hot Grills, would you go home with this guy?

James Head Shot1
Wanna Fuck?

OK, total cheap shot—anyone could do the same with me—but he decides to continue. I already kinda regret the shot, and am fully prepared to lose sleep over it tonight, until weariness overrules my conscience, which I predict will happen between 1am and 3am. …But it’s how I roll.

The general debate between us is somewhat relevant in general, and now it’s my task to make it—at least—entertining. I hope. And why? Because I have to make my cheap shot up to Jamie somehow, so I want you to go read what he has to say in the matter and as always: you’re the judge.

…Jamie suffers from a time warp where, as in the olden days of Internet, quoting and debating was like this:

> Bla bla bla bla

Appeal to authority. Appeal to tradition. Ad Hominem.

> More bla bla bla

Argumentum ad puplulum.

Yea, I did that when I was a kid, too. I got on USENET in 1992/3. That was the way things were done. It was valuable. The smartest and cleverest people on Earth were doing that, and probably because in those days, you had to really know how to get to the anarchist USENET, as it was. I suppose it’s just as anarchist now, in various ways, but they’ve since made it easy to get on everywhere, and so you have to contend with more morons than smart people. The childproof cap has not only been removed…what? I dunno.

…It’s a different landscape, by far, now.

So, instead of going out-of-context for effect like that (on purpose), once I began blogging in 2003 regularly, almost a post per day all these years, I began to get away from the deconstruction deal—it makes for an awful blog post—into trying to encapsulate what someone was tying to say in total, dealing with that in total, letting chips fall.

When you get good at it, you can even integrate stories and experiences—anecdotes and whatever—all for the purpose of distracting folks from SCIENCE (TM), and TRUTH (TM). 🙂

I’ll give you an example. I wrote a comment to Jamie and blogged it here, with little in the way of embellishment in the blog post. It took him almost a week to deconstruct the bits & pieces he wanted to highlight in a post, which he did here, as already linked twice, and now a third time.

As with others’ posts about me, it’s difficult for me to actually get through it, and it’s about me! I dunno, Jamie, but have you ever stopped to wonder why your posts get 4-5 comments each, and mine regularly get hundreds?

Perhaps, you’re just fucking boring? Check into it, man. Free tip. Or, run that argumentum ad puplulum as far as it goes and with any luck, you’ll have no readers at all.

But of course, that gets back to the SCIENCE (TM), right? SCIENCE (TM) trumps. And, of course, all one need to do is fall at the altar of SCIENCE (TM) in order to claim the mantle of SCIENCE (TM), and to be safe in demolishing the Stone Tablets before the Heathen Orgy of Humanity: to proclaim all others un-SCIENCE (TM)-ific.

That’s really the meta-point before I even begin to address his stupid bullshit deconstruction. He’s all for science, and I agree in principle. But he hides behind it. He uses it as a shield to elevate himself above those crunching out or working some science day by day and who are helping people, in spite of errors. I’ll have more to say on that point at the end.

It’s too bad that Jamie glossed over my “Larry the Liquidator” bit at the very beginning of my comment. It prefigured what I had to say and what I had to say was about value investing vs. speculation and gambling. But he’s a “basher,” or he loves them. That is, he values bashing for the pure value of bashing. I’ll tell you why, and it goes to the analogy he used in the first place about stock trading. He chose the analogy.

Value investing, to do right in the Warren Buffet sense, is intensely hard. You have to spend months, even years analyzing a single company for not only physical assets (not so important because Larry is always there) but balance sheet, P&L, management (huge biggie), market, market potential given the foregoing and so many hosts of other things.

But here’s the deal, the most important deal: there’s lot’s of well-positioned, well-managed companies with good potential. Warren is looking for those few that have been “dumped” or “bashed” a little much. When he finds them—”undervalued” in investor speak—he makes a huge bet.

His record speaks for itself.

On the other hand, there are speculators and gamblers, and the distinction is difficult to make. I was one, so I know. For a day trader, speculator, gambler, none of that foregoing shit means a thing. You’re looking at “technicals” (the chart pattern over various time periods), sentiment (what are other investors thinking of doing), news (how is CNBC, et al, going to influence trading), futures, foreign markets, or some combination of the foregoing (I tried to account for all as best I could in trading options).

See the difference?

Do you see the difference, and do you see why and how I turned Jamie’s analogy on its head in terms of my dealing with Evelyn at CarbSane? In short, we have no need of bashers around here, just yet. And how many people are dumb enough to make a career of bashing a startup that hasn’t even “gone public,” yet, to force the analogy a bit further?

OK, I’m sure I haven’t detailed this post enough as to not have people going WTF? Well, follow links, if you like. I’m not your mommy.

I’ll close by saying that I do not at all think James Krieger is in the same camp as Evelyn. From what I know, he has been critical, and has given the science as he sees it. He’s not written dozens of posts contre Taubes, or anyone else. As far as I know, he adds more than he bashes, and I only suspect that because I know he’s often mentioned along with Martin Berkhan, Lyle McDonald, and Alan Aragon—and I know for sure they don’t work that way.

In the end, I kinda regret having to go this far with James and go pussy-assed cheap shot on him, but he just had to defend Evelyn, and Evelyn is an enemy.

She is an absolute enemy. Her only raison d’etre is to tear down anyone she can find around paleo, LC, Lustig and now, Cross-Fit—imperfectly helping real people. She is a cancer, and the sooner she’s cut out and tossed to the dogs for digestion, the better

Richard Nikoley

I'm Richard Nikoley. Free The Animal began in 2003 and as of 2021, contains 5,000 posts. I blog what I wish...from health, diet, and food to travel and lifestyle; to politics, social antagonism, expat-living location and time independent—while you sleep—income. I celebrate the audacity and hubris to live by your own exclusive authority and take your own chances. Read More


  1. EatLessMoveMoore on June 5, 2012 at 20:10

    She recently did a take down of the CEO of CrossFit (well, sort of). Gotta at least give her credit for having a broad range of targets.

    • Richard Nikoley on June 5, 2012 at 20:50

      Not really.

      It’s all she does, attempt to take down other people. Why should anyone really care if the founder of a franchise eats at the franchise, so to speak. Are the folks who buy from the franchise happy and does it sit them?

      Robb Wolf had his issues, but he was in deep. He did his piece, moved on, but still promotes the principles of CF. Watch for the cancer to say yea, but it’s obvious it’s helping a motivating so many people so, cool.

      Never, not in her metastasizing world.

  2. EatLessMoveMoore on June 5, 2012 at 20:15

    Although I do wonder why she let Kruse off the hook so easily. For that matter, it blows me away how fast Krusegate just disappeared from public consciousness. Even Jimmy’s public silence on the matter has been deafening…

    • Richard Nikoley on June 5, 2012 at 20:53

      The reason Kruse disappeared is this blog. It’s not just me, but the many people who exposed the whole deal with his other similar conduct on other forums.

      I wish him well, though. But in a better character.

      • EatLessMoveMoore on June 5, 2012 at 22:29

        But all the cruise attendees? The ORGANIZER of the cruise? Something slimy – or at least dishonest – about that, if you ask me. I mean, Jack Kruse is on the LLVLC list of “Best Blogs” but Dr. Kurt Harris isn’t? I think Krieger has a point about that kind of stuff being the fallout of junk science.

      • Richard Nikoley on June 5, 2012 at 22:47

        Oh, ok. Frankly, I never pay attention to blogrolls, not even the ones that have me listed.

        I don’t even know if I’m on Jimmy’s list and frankly, haven’t done maintenance on my own in forever. Could even be dead links there.

        But I take your point. Could be that Kurt openly disses Jimmy, or that he doesn’t blog regularly but, I suspect I’d have to go with the former if I had to pick quickly.

        It could be bad or undiscipled science at the root. We’re all learning and I myself have changed course, though a bit in the middle becaue I’m convinced LC is a decent thing to do for a ton of people. Bit, yea, total allegiance to it is a problem.

        I prefer to give it time rather than try to trash it. It should be a tool. Hell, I have zero carb days just because it feels right for me, sometimes. But I’m not afraid of carbs from real foods.

        I advise patience and continued dialog. People read these comments.

  3. Nicholas Rich on June 5, 2012 at 20:23

    The USENET archives provide me with an endless source of amusement.

  4. Jeff on June 5, 2012 at 21:10

    Yeah, you’re right…. he’s just fucking boring.

  5. AmandaT on June 5, 2012 at 21:18

    I suspect that Evelyn has the ‘attention-seeking’ disease (Munchhausen’s) as she lives to over-dramatise. She wants to be worshipped as the ‘One True Scientist’. It is also interesting that her blogroll isn’t a list of blogs that she thinks are useful, but blogs that mention her. Which makes it obvious that her web efforts are just an ego trip. Ugly stuff.

  6. Neal Matheson on June 5, 2012 at 21:18

    Fat woman calls Greg Glassssman fat, did I miss something? Is she defending sugar on that site? what the fuck for? I don’t care for Crossfit especially I did it for a few years but I am (or was) a young fit man. Robb Wolf’s criticisms seem to be the most fair. Frank Forencich seems to have a much better handle on exercise in an evolutionary congruent manner and it won’t drop you like a pole-axed steer if you haven’t been in a gym for a few years.

    • Neal Matheson on June 5, 2012 at 21:20

      Defending potatoes is one thing (and fine if you ask me) but defending sugar is just a bit odd.

    • marie on June 6, 2012 at 18:08

      “…and it won’t drop you like a pole-axed steer if you haven’t been in a gym for a few years” -laf, nice imagery, that was my experience too. I came back to it later…much later.

  7. AndrewS on June 5, 2012 at 21:22

    Hey man, isn’t that pretty cruel to the dogs?

  8. Asfaq on June 5, 2012 at 21:30

    Please shut the fuck up and write about Paleo. Who are these nut jobs you keep dissing anyway! Am here to read about what your opinions on Paleo are, not for you to get all whiny about some other kids.

    Lately, the flame posts have just become too frequent. Focus man, focus!

    Your Friendly Neighborhood Troll.

    • Richard Nikoley on June 5, 2012 at 21:44


      I’ll try to remember its all about you.

      • Asfaq on June 5, 2012 at 22:08


        That’d be nice, no doubt 🙂

      • Richard Nikoley on June 5, 2012 at 22:14

        Hey, I can be a good sport sometimes. 🙂

      • LeonRover on June 6, 2012 at 07:24

        You are certainly a sport.

  9. Asfaq on June 5, 2012 at 22:20

    Cheers man!

    Good luck with those cold water baths (‘thermogenics’ is too fancy a word). I am doing them too, but this being India, the water temperature isn’t even remotely close to where it should be 🙂

    • Richard Nikoley on June 5, 2012 at 22:38

      Yea, I don’t want to mess with ice, so I’m looking forward to winter with much trepidation. Cold weather in 40-50 something water.

      On the lighter side, I do go to the pool club where I estimate the water is about 7o something, but I stay in for usually 40-50 minutes, lightly swimming or treading. I still get a profound well being feeing from it. Sometimes, I’ll come back and just do 10 min in my 60 deg tub to top things off.

      I am very sold on this as a regular thing.

  10. Kevin on June 5, 2012 at 23:27

    it’s difficult for me to actually get through it, and it’s about me!

    I laughed my ass off at this.

    The thing about you, Richard, is you rant funny. The people who take shots at you pretend that doesn’t matter. But it makes ALL the difference.

    Anyway, look for Evelyn and the usual suspects to really ramp up the attacks on Lustig now that NYC and even the Walt Disney Co. are taking real steps against sugar. The Disney Channel turning down ads for sugared cereals and breakfast pastries? Disney CEO Iger saying that taking a stand against sugar ads aimed at children is “just good business”? Fucking A, never thought I’d see that in my lifetime.

    Lustig certainly isn’t 100% responsible for that, but he is a big part of why it happened now.

    Evelyn will pretend her attacks are about his not getting the science perfect, but it’s really about the fact that, like Taubes, he made a difference. (Which is something that remedial chemistry teachers at shitty commuter colleges just don’t do.)

  11. Andy on June 6, 2012 at 08:39

    “To me, it sounds like you are saying that essentially the popularity and influence is what really matters, not what is factual or truthful. This is nothing more than a form of the argumentum ad populum fallacy…if it’s popular, then it must be true. The characteristics you describe only demonstrate that people are easily swayed by things that are completely irrelevant to the truth. Hitler had personality, drive, sensation, conniving, and influence….and 6 million people died as a result.”


    I took it as good results/science (perhaps by accident) outweigh the errors of the bad science. Also, Reductio ad Hitlerum.

    • Richard Nikoley on June 6, 2012 at 08:42

      Goodwin always shows up eventually.

  12. Andy on June 6, 2012 at 08:55

    What is the fallacy called where you unfairly dismiss something by referring to fallacies with Latin names though?

    • Sean on June 6, 2012 at 09:58

      It’s not about unfairly dismissing something using Latin names, it’s the fact that these fallacies have been degraded as they’ve become popular amongst 12 year olds (or their mental equivalent). I’m aware of logical fallacies and have been for a long time, but I try not to invoke them very often because they are so poorly understood and used. They are just a shortcut or rule of thumb for lucid logic.

      Now I’m not saying that Krieger doesn’t have a firm grasp on logical fallacies. But I think the main point Richard makes is that this style of quote a couple sentences, give a dry esoteric argument, etc, is really boring and generally pointless.

      I too, spent time on Usenet back in the 90s doing this kind of stuff.

      I don’t know how well Krieger argues it because I couldn’t be bothered to read more than a few sentences. But when people use inflated language in a dry tortured way, as Krieger did in the few sentences I bothered to read, they are generally full of shit or trying to obfuscate things rather than arguing in an intellectually honest manner.

      The idea behind logical fallacies is to promote logical clarity, ironic that they are mostly used these days for just the opposite.

      • Richard Nikoley on June 6, 2012 at 10:06

        Yea, I can remember, back in the day having my link handy for all the logical fallacies. They are indeed useful to read and understand, but what I found over time is not to beat others over the head with, but to keep in mind as you construct your own lucid counter, arguments.

        So, for instance, instead of saying “argumentum ad populum,” how about something like, “you know, there was a time when everyone believed the entire universe revolved around the Earth.”

        YMMV, but I have found that to be a much more engaging way to argue.

      • Sean on June 6, 2012 at 10:44

        I think you are right.

        But another problem is that the people using these arguments usually don’t understand them. They are logical shortcuts, not scientific proofs.

        Begging the question, strawman, etc, these things are so often misused as to have become almost meaningless in normal (ie stupid) discourse.

      • Richard Nikoley on June 6, 2012 at 11:13

        Don’t get me started on my pet peeve of people using “begging the question” when they mean “raise the question.”

        Actually, I think that fallacy is probably the very most common.

      • Sean on June 6, 2012 at 11:43

        Richard Feynman talked about the difference between understanding a concept and merely parroting it. It’s far from always true, but a decent rule of thumb is that if someone can’t explain a concept clearly it’s because they don’t understand it very well themselves.

        This is why I was skeptical of Stephan’s explanation of food reward, he did a poor job of explaining it, and especially defending it, IMO.

      • Jscott on June 6, 2012 at 16:32

        I enjoy good story tellers. The best are also great at explaining difficult concepts to children.

        Feynman talks a bit about this here:

        As of late I have been rather appreciative of Ray Cronise’s refusal to get into debate about..well, anything. The commenting on his blog is quite intriguing in the way he handles it.

        Seems to me, that the more curious the person the less they have time for debate. Though, I suppose you need both.

  13. jofjltncb6 on June 6, 2012 at 09:09

    James who? Should I even know who this guy is?

    • jofjltncb6 on June 6, 2012 at 09:11

      Oh, sorry…I posted this comment before I made it all of the way through your post.

      At least now I understand his relevance, at least insofar as it relates to you.

  14. Matthew on June 6, 2012 at 09:47

    I’m 100% against Carbsane when it comes down it. There’s only one reason why, her own n=1 study for weight loss and health seems to be a huge failure. I don’t take anyone seriously who can’t produce results for themselves (Berkhan, Sisson, You, Tom Naughton, Harris, etc. etc.).

    That being said Richard, it’d be nice to see some progress pics from you every once in a while, just to see some of the results aka the “proof” of these n=1 experiments.

    • EatLessMoveMoore on June 6, 2012 at 10:43

      Like Jimmy? Give him a year – or less – and he’ll be back where he started. All the individuals you mentioned (“Berkhan, Sisson, You, Tom Naughton, Harris, etc. etc.”) have one thing in common: They acknowledge, even if they call it different things, the importance of calories and physical activity in weight loss. Tom Naughton may be drinking the Taubes Kool-Aid, but you don’t see him gorging himself on fat either.

      • Richard Nikoley on June 6, 2012 at 11:17


        “Give him a year – or less – and he’ll be back where he started.”

        You talking about me?

        Laf. I’m nearing the best I ever was, sometime in 2009/10.


        Now I get to think how stupid you are, and just when I was getting to like you, too. My “progress pic” will be revealed at AHS.

      • EatLessMoveMoore on June 6, 2012 at 11:30

        You? Oh hell no. Talking about The Jimmer.

      • Richard Nikoley on June 6, 2012 at 11:51

        OK, ELMM. My bad.

        No worries, mate. Thanks for the clarifying clarification.

    • EatLessMoveMoore on June 6, 2012 at 10:46

      And who says CarbSane is fat? That seems to be a sort of urban legend based on little in the way of hard facts. She looks pretty decent in her pics – unless anorexic chic is your thing…

      • Richard Nikoley on June 6, 2012 at 11:19

        I have it on good authority that she is very fat. Way fat.

        But, it’s not my thing to worry about that. I’d be doing the same if she was thin.

      • EatLessMoveMoore on June 6, 2012 at 11:31

        Gonna be epic when she goes to AHS this year.

      • Matthew on June 6, 2012 at 13:33

        The problem with the entire paleo dialogue is that there are two “camps” using one moniker aka paleo.

        There’s the whole weight loss clique, and then there are the people who are already in peak condition and now want to strive for peak performance.

        Personally, I follow people (like I listed) who have their shit together, and are disciplined. There are plenty of paleo tools available to help you lose weight. If you can’t do it then I just have to chalk it up to lack of discipline.

        That being said, being thin doesn’t always mean being healthy, and I think that’s where the actual paleo debates are still worth having. What micronutrients, workouts, CT, etc. et.c

      • Richard Nikoley on June 6, 2012 at 14:04


        Yes, the ripped vs. reasonable person is a debate worth having and I think, especially for 50+ women. I am coming to think that for them especially, a BF of 20-25%, Marylin Monroe-esque and many, many in that era, if potentially the most healthy hormonally.

        I’m not sure, but I think it’s a discussion worth having.

      • gallier2 on June 7, 2012 at 01:40

        It is also to that BF level that “normal” low-carb tends to put women, which is often not the intented BF aspired too. Therefore the frustration against low-carb. IMHO the problem most people (women) have with their weightloss is due to unrealistic expectations, more than a problem in metabolism or else.

  15. Chris Tamme on June 6, 2012 at 10:31

    This guy is such an ass. Apparently you have to be an expert to decipher anything and yet he attempts to have us believe that he has some kind of wisdom on sotck trading even though he carries no degrees or business experience in stock trading. Let’s get down off your high horse because I am tired of so called experts calling me a trained monkey because I don’t have a specialized education. I was trained to be a problem solver and that is what I do.

    I am a greedy bastard and steal wisdom from every single person I run into. I learned a long time ago that everyone carries a bit of the secrets of the universe, the hard part is recognizing it.

  16. marie on June 6, 2012 at 10:36

    “Hot Grills, would you go home with this guy?” _ Hmmm, dunno, how exactly does he use those hot grills? 🙂 Hot Grrls may want to know…

    • Sean on June 6, 2012 at 11:04

      Grrls always claim it’s not the black body radiation but the peak amplitude that matters.

      • marie on June 6, 2012 at 11:21

        Ooooooh, yes! They are fans of Max Planck.

      • LeonRover on June 6, 2012 at 11:42

        Or even Maximum Plank.

      • Richard Nikoley on June 6, 2012 at 11:53

        OK, Yooze Guise. I wrote Grills instead of Grrils on purpose.

        Not sure why, but I did. Made me chuckle. Don’t know why it did, either.

      • Sean on June 6, 2012 at 11:51

        If I only had a dollar for every time I heard that kelvins didn’t matter…

      • marie on June 6, 2012 at 12:02

        Oh no Sean, absolute temperature matters, always. The hotter, the better…

      • Sean on June 6, 2012 at 12:13

        Well I was thinking of the kelvins related to the mass of the black body’s peak radiation spectrum.

        But keep telling yourself that size doesn’t matter.

      • marie on June 6, 2012 at 12:23

        “…mass of the black body’s peak radiation spectrum” -Lol Mhm, mass matters 🙂

      • jofjltncb6 on June 6, 2012 at 12:28

        And like they say, once you go bla…

        Wait a second. What are we talking about again?

      • Sean on June 6, 2012 at 12:56

        jofjltncb6, this made me laugh.

      • marie on June 6, 2012 at 12:59

        Quantum physics, actually, and relativity :
        [greater mass –> greater energy ~~ greater calories –>greater energy –>life and pleasure, if you use that energy, or fat, if you don’t] = Quantum loop .
        You asked… 🙂

      • Richard Nikoley on June 6, 2012 at 13:38

        “I was thinking of the kelvins related to the mass of the black body’s peak radiation spectrum. ”


      • LeonRover on June 6, 2012 at 14:13

        Please do not end up at the centre of a Hawkings’ Black Hole – you will become infinitely extended.

      • marie on June 6, 2012 at 15:29

        Fighting it, but that gravitational pull is too damn strong….sigh.

      • marie on June 6, 2012 at 15:51

        Jof, Richard,
        Oh, I see, said the blind (wo)man…. shame on you, corrupting the pure scientists in your midst!

      • Jscott on June 6, 2012 at 16:41

        I am aghast. All this filth!

    • marie on June 6, 2012 at 11:35

      Richard, this is a Friendly pointer to your typo. Humor still has it’s place, yes?
      Because if you return to bad boy behavior, I’ll have to post the Castle Anthrax video again,
      just to illustrate the proper way to deal with naughty boys, you understand…. 🙂

      • Richard Nikoley on June 6, 2012 at 11:56

        see my previous comment.

        ….now I’m headed to the backyard to contemplate the real distinction between grills & grrils, if their is a meaningful one.

        I mean, I think my usage holds, at least from the adjective standpoint: hot. I already know that guys love hot grills and hot grrls.

        What am I missing?

      • marie on June 6, 2012 at 12:07

        Ha! I knew it, your word monkey is finally breaking out of the closet : “hot” –> heat –> grills.
        But you have a ways to go, if you need to be be shown the distinction between grills and grlls! geez… the Grrls can get much hotter, for one thing… ask Bea to explain it to you 🙂

  17. Mario Vachon on June 6, 2012 at 10:41

    Part of me thinks she just wants excuses for being chubby.

    As far as James is concerned, I am absolutely certain that I have heard Lustig on a few different podcasts or youtube clips emphasize that is he not anti-fruit. He is anti sodas and fruit juices – a very big difference. For James to suggest Lustig should be crucified because he is getting some people to not eat fruit (sure as hell is not his message) is a big load of dung.

    • Richard Nikoley on June 6, 2012 at 11:02


      Exactly right, and this is what got me incensed from the beginning, for its disingenuous nature. I have yet to go back and listen to Jimmy’s two podcasts with him, but i am certain that in one or both he emphatically stated that whole fruit is good, because of the fiber.

      I have posed this question a couple of times in comments at other places, asking for refs where he has cautioned against whole fruit and I get zero response.

      • LeonRover on June 6, 2012 at 11:52

        As far as Lustig vids I’ve seen, he says:

        “In fruit, fructose comes with its antidote: fibre”

        A whole apple or two is fine – but not quarts of apple juice (or orange , etc).

        It seems that others have extended such comments to zero fructose.

      • Richard Nikoley on June 6, 2012 at 12:04


        Yes. In fact, even way back when I first began experimenting from time to time with LC (which was always effective short term, but long term because, Sean, I didn’t have “first principles” right).

        I used to say to people. Cold you eat a coupla applesor, a coupla oranges—maybe 3 or 4 now and then when particularly outstanding? Yea? Well, would you eat 24 every day?


      • Sean on June 6, 2012 at 13:12

        If I ever get a return gig at FTA perhaps I ought to talk about my opinion of first principles, politics and philosophical constructs vs scientific constructs.

      • Richard Nikoley on June 6, 2012 at 13:40

        Go for it, Sean. Your timetable.

      • Richard Nikoley on June 6, 2012 at 12:08

        Funny story my mom recounts deadpan from time to time.

        Years ago, the mother and father-in-law of my bro got a juicer and with wide eyes told my mom how she could use it to “eat” 5 pounds of carrots.

        My mom: “Why would I want to eat 5 pounds of carrots?”

      • marie on June 6, 2012 at 12:50

        Yes, Lustig is very consistent about this, I don’t see how anyone can extend his added fructose commentary to natural fruit consumption, he makes a point of showing the difference to getting it from fruit every time he speaks (less quantity, mainly, because fruit is filling, fiber, etc…).
        For example, see older “Sugar: The Bitter truth” video, at ~11:47 where he points out that our natural consumption of fructose from fruits and vegetable is something our “liver can handle.”

      • marie on June 6, 2012 at 17:58

        Oh yeah, he’s completely consistent about fruit versus concentrated sources of fructose, whether in ‘popularized’ talks or heavily scientific ones.
        I’m at home now, so here’s one from my archive (I save ‘original sources’, a science habit, but why don’t those freakin’ lazy bloggers do that so they’re not talking out of their asses? it’s easy, they do know how to use a regular web-browser one presumes?).
        Warning : this is a terminology-dense biochemistry lecture from ‘ancestral health’ last year, but at around 13:00 he’s referring to added fructose in processed foods and you’ll hear him saying that in Those foods it is
        “completely unopposed by fiber, which is the one thing that could mitigate the rate of fructose absorption, for instance orange juice vs.oranges”.
        The Trouble with Fructose: a Darwinian perspective >.

      • Richard Nikoley on June 6, 2012 at 13:25

        Thank you marie, the more specific cites the better.

        ….to put it to these fucking liars who have completely framed the debate that Lustig is trying to scare people off fruit.

        Of course, I did drop that link in my comment to James, that “mastur-bater of fruit” the one about 4 oz of liver taking 5 pounds of fruit, and zero response on that point.

        I might have to addendumize the post.

      • marie on June 6, 2012 at 18:00

        I meant ‘excess’ fructose, not ‘added’, it’s getting late for me…

      • Rob on June 6, 2012 at 11:55

        They seem to enjoy having this caricature of an enemy that has no grey area or redeeming features. Note how Krieger makes the claim that, “They will point out how Taubes has helped people, while failing to realize that for every person helped, there are dozens more who are hurt.” Now, being a man who represents “science”, I would think he could show some demonstration of that claim. I don’t think I am some anomaly that read the book, put the low carb principles into action, lost 30 lbs easily when I have been some sort of overweight all my life. It would also mean that I was an anomaly, as when I started doing heavy compound lifts and eating low carb failed to advance my lifts, I had the mental clarity to search out other sources of nutritional information which lead me to Leangains (thanks for those series of interviews). I’d like to flatter myself into thinking I was the one in dozens who was able to rebound from such “bad information” to thrive, but somehow I doubt it.

      • Richard Nikoley on June 6, 2012 at 12:15


        While I’m sure you’re very smart, I don’t think everyone is dumb. This is part of what i have up my butt on this—and yea, I know there’s a tedious aspect to it.

        They seem to come from a perspective that it’s less notewhorthy when people actually do figure it out. Everyone starts somewhere and LC is an excellent way to start. Paleo evolves continuously. As do the people making it happen.

        They give zero credit to that, don’t acknowledge it a lick. Not even a little bit.

        If it doesn’t come from an authority, it’s shit.

      • LeonRover on June 6, 2012 at 22:36

        “Paleo evolves continuously. As do the people making it happen.”

        No doubt, at Star-Kruiser epigenetic speed?

      • gallier2 on June 7, 2012 at 02:57

        LC via Taubes as a starting point has the merrit to enable the mindset that infuriates people like Krieger. It’s not the biochemistry that is the threat but the sapping of authority. Taubes brilliantly shows that there is a big problem in medical research. That ideology trumps scientific results and that politics are more important than truth. He destroys thoroughly the credibility of all the big institutions messages be they public or private and that is what an establishment shill like Krieger (look up his CV, it’s obvious from where he’s coming) can not tolerate.
        His blog is nothing more than the impotent barking of a gatekeeper seeing his world wanishing into irrelevance.

      • AndrewS on June 7, 2012 at 06:08

        I think this was Taubes biggest contribution — the suspicion of the medical establishment. And that’s at the heart of why people read Taubes and then move on to something else; Taubes empowers them to distrust nutrition authority.

      • Richard Nikoley on June 7, 2012 at 06:46

        Oh, I think keeping all our shit in the same solar system would be a good idea. 🙂

      • marie on June 7, 2012 at 07:22

        Nah, we’re drowning in it. Expel the major shit producers! Alpha-centauri may be far enough.
        Start with the nutrition/dietetitcs “science” posers. They are a practical trade and yet aren’t held to the same standard as our plumber or electrician who can actually fix our leaks and short-circuits.
        So they create consensus and ‘authority’ as bulwarks to questioning and investigation – what real science depends, centers itself, on authority? Something either is Q.E.D. or it isn’t. If it isn’t, it’s open for debate and, rather importantly, for experimentation.
        We need to expel bad trades people. They not only use up oxygen but produce crap.

      • rob on June 6, 2012 at 12:41

        Seems to be the nature of the internet to assume everyone else is an idiot, it is worst on sites/blogs involving training. I’ve been given advice over and over again by people who say “I’ve been doing this for 5/10/15 years” and I’m thinking “I’ve been doing this since the 1970’s you schmuck.”

      • Andy on June 6, 2012 at 15:18

        Indeed. I find this quite interesting actually 🙂

  18. chubby paleo chick on June 6, 2012 at 16:21

    I like CarbSane and I like your blog, but I don’t understand what the point of Evelyn’s blog is anymore, now that she’s had all of her arguments with you, Taubes, and Jimmy Moore. In the case of Jimmy, he has a severe eating disorder and needs all kinds of intervention.

    But really, who cares? If low carb, paleo, primal, whatever is a lie then why doesn’t she just calorie count and lose the weight? Why doesn’t she just do it?

    • EatLessMoveMoore on June 6, 2012 at 19:15

      “In the case of Jimmy, he has a severe eating disorder and needs all kinds of intervention.” Finally someone other than CarbSane said it. LLVLC has ‘LLV*ED*’ written all over it. His issues have nothing to do with macronutrient ratios.

      Can’t speak for Evelyn, but regarding why she doesn’t just ‘do it’, she seems like someone who’s content with where they’re at. Happens… Just compare your average couple before and then several years after getting married.

      • JeremiahMavin on June 6, 2012 at 20:49

        You got it all a mess, child.

        It was them past ways that brought ‘ole Jim to these breaks. Can’t blame a man for not lettin’ Bessy feed off of that grass. Livin’ La Vida Paleo takes time. A whole lotta time and spendin’ money. You gots to be mindful of them nasty carbs the way our old folks was. Grokmaw done knew to slap half a pound of Kerrygold on her sweet potatoes to protect her little self from insulins. Calories ain’t nothin’ but hogwash. We needa do how they did back in the day. We needa fill our bellies with as much grass eatin’ muscle meat as possible.

      • Gene on June 7, 2012 at 14:03


        “We needa fill our bellies with as much grass eatin’ muscle meat as possible.”

        Actually, that’s likely EXACTLY what our ancestors were thinking. Optimum food source is optimum food source.

      • LCForevah on June 10, 2012 at 08:36

        If she is as fat as is being implied, there is no way that she is content. I am “only” fifty pounds overweight and it would take me a couple of hours to tell you the myriad ways it physically hurts, never mind the psychological stuff.

        No one who rails against the LC/Paleo world like she does with so little provocation, is a happy human being. Now that I know that she is fat, I see her rantings as a method of laying the blame elsewhere for her failure to deal with her own obesity.

        She is an object to be pitied. Taking her at all seriously and giving her blogtime on other blogs just fuels her personal problem, and doesn’t help the lc/paleo community.

  19. Jscott on June 6, 2012 at 18:48

    Carbsane and James should drop diet and nutrition. That is simple and should be left to the mere mortal. They should tackle the fact and fiction of brain science.

    I am sure they would both have time to trade socks and influence people.

  20. marie on June 6, 2012 at 18:57

    Oh yea, especially since they’ll find their very familiar argument phrasings : “Is the “serotonin hypothesis” of depression really dead?” and other such.

    • Jscott on June 6, 2012 at 19:04

      But the socks Maria Maria. The socks.

  21. marie on June 6, 2012 at 19:10

    You forget, pure scientist here, would never catch that, nope. Though since you did mention it…would it be like trading, oh, stocks for example, only kinkier?

    • Jscott on June 6, 2012 at 19:34
      • marie on June 6, 2012 at 19:41

        Ah! I can see why, they will “free the world of sock sorrows”…lol ! Religion sure is the top profitable business.

      • Jscott on June 6, 2012 at 19:51

        What does it profit a mother fucker if they Make all them profits but lose the essence of what is “them?”
        -Jscott’s loosely translation of mark 8:36

      • Jscott on June 6, 2012 at 19:53

        *loosely joined translation of mark 8:36

      • marie on June 6, 2012 at 20:01

        Moot, mother fuckers have no essence to lose. The rest can profit without loss.

      • Jscott on June 6, 2012 at 20:45

        Jesus says, “STFU or die!”

  22. Edward J. Edmonds on June 10, 2012 at 22:31

    WannaFuck and CarbCunt kinda look alike. Both are fucktards. Writting style reveals personaity accurately. Everything about their writting is fuckheaded. When a prince or princess opens a post with “if you’ve been following me on twitter” or titles a post “the lengths people with go to” are signs you’re dealing with a mother fucker who has some serious self-esteem issues. Right away they open with an authoritative context. And they SHOULD have self-esteem issues because neither of them have strong enough chins for me to place my balls on.

  23. Edward J. Edmonds on June 10, 2012 at 22:37

    Notice in both their profile pictures they have their head cocked to the left or right.

  24. Edward J. Edmonds on June 10, 2012 at 22:40

    And notice how they are clipped out of larger photos… a sign they were hunting around their hard drives for “good” pictures. Rest assured these folks look and feel like shit most days.

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Follow by Email8k