I think the author of that article means well, and I believe he believes what he's written. Even so, much of what he says is just plain wrong and underscores his lack of education and experience.
It's true -- thinking solely calories-in, calories-out, is flawed
No it isn't. It is very simple, total calories is what's important. The ratio of macronutrients is not critical, providing it doesn't lead to malnutrition. The problem here is that telling people the truth, rather than demonizing one macronutrient over another, isn't a very good method for selling diet books and supplements. People don't willingly pay money for common sense advice.
100 calories from meat and fat or oil metabolize a lot differently than 100 calories from sugar or starches
You are stating the obvious and something that you will learn in any basic nutrition course. We have known for a long time that there are differing efficiencies for protein, crabs and fat. However, that doesn't change the fact that a calorie remains a measure of the amount of energy and it is always the same.
I think the big misconception is that eating fat makes you fat
Fat, just like protein and carbohydrates, will make you fat if you eat too much of it. Fat just happens to contain more than twice the number of calories, per gram, than carbs and protein.
Taubes is a quack, pure and simple. He relies on studies to support his opinions that use self reported caloric intake. Beyond that obvious flaw, he is extremely selective about what evidence he chooses to use and even prefers his own hunches over the available scientific evidence. Taubes continues to reference scientists who claim he is misrepresenting their work, and selectively quotes them to make it appear that they support his nonsense. Anything for a buck.
It seems that every dieter who tries to lose weigh, but can't, believes they have some special kind of physiology that defies science. That's when they find their way to charlatans like Taubes who tell them what they want to hear....It's not your fault.....then they come to forums like this to tell us all that it is a scientific fact that the first law of thermodynamics applies to everything on earth but them......because they can't lose weight, and it's not their fault.
“the first law of thermodynamics applies to everything on earth but them”
Please refrain from discussing laws you know nothing about. The idea that a human functions as a closed system is silly. We have stuff going in and going out - and going out is not just energy expended, unless you never poop or pee.
In addition, machines don’t get to decide when to ‘eat’. Humans do.
“It seems that every dieter who tries to lose weigh, but can’t...”
Ummm...what about those of us who have dieted SUCCESSFULLY? Hmmmm? Why is it you assume those you disagree with have failed?
For the record, I failed when I followed the US government’s advice. I drop weight easily following Atkin’s advice - which sounds a lot like my Mom’s advice in the 60s.
However, nutrition is chemistry. It is not one-size-fits-all simple addition and subtraction in terms of caloric values. As I pointed out above, if I consumed 3,000 calories a day primarily via sweets and carby processed starches and swam my four or five miles a week, I'd get weak and I'd get pudgy. If I consume those same 3,000 calories a day via very few sweets and mostly animal protein, fats, veggies/fruits, and some very basic carbs, I will be lean and vital. Same amount of calories, same amount of exercise, different outcomes.
Thinking solely calories-in, calories-out, is flawed. It is why DIETS DON'T WORK.
>It seems that every dieter who tries to lose weigh, but can’t, believes they have some special kind of physiology that defies science. That’s when they find their way to charlatans like Taubes who tell them what they want to hear....It’s not your fault.....then they come to forums like this to tell us all that it is a scientific fact that the first law of thermodynamics applies to everything on earth but them......because they can’t lose weight, and it’s not their fault.<
I’m not sure what this last statement has to do with the fact that eliminating processed starches from one’s diet can and does indeed allow a large percentage of people to shed pounds, when they have failed to do so by simple reduction of calories (made up from the standard American diet).
There is a fairly good-sized (pun intended) percentage of Freepers who have lost a lot of weight and who have kept it off simply by eating a diet that includes animal fats, moderate protein, green, low-carbohydrate veggies and by eliminating processed starches, grains and white potatoes from their plates.
By adopting such a diet, people do find their appetite drops and thus they do tend to eat less food over time.