Hacker News Reader

Comment by cmiller1 | Hacker News Reader

Sort of meta-question: why do nutrition takes from grifters and quacks like this spread so well particularly among the Hacker News community while I see few articles about normal science-based nutrition?

View on HN

There is some contrarianism bias. Going against the grain feels more interesting and intellectually stimulating.

Engineers disease. All nutrition threads on HN are complete train wrecks of nonsense. I wish dang would ban them all outright.

I'm someone who was once taken in by a lot of this nonsense. They're good at finding a handful of studies they can present in a way that seems convincing, and couple that with the general mistrust people have for the modern diet, and you've set the stage quite well. Further prevent people from realizing that no nutritional scientist anywhere is suggesting that the shit we shovel into our mouths daily is the right course of action. Next, present them with diets that necessarily result in caloric restriction, along with cutting out one or two of the half dozen awful things we eat, and have people see personal success in their weight going down, lipid markers improving, etc., from where they were prior when they were eating the absolute worst sort of diet they could.

Now they seem like people who are renegades fighting against the establishment for the good of personal health.

It all unravels once you start really digging in to things, but if you don't have the time or inclination for it, them appearing as a guest on a podcast and presenting you with this snazzy package specifically designed to lead you astray is really coupled with some testimonials from people touting it's efficacy makes a compelling case.

I was also taken in by this kind of stuff, and you’ve hit the nail on the head here.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com