Anthony Chung > Recent Status Updates

I can't put this book down. Topics ranging to science to politics strung together in marvelous ways. It's clearly not bipartisan, however, which is the only reason why I'm a little bit wary. Although, it does have some over-reaching statements that I can't really claim to be causality.

The logic is killing me here. I get he's a doctor and he wants to explain how diabetes works, but diabetes is not exacerbated by gluten. It's caused by a high caloric intake. More anecdotal comparison of bread, and a tablespoon of pure white sugar about glycemic index. He wants to link it to glycemic index but you know.. carrots have a higher glycemic index than any of those...

Full of anecdotes without enough scientifically proven facts. If he's going to explain gluten to have a exogenous morphine-like effect, you better state the experimental conditions because wheat products break down to simple sugars via amylase. Sugars equally stimulate opiate production. Without a statement of control, this data means nothing.

(Kindle Page 81) It feels like I'm reading the "results" page off of a scientific journal. It's practically unreadable in context of what he's trying to convey. Moreover, working women equates to more processed meats? Seriously? How far can flawed logic go?

My first turnoff: "Where we're offering theory rather than scientifically validated results...". Theory are different from facts. This is conflating the two ideas that are distinctly different. Theory is just an explanation of facts. Facts are information used to prove/disprove theories. They are two completely different things. The way written makes it sound like theories are inferior to facts.