Many age-old assumptions and health recommendations are rapidly changing due to new research.

Here is the meta-analysis mentioned in the video.

https://www.jacc.org/doi/full/10.101...cc.2020.05.077

It's more balanced and informative than this sleazebag who has been disciplined by the Tennessee Board of Medical Examiners on two occasions for false advertising and dangerous practices. He also got an employer successfully sued for failing to stop him from sexually harassing cleaning staff, and may have hired arsonists to burn down his own, heavily tax-liened, clinic.

No need to personally attack anyone who has no way to defend your allegations which have zero to do with the subject. Berry also discusses much more about the topic than just the analysis you mention. I guess though it's always acceptable to shoot the messenger if you don't like the message.

Ohhh ho ho no, my friend! There is a definite need for physicians to attack guys like this who drag the whole profession down.

Incidentally, I do like the message on saturated fats. I just don't like the grift.

I don't know the guy; he may be all you suggest. There's just no benefit in attack him on this platform, and it distracts from the message which is valid regardless of Berry's morality.

We'll have to disagree on that and on the integrity of his message. I am a "message" guy in real, peer-reviewed, life and I believe it is crucial to maintain a rigorously ethical approach in order to have credibility with my colleagues and the public. That philosophy has stood me in good stead for over 30 years.

I'm once again grateful for MoAlpha's insights and expertise on topics relevant to health and medicine.

You have a valid point if we were talking about Berry's personal message or recommendations. In this case we are referring to information Berry is referencing from other sources. Berry's personal ethics or credibility is not involved in any way.

Then I suggest you post references or pointers to these "other sources". When information is massaged by not-disinterested messengers, its meaning becomes less clear and convincing.

If this had been a balanced and scholarly presentation from a disinterested presenter, rather than a hyperbolic piece of advocacy from a guy who profits from his viewpoint, I might agree.

Again, the message that saturated fats have not turned out to be the danger we thought is valid. However, he goes much further explicitly and by implication.

And in general, it's a bad idea to get your nutrition and medical information from youtubers. Just sayin.
Reading is not fashionable, I know.

Back when I was a grad student, the then-chair of the department, a member of the NAS, used to remind us, "Argumentum ad hominem is, 'Your argument is trash because you're a dick,' it's not 'Your argument is trash because of these following reasons, and by the way, you're a dick.'" This is an example of something else entirely: "your argument is okay but you're a dick."

Maybe, "We can't even discuss this subject because you're a dick." is applicable.

I haven't seen any attempt to discuss the subject. Just a link to a youtube. Go ahead, discuss the evidence.

If you say so.

Meanwhile, the incidence of colon cancers, especially in the young, continues to mysteriously increase.

I don't really think the argument is okay. There's a "motte and bailey" thing going on where the carnivore diet folks say "Eating nothing but meat is the healthiest thing in the world" and then, when pressed for evidence beyond anecdotes and fallacious evolutionary arguments, they retreat to the defensible, but qualitatively different, position: "Saturated fats aren't so bad and meat and full-fat dairy might be better for you than some other crap in the modern Western diet." Berry's being a dick is more than incidental to his argument and his obvious conflict of interest.

There isn't any.

Seed oils!

Did you look at any of the information Berry presented, or is he too much of a dick for you to bother?

Perhaps it's sugar. Isn't the instance of childhood diabetes and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease higher than ever?

I've heard that the most dangerous food is word salad.

I have read that T2DM is a risk, so might be right.

No, he is too much of a quack for me to bother.

The danger for any of these fats, carb's or even protein is that too many people feel that when it's on the good for you list, then they over indulge themselves with it. Sometimes with the faulty reasoning that if a little is good, more must be better.

Right! Do like the rest of us do - get your nutrition and medical information from strangers on internet forums.