Yeah...
Really scientific, unbiased, peer reviewed, modern research. Not a snake oil salesman at all.
Also any article in the format "X reasons [thing] is more harmful than [other thing]" can generally be laughed at.
Yeah...
Really scientific, unbiased, peer reviewed, modern research. Not a snake oil salesman at all.
Also any article in the format "X reasons [thing] is more harmful than [other thing]" can generally be laughed at.
- Kresser: 21 citations to "scientific, unbiased, peer reviewed, modern research"
- NYT OpEd guest writer: naked unsupported assertion that "most of these assertions [about gluten], however, are contradicted by significant evidence" providing no references or scientific discussion
Which one is snake oil again? More ironic, the Kresser article does talk about gluten as an auto-immune trigger, making your dismissal seem even more knee-jerk. There are people doing serious work on nutrition, but you won't have much luck finding them in the NYT, much less the OpEd section.
Well... cod liver oil, actually. And that would be here: http://store.chriskresser.com/
Frankly, I wouldn't put a whole lot of faith in either.