This Man Studied Nutrition for 30 Years and Missed the Point

Get better looking and healthier with my system: https://www.skool.com/faceiq/about A guy who has studied nutrition for 30 years just laid out his 5 principles for eating well, and a lot of it is actually solid. He is right that you should look at whole foods instead of obsessing over one nutrient at a time. But there is one problem running through his entire framework, and it is the reason his approach can only ever get you slightly above average. His whole method leans on epidemiology. That basically means eating whatever is associated with good outcomes in big population studies. The catch is that the average person in those studies is overweight and sick, so beating that baseline is a low bar. Epidemiology is noisy, packed with confounders, and biased by the fact that health conscious people do a hundred healthy things at once. It can tell you what beats a bad diet. It cannot tell you what is optimal. So in this video I go through where his reasoning holds up and where it falls apart. Why animal foods like egg yolks, organs, and fatty fish are nutritionally complete in a way most plants are not. The opportunity cost of loading your plate with beans, oats, and olive oil when the same space could be feeding you something dense. And why mechanisms, human biology, anthropology, and your own self-experimentation tell you more than a scatter plot ever will. nutrition made simple response, gil carvalho, is epidemiology reliable, healthy user bias, epidemiology nutrition, evidence based nutrition, ancestral diet, pro metabolic diet, animal based diet, nutrient density, are beans healthy, are oats healthy, seed oils, canola oil, weston price, optimal diet, best diet for health, whole food nutrition, nutrition science explained, plant based doctor, carnivore vs plant based, raw dairy, faceiq