I’m very glad that the Dudes are back, but man… a boolsheet episode was enough. Now there’s a segment called that. So childish. So disappointing.
Yes, I’ve put on my old set of firefighter bunker gear. Ready for the flames.
Very Disappointed
Fangs
#4
It’s cool. No flames I would think, everyone either likes or dislikes alot of darn things in this life, and this happens to be a dislike for you 
Nothing wrong with saying your opinion on it!
collaroygal
(KCKO, KCFO)
#5
Hey, do what I do when someone on a podcast is talking about something I don’t care to listen to, fast forward to the next part of the podcast.
I’m just happy to be able to hear Richard’s voice again. I miss Australia so much and hearing him is like going back there for me.
richard
(Richard Morris)
#6
No worries. It’s not for everyone, but I hope to be able to say some important things on that segment.
We plan to do a segment on the boolsheet that we’ve said too. In 200 episodes you get a lot of things wrong, so there is plenty to choose from. We’re not omniscient, we’re all speculating from the best available facts and when those change we have to also change.
The main reason I wanted to do this is that there are popular ketogenic diets floating around that are more myth than evidence based. It’s very important to me that ketogenic diets remain an option for type 2 diabetics as there is good evidence that this is an effective treatment.
Dr Stephen Phinney tells a story of how when he was just starting out as a scientist there was a diet called the liquid protein diet. It was coincidentally ketogenic, essentially a caloric restricted diet of gelatine. And it killed 28 people [edit: I have since discovered it killed 60 in 1977 alone]. Dr Phinney told me that that gave all ketogenic diets such a bad reputation that it sidelined his career for 3 decades and it was only Jeff Volek and their collaboration that resurrected his career.
If some stupid malarkey like using gluccometers as a fuel gauge to determine when to stop fasting and ignoring hunger/satiation cues ends up causing eating disorders (or tragically worse) then those diets proximity to low carb and ketogenic diets will leave a stain that may mean that no diabetic will be able to do a ketogenic diet with the support of their physician and dietetic professionals. I’d rather head that off at the pass by setting down a marker - that that kind of boolsheet is not what a ketogenic diet is about.
At least for me and 100s of thousands of other type 2 diabetics it’s not.
gabe
(Gabe “No Dogma, Only Science Please!” )
#7
I think it’s a sign of the times that I find myself surprised when I read a rational comment like yours, @Richard. Refreshing, but surprising in an age of so much… boolsheet.
richard
(Richard Morris)
#8
Maybe we should change the title of the segment if the homonym is distracting from the message. I don’t mind the term “Malarky” but “Bunkum” is also good.
FrankoBear
#10
Ok finished listening to the episode it was a good one. I especially enjoyed the language around the proponents of dogma.
The boolsheet is by being virtuous to some dogma that you are protected from risk.
That is a fantastic set up to turn the mirror on to the ketogenic diet.
flap_jack
#11
I love it. The new 2KD podcasts are fantastic, they’ve all come out fighting! And the boolsheet segment is a winner for me.
Hallie
(Butter Withaspoon)
#12
It’s a good segment and so great to have Richard back on the podcast, but I admit to wondering if the name Boolsheet doesn’t hit the right tone. Bunkum and Hogwash could work… or maybe it’s just too darn serious and should be called Serious Critique, or Bad Science.
I spend time listening to bollocks podcasts or watching weird pseudoscience YouTube. I want to understand where the scary misinformation comes from and how to lure people over to the light side. Lure to the Light Side - what a great name for a podcast. I should do one!
BuckRimfire
(BuckRimfire)
#14
I like the term!
Of course, my strategy is to remain immature to slow the aging process, so I’m biased. Not that I want everything to be Beavis and Butthead, but…
The first time I was exposed to Beavis and Butthead, at the ripe old age of 28, I thought it was stupid, but I came around rapidly.
BuckRimfire
(BuckRimfire)
#16
And his later work, Office Space, Idiocracy, Silicon Valley, is some of the greatest comedy of the last 20 years, IMHO.
ctviggen
(Bob M)
#17
Not the least of which might be protein. While I’m not a huge fan of “high P:E” (see below), I think higher protein, lower meals is perfectly fine. I’ve seen many people lose weight by dropping fat intake instead of adding it. (Not all, of course; it’s never all.)
Issues with high P:E:
1- It has grams versus energy. This drives the engineer in me crazy.
2- It conflates both fat and carbs within “E”.
3- It implies that if you eat a higher fat meal, you get fatter. I highly doubt that’s the case.
4- It makes me feel bad if I eat sour cream with “Taco Tuesday”, as that’s low P:E.
On the other hand, lower fat, higher protein seems better for a lot of us, like me.
amwassil
(Michael - When reality fails to meet expectations, the problem is not reality.)
#18
Help me out here, folks. Please. Where’s the boolsheet?
I go to:
All I see are:
- Julie’s Keto “Corn” Tortillas
- The BEST Keto French Toast!
- Carl’s Flavor Bomb Lamb Merguez Sausage
- Chef Robert Ramsay’s Smoked Brisket
- 6 more of the same…