Improbable Science

I came across this pretty comprehensive article on the Improbable Science blog. It is well worth reading. It covers some themes that anyone who does the rounds of the main paleo-blogs (such as Mike Eades' Protein Power), will be aware of including some stuff from Gary Taubes.

DC who writes the blog is a great communicator and obviously a smart guy. However there is one comment in the post where (I think), he 'stumbles' slightly.

He picks up on Sacks' paper (Sacks et al., 2009), which compared several different diets.

• The percentages of energy derived from fat, protein, and carbohydrates in the four diets were 20, 15, and 65%; 20, 25, and 55%; 40, 15, and 45%; and 40, 25, and 35%. No difference could be detected between the different diets: all that mattered for weight loss was the total number of calories.

The conclusion here is correct, but ignores a true low carbohydrate, paleo diet. Anyone reading this might think that the matter of 'which diet' had been settled by Sacks, when in reality the paleo diet was not even in the race.