Hacker News Reader

Comment by chrisdotcode | Hacker News Reader

Of course you're not immediately "disqualified" from providing meaningful information if you don't have skin in the game. However, the current state of pretty much any science-related-to-food is woefully inadequate (remember the food pyramid? and how fat was evil and going to kill you? And don't even get me started on carcinogens and meat). At this present moment in time, people who are actually trying and living on keto (, in particular those with diabetes) are actually on the bleeding edge of food science.

I personally have friends who manage Type 1 & 2 diabetes with little-to-no insulin on Keto, and I'd hate to see people being turned away from at least researching a lifestyle that could significantly benefit them because a well-respected member of the community said it was "dangerous" (and often, deferring to doctors can be not helpful for reasons mentioned above - I wish people would at least research for themselves).

View on HN

And I spent the better part of a month deeply embedded in safety materials regarding diabetes type 1. It's simple: if you start experimenting like that without guidance from your doctor then that's asking for trouble. Giving medical advice with such a high chance of risks materializing for the takers of such advice is irresponsible to put it mildly. You can't just dump blanket statements like that in a forum and expect a positive outcome.

Telling people to research a lifestyle is completely different than providing ready made recipes paired with unqualified statements based on a sample of '1'.

That's true- I even stated that I thought KetoType1 should have put a disclaimer.

At the same time, I do encourage people to take charge of their own health, and to make calculated and appropriate risks. My primary concern was people only reading your name, the word "dangerous", and being put off from further research about keto in general because of that. Some physicians used to recommend rice- and grain-heavy diets for diabetes, so some healthy skepticism (EDIT: in the "trust, but verify" sense) is warranted, even towards one's doctor.

> some healthy skepticism (EDIT: in the "trust, but verify" sense) is warranted, even towards one's doctor.

That's fair, but for all you know OP is making stuff up, has been misdiagnosed and 50 other things that could be true that would make their well intentioned unqualified advice utterly irrelevant and dangerous to boot.

Just like you shouldn't take legal advice from ACs on the internet you shouldn't take medical advice from them either, especially when they're novelty accounts promoting diets that have been used to 'cure' everything from cancer to epilepsy, Alzheimers and TBC. Extreme skepticism is warranted there. As for your doctor: assuming they're a diabetes specialist: you should put your faith in them, and if you don't trust them then you should go find yourself another doctor, not start taking randos advice.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com