Why “Clean Eating” is a Myth

[DanTex]

46. While I agree with the anti-anti science thing, this is not a good article.

It presupposes as fact many claims that are controversial within the peer-reviewed literature. For example:

Research has never found red meat, or most other foods, to damage your health.

Actually there is plenty of research finding that red meat is bad for your health. And there are plenty of credentialed cardiologists who recommend avoiding red meats. Does this blogger know something that all of these other scientists don't?
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=red+meat+heart+disease

Fat loss is ultimately about calories in versus calories out.

At best this is technically true but not a very helpful way analyze fat loss. At best. One example, foods can affect things like hunger and metabolism. Another example, calories in versus calories out tells you nothing about whether the weight gained or lost will be in the form of fat or lean body mass. So, even if it weight gain or loss can be reduced to a thermodynamic equation, that does not actually mean that this is a useful way of thinking about it. There are a lot of other important and useful variables that affect both sides of that equation in ways that it is foolish to ignore. In the same way the "force equals mass times acceleration" is not terribly useful advice for a race car driver.

And so on.