Save for the sick and sedentary, Colpo is hostile to low carb theory, particularly in the exercise context:
Why Low-Carb Diets are Terrible for Athletes: Part 1 | AnthonyColpoMore generally here:
Why Low-Carb Diets are Terrible for Athletes: Part 2 | AnthonyColpo
Reader Mail: Dumping on Paleo Dogma, Low-Carb Gurus & Psychos, & More! | AnthonyColpoColpo is prominent for his vigorous and highly personal e-stoushing with leading US low carb guru Dr Michael Eades, as explained by other bloggers/observers here and here.
Reader Mail: Debunking More Low-Carb Myths | AnthonyColpo
Can Low-Carb Diets Make You Crazy? | AnthonyColpo
The Great Eades Smackdown, 2010! Part 1 | AnthonyColpoHere is an example of the energetic Colpo approach - on the topic of low carb guru Gary Taubes:
The Great Eades Smackdown, 2010! Part 2 | AnthonyColpo
Anthony Colpo Explains Why Dr Michael Eades is the Biggest Prat in the Diet Industry | AnthonyColpo
Reader Mail: HCG Diet, The Great Eades Smackdown, and More! | AnthonyColpo
Eades | AnthonyColpo
Q - What About Gary Taubes?
I’ve read your posts on Michael Eades and Fred Hahn, they’re masterpieces in the lost art of debunking, I really appreciate your efforts in unmasking those clowns. But in those same posts (and others) you’ve slipped short references to Gary Taubes, putting him in the same group as those two frauds (or, as you call them, “notorious low-carb shills”). Why is that? Would you care to elaborate? Given all the time you’ve spent dealing with Eades and Hahn, I find it surprising you are (in comparison) mostly silent on Taubes.
Sam
Anthony replies:
"Hi Sam,
I think Taubes is every bit as duplicitous as Hahn and Eades, and have explained why here:
http://www.thefatlossbible.net/They_Are_All_Mad.pdf
(p. 82 of the PDF)
I guess I haven’t given him the same lashings I’ve given Hahn and Eades because he’s wisely kept quiet in response to my criticisms, whereas the other two decided to attack me personally. Being a bullshitter is one thing, getting self-righteous and personally denigrating those who correctly call you out on your BS is another.
Also, others have highlighted Taubes’ duplicity at length:
http://www.thelivinlowcarbshow.com/shownotes/3557/blogger-carbsane-calls-gary-taubes-a-willful-fraud-episode-436/
http://carbsanity.blogspot.com/2010/05/glyceroneogenesis-v-taubes.html
http://carbsanity.blogspot.com/2010/10/update-gary-taubes-email-my-response.html
http://www.thebsdetective.com/2009/10/bullshitter-of-day-oct-7th-gary-taubes.html
CarbSane is an especially tenacious and effective critic of Taubes and has highlighted an abundance of contradictions and fallacies in his anti-carbohydrate/anti-insulin dogma. And as you can see from the above links, his response to her has been to pretty much ignore her scientific criticisms and instead accuse her of “stalking”!
A perennial fantasy about being “stalked” and the subject of someone’s “obsession” seems to be a common thread among prominent low-carb shills. The stalking and obsession claims seem to conveniently arise only after being the subject of criticism for which they have no valid scientific refutation.
After demonstrating a complete inability to refute my criticisms of his absurd “metabolic advantage” claims, Dr Michael Eades wrote a long-winded piece claiming I was a “man obsessed”. More recently, Fred Hahn tried the same tactic; as with Eades, this is a rather ironic claim coming from a person who has spent an inordinate amount of time and effort attacking me every chance he gets.
All these folks have to do to shut me up is present peer-reviewed, tightly controlled ward research showing greater fat-derived weight loss on an isocaloric low-carb diet, then explain why all the other metabolic ward studies failing to show similar results were either seriously flawed or falsified. Despite being offered abundant time, opportunity and even financial support for their favourite charities to do just this, none of these low-carb promoters has been able to deliver.
Unable to refute their opponents on scientific grounds, low-carb shills like Taubes, Eades, Hahn, et al feel compelled to discredit their opponents by instead portraying them as mentally unstable, “obsessed” and “stalkers”.
In their dreams…
It goes without saying, but issuing valid scientific criticisms of someone’s scientifically untenable nonsense hardly makes one a stalker or obsessed. Here’s how a true Internet stalker behaves: After a real or perceived personal slight from you, an individual begins bombarding your email and/or your Internet forum on a daily basis with extremely hostile correspondence. Almost all of this correspondence is liberally peppered with profanity and much of it contains lurid sexual taunts. If the author of this demented campaign happens to go by the monikers of “Razzi” or “Razwell”, and you happen to descend from non-Anglo-Saxon stock, his email correspondence will also include frequent gutter-level slurs on your ethnicity.
When his email address is blocked, he promptly creates a new account and resumes his barrage of hate mail. When this new address is again blocked, he repeats the process. You will receive literally hundreds of nasty and virulent emails in this manner from this truly demented individual.
When his forum membership is banned, he promptly rejoins your forum under a different username. Similar to the email scenario, he repeatedly rejoins in response to continual banning, until you and your forum administrators get totally fed up and institute a policy whereby each and every new member must be personally screened prior to being allowed on the forum. This of course creates inconvenience and delays for all the genuine applicants, but the web stalker couldn’t give a rat’s ass that he is being a humongous public nuisance and inconveniencing innocent people; recent post on Spoilt Little Web Brats explained, these folks are self-centered, immature, narcissistic losers with little else to occupy their time except a driven quest to prove to the world what complete dickwads they are.
To date, I have been the target of two such individuals, both of whom were low-carb fanatics and one of whom was the subject of my recent article. Neither of these individuals were reprimanded or castigated in any way by their fellow low-carbers for their lurid and anti-social behaviour. To the contrary, one of these individuals (the racist super-troll “Razzi/Razwell”) has been welcomed and encouraged by Dr. Michael Eades (see previous email and my answer).
I must say this: the low-carb movement, as it stands today, is a complete and utter joke. It is dominated by intellectually dishonest individuals who are violently allergic to contradictory evidence. These commentators repeatedly fail to scientifically refute their opponents and instead routinely resort to personal attacks often of a patently ridiculous nature, including accusations of stalking and obsession. Evidently, their driven desire to discredit their opponents even extends to cosying up with well-known Internet trolls whose behaviour would easily meet any legal definition of harassment.
I have explained previously why ketogenic low-carb diets may contribute to the unbecoming behaviour frequently exhibited by their followers . Needless to say, individuals with a susceptibility to anger, depression, hostility, mood or psychiatric disorders should avoid low-carb ketogenic diets like the plague.
Cheers,
A."
