He is probably well intention, but I agree he probably does not connect the dots and bases most if not all of his opinions on what research says.
The nutrition space is a mess. It boils down to eating the highest quality animal foods you can get and avoiding plant foods as necessary, which changes from person to person. Anything more than that is diminishing returns and window dressing imo
I agree it’s a mess. I’ve found it frustrating to source reliable info. A carnivore diet that works immaculately for someone could give another person chronic seizures. I believe fiber from plants can provide value to some. You’re sounding like a Shawn Baker maximalist but I’m not gonna jump to conclusions.
More recently I’ve been compelled by nutritional theory around the idea that food is an electromagnetic “barcode” printed by the sun, directly or indirectly. It makes sense cuz all food traces back to the sun. This means we may eat optimally by eating hyper-local whole foods because our bodies get the same solar signaling. Epigenetics and methylation probably play a big role too. The major problem seems to be so many western people are so far removed from nature’s signals that we’ve evolved with, their bodies and mitochondria are barely limping along to metabolize the nutrients it should know how to.
Shawn Baker maximalism would be stakes all day every day, which ls hardly what I said. Animal foods are unquestionably necessary thrive. Plant foods have toxins and anti-nutrients that affect people differently, hence my comment to remove or avoid as needed. At the end of the day everyone had to fine tune general guidance and make it work for them. Arguing over nutrition once you get past the fiat fuckery with processed foods is a waste if time imo if one is healthy