[Dean's World] Dean: Cascade Failure In Science -- And Fat In Your Diet

[notify at powerblogs.com]

Posted by Dean:
Cascade Failure In Science -- And Fat In Your Diet
http://www.deanesmay.com/posts/1191968026.shtml


   Computer programmers and engineers of other complex systems are very
   familiar with the concept of a "[1]cascading failure," which is when a
   failure in one place causes a surprising failure somewhere else, which
   in turn causes a whole host of failures in a bunch of other places at
   once.

   It's a ubiquitous phenomenon, really. You see the same thing when a
   small crack in a dam eventually results in collapse of the whole
   system.

   A few years ago the Esmay household found itself in the middle of
   [2]the Northeast Blackout of 2003 that took down most of the
   electrical grid in large parts of the United States and Canada. We
   remember it very well: we were days without power in the middle of a
   hot summer, and it was all caused, according to reports, because
   ultimately, a single generating plant in Eastland, Ohio went down,
   which happened because the company that owned it failed to trim trees
   properly in their area over a short period of time. The result was
   over 100 power plants shut down, about 10 million Canadians without
   power, and about 1 out of 7 Americans without power--for days.

   It's long been my contention that the peer-reviewed funding system run
   by the U.S. Federal government and many international agencies has
   suffered from this problem in numerous areas, most especially because
   of failure to admit the possibility of this problem ever occurring.
   Thus when someone questions current scientific consensus on any of a
   wide variety of subjects, they are portrayed as believing in
   "conspiracies" or of "attacking science" or "attacking medical
   professionals" or "denialism" any of a host of other counterproductive
   defensive reactions.

   Take, for example, a recent book by Gary Taubes, a correspondent for
   [3]Sciencem Magazine magazine (one of the most prestigious
   peer-reviewed journals on Earth). Taubes has recently published a
   book: [4]Good Calories, Bad Calories: Challenging Conventional Wisdom
   on Diet, Weight Control, and Disease. Taubes is not the first to rise
   up and say that most of what we've been told about dietary fat causing
   heart disease, obesity, and cancer is bunk, but he's maybe one of the
   most prestigious so far. I fully expect him to be thoroughly attacked,
   but I am also pretty damned sure he's correct. Lowering the amount of
   fat in your diet is very unlikely, in most people, to reduce risk of
   obesity, heart disease, cancer, or diabetes. Trans-fats, maybe. But
   regular natural fats? Not very likely at all.

   By the way, I've been saying this for more than a decade, even back
   when I had my blog-before-blogs and published hand-html-coded articles
   on my personal web site that I've preserved from those days. See
   [5]The World's Biggest Fad Diet (which I have it on good authority
   thoroughly pi**ed off [6]Dean Ornish and his sycophantic
   vegan-worshipping supporters, by the way), and also [7]The Low Fat,
   Low Cholesterol Diet Is Ineffective, which I got permission ten years
   ago personally from Dr. Laura Corr to publish on the web, and I've
   kept online ever since.

   Fat is good for you. You need it to be healthy. And yes, saturated
   fats like you get in things like butter and bacon and cheese are
   needed in a healthy diet. After decades of study, no one has ever
   shown that a reduced fat, or reduced (natural, not trans-) saturated
   fat diet reduces heart disease or overall mortality. Indeed, while
   there is some minor evidence that it might be peripherally helpful,
   there's also some evidence that such diets are actually harmful.

   Yet watch the fury that comes pouring out of some people when you say
   that. I've experienced it firsthand, and it's almost frightening to
   behold.

   You tell people this and they tell you you want to kill people,
   particularly old people or those with heart disease. They'll tell you
   you're attacking the medical profession. Doctors and nurses. Heroic
   researchers. Science itself. And of course, you must believe in
   "conspiracy theories." [8]Cascading failure. It's not that hard to
   understand. It only requires admitting that there may be a problem and
   instituting needed reform in how we fund scientific research.

References

   1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascading_failure
   2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northeast_Blackout_of_2003
   3. http://www.sciencemag.org/
   4. http://www.amazon.com/Good-Calories-Bad-Gary-Taubes/dp/1400040787/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/104-2343564-5735931?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1191967150&sr=1-1/deansworld01-20
   5. http://www.deanesmay.com/lowfat.html
   6. http://www.ornish.com/
   7. http://www.deanesmay.com/corr.html
   8. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/09/science/09tier.html?pagewanted=1&ei=5124&en=67642ef2330f51af&ex=1349668800&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink