I'm happy to see articles like this getting published in mainstream news outlets:
Dietary dogma: How paleo, low-carb, raw food and other fads do nutrition a disserviceQuote:I once worked on a heart-health program with a physician who asked me if I was going to put all of our clients on a Mediterranean diet. “Put them on a diet?” I thought. You can’t put a person on a diet any more than you can tell a child to play with a particular toy. If a way of eating fits for a person, then they will do it, but if it is incongruous with their lifestyle, preferences, pleasures and motivation, then “putting them on a diet” is irrelevant and useless. Yes, anyone can do anything for a while. But maintaining a new way of eating, especially one that is a quantum shift from one’s usual routine, is a big undertaking, and one with a very low success rate.
Same goal - many paths.
Oh, and yes, the title of the article doesn't match the content very well. It isn't about bashing paleo or LC - it's essentially just saying that any given diet - whether it's paleo, keto, low-GI, whatever - is not going to be effective
if you can't adhere to it, and that the restrictions imposed by many of these diets
may therefore be counterproductive. I might have worded the title "How dietary zealotry does nutrition a disservice."