All Posts by Date or last 15, 30, 90 or 180 days.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases @AMAZON

Designed for the most demanding needs of photographers and videographers.
Connect and charge all of your devices through a single Thunderbolt or USB-C port.

Nina Teicholz: U.S. News' Rankings are Losing Medical, Law Schools. Is “Best Diets” Next?

re: Nina Teicholz
re: follow the money
re: psyop and gaslighting and mass hysteria

Real science is never settled, and anyone who has certainty on such things is not qualified to discuss it.

See Unsettled Science, by Nina Teichholz.

See also: Tufts' Food Compass...It's Worse Than You Thought

Nina Teicholz: U.S. News' Rankings are Losing Medical, Law Schools. Is “Best Diets” Next?

2023-01-20. Emphasis added.

It's not just Harvard and Yale that are pulling out of U.S. News' Rankings; Dieters should, too.

This week, Harvard Medical School pulled out of the U.S. News & World Report rankings, citing in part longstanding concerns with the methodology behind the ratings. This blow to the magazine comes on the heels of a decision last fall by top law school deans, including those from Harvard and Yale, to withdraw from the U.S. News rankings over methodology issues for their schools. Are the U.S. News “Best Diets” any better?

After a long, lucrative run, ranking everything from colleges to cruise ships, U.S. News has in recent years faced growing scrutiny and criticism of their lists. The magazine tried to appease law schools this month by making rankings changes, but it has yet to respond to expressions of concern by hundreds of doctors and others about how the annual “Best Diets” list also has serious problems and is the product of scant scientific backing.

With more than 43% of the nation suffering from obesity and the government projecting a 700% increase in diabetes among young people, under the age of 20 by 2060, the public is desperately in need of sound, evidence-based advice on how to eat.

Many of the U.S. News “Best Diets,” however, have barely been tested in clinical trials, the kind of rigorous evidence that is essential for showing cause-and-effect relationships. 


Of course numbers aren’t everything, but virtually every head-to-head diet study has found that low-carb dieters lose more weight than those on low-fat, in addition to seeing more or equal improvement in most heart disease risk factors.

These are no longer preliminary results. When I co-authored an op-ed critiquing the U.S. News list in 2018, ample data already existed to argue that low-carbohydrate diets should not be relegated as U.S. News “Best Diets” bottom dwellers. Now, five years later, the medical literature on this nutritional approach has ballooned to the point where stiffing this option is no longer scientifically credible.


WIND: does anything mainstream in nutrition or health have any serious scientific backing? Or is it 99% follow the money*?

Mainstream nutrition advice psyops campaigns run by the unholy trinity of {Big Food + Government + Big Pharma} has been disabling and killing people by the tens of millions for decades now, with the most cruel advice on diet possible, eg the high-carb-low-fat or at least seed oil PUFA fats crackpot advice. Eat your grains and seed oils... grist for the Big Pharma assembly line.

But maybe the tide is turning just a little, as more doctors grudgingly acknowledge that a low-carb diet can address diabetes and related issues in a dramatic way.

What is startling is just how simple the equation is: when the issue is high blood sugar (perhaps the root cause of 90% of all serious health issues?), two simple things lead to a cure: (1) cut carbohydrates way back, and (2) engage in short but high intensity exercise to deplete body stores of glycogen. It’s a no-brainer. Meaning that far too many highly trained “experts” lack the most basic insight into how the body actually works, in spite of years of medical training. But if you think about it, it makes sense: it is training and memorization, not thinking. Not much different from what Pavlov researched.

* Experts today = ethically and intellectually bankrupt doctors and researchers living off the public tit and/or assembly line medicine teats.

WSJ: Medical Schools Bail on Academic Merit and Intellectual Rigor


Some refuse to be ranked by U.S. News, which weighs test scores and grades rather than diversity.

...So far, U.S. News has resisted demands from the graduate schools to base the rankings on equity rather than on the grades and test scores of incoming students. U.S. News has been transparent about the method it uses for its rankings, including factors such as a reputation survey, MCAT scores and grade point averages of incoming students.


WIND: the above does notch up my opinion of the folks at US News.

Diversity when all other things are equals is all well and good, based on the premise of more and varied viewpoint interactions, Sounds worthwhile, but does that exist in medical school let alone with the physician in charge of the newbies? And then of course it just turns into vicious power play (racism, sexism, etc), because there are no objective standards when it comes to diversity, only the most disgusting anti-intellectual thinking possible: judging people by crude physical characterics—the very definition of racism and "isms" in general.

All I care about is competence, particularly if I were to need a procedure with a 30% chance of dying. What skin color or penis or vagina or sexual preference or whatever someone has matters not one bit to me. But dying does.

View all handpicked deals...

FUJIFILM GF 20-35mm f/4 R WR Lens
$2499 $1999
SAVE $500 | Terms of Use | PRIVACY POLICY
Contact | About Lloyd Chambers | Consulting | Photo Tours
Mailing Lists | RSS Feeds |
Copyright © 2020 diglloyd Inc, all rights reserved.
Display info: __RETINA_INFO_STATUS__