Worse still is casually lumping together all different types of fat as simply "f...

colechristensen · on July 23, 2017

Still thinking in the wrong way.

The health of a diet can only be considered as a whole, not bit individual contributors.

"Food A is good for me and Food B is bad for me" is not how health works.

ethbro · on July 23, 2017

> "Food A is good for me and Food B is bad for me" is not how health works.

Overly reductionist statement and as inaccurate as what you're arguing against.

There are absolutely foods we know to be bad for humans.

throwaway7645 · on July 23, 2017

I think you're being excessively critical here like a compiler :)

You're not wrong, but I definitely understood the parent comment's point.

ethbro · on July 23, 2017

I'd be more inclined to grant linguistic leeway if the parent themselves hadn't jumped on someone else's turn of phrase.

Nutrition science has figured out some things to a high probability. It's still unsure and mystified by others. Don't throw the former out because the latter exists.

throwaway7645 · on July 23, 2017

Fair enough and good point

vikiomega9 · on July 23, 2017

I think this is meant to be read as a catch-all statement as opposed to considering other factors (lifestyle, mental state etc)

thwarted · on July 23, 2017

Maybe the first step is to stop referring to things that are absolutely bad for humans as "food".

delhanty · on July 23, 2017

>"Food A is good for me and Food B is bad for me" is not how health works.

Your oversimplifying what I said.

As it happens, I generally favor a holistic approach to nutrition too.

colechristensen · on July 23, 2017

You're right, but I tend to think oversimplifying in the opposite direction to the trends of the last half century or so is warranted. The biggest problem I'd say we're facing today is people categorizing food into good and bad buckets, even if there is some truth to it.