Vee, in all of your many and verbose posts on this board, I have yet to hear you say a single positive word about Gary Taubes...Is that an important point?Really....no, really Does my opinion of Gary Taubes make a jot of difference.On the positive side, I'm tremendously happy that Gary has lost the excess weight he was carrying. He's quite an entertaining and engaing speaker. I'm sure he brushes and flosses diligently. And I bet he's good to his mum.However, he's not a responsible, reliable educational resource. I've attempted in my *verbose* posts to drop a number of hints why that might be the case. Maybe there are folk who credit him with alerting them to the fact that they shouldn't be scarfing down mounds of pasta, rice, Snack-Well cookies etc.......and I guess that's a Good Thing.....but here's a Heads-Up!!. No one would ever suggest that pasta, rice etc. etc. consumed to excess was the right way to eat or interpret a *low-fat/high carb* diet. This stuff was called *empty calories* back when I started on my nutritional journey in the early 1970's......and "everyone" seemed to realise that *empty calories* meant just that.Now, if you're asking about my profound negativity re: Gary Taubes then that's a different matter. Am I correct in surmising that you don't have a background in nutritional science, biolgical sciences in general or the Scientific Method?? Doesn't make you a bad person at all.....but it's wise to realise that this shortcoming leaves you vulnerable to bogus claims and hucksterism of the sort that Gary Taubes indulges in.I'm not sure how early your exposure to Gazza was but, back when he did that first *exposee* in the popular press (the "Big Fat Lie" thang in the NYT) it totally looked like there was this totally disingenuous and totally unbiased reporter out there to uncover *The Truth*. Now, back then, I was far more familiar with nutritional studies and whatnot....but when I read this, I had that WTF question in my mind. Here was this *investigative reporter* interviewing the supposed best names in the field of nutrition and it seemed to me that they all appeared to agree with his low carb stance. I'm talking here about names that I recognise as not being so sympatico....Walter Willet, for example, up here at Harvard etc. etc. So, as much as I wondered, I didn't really need to....within a few weeks the *best and the brightest* that he'd chosen to interview (and who'd spent their time being interviewed) were either summarily ignored or had their opinions misrepresented. Of course, by then his book deal with Knopf had been signed so WTF did he care if his journalistic career was on a dodgy footing and anyone who actually had half a clue was widdling all over him. The rest, as they say, is history.Dude knows his audience.We see the choice that you have made.We?Which *we* would that be. The windmills??