Talk:Max Lugavere

"Known for Fringe Dietary Claims"

Moving this into it's own topic. To summarize, the statement in the infobox that Lugavere is primarily "Known for" his "Fringe Dietary Claims" is unsourced and contentious material as discussed in previous topics ("Neutrality concerns" & "No Concensus for NPOV template"). Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons states such material must be removed immediately and burden of evidence rests with the editor who adds or restores the contentious material.

The main dietary intervention he appears to promote the most based on the existing references (and online review) is a ketogenic/low-carbohydrate diet (e.g., [1]), which is certainly mainstream enough to be considered not "fringe".

There does seem to be basis to the claim that Lugavere is otherwise "known for" some "opposition" or concern with the vegetarian diet, which in fairness is the subject of extensive ongoing research & debate and does not rise to the level of being a "fringe" perspective (both pro- and anti-Vegetarianism are popular mainstream dietary beliefs).

Editors have further mentioned his association with sponsors of non-dietary products, and anecdotes from guests on his show as somehow supporting the assertion of his "fringe dietary claims", but these are not Wikipedia:Reliable sources (not to mention Association fallacy).

It is not for WP editors to determine his dietary claims are "fringe" Wikipedia:Synth -- We simply need a reliable source that we can attribute to the specific assertion of being known for "fringe dietary claims" or the contentious statement needs to be revised/removed. Kalem014 (talk) 23:00, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

We're supposed to summarize sources, and it is a fair summary of the McGill source. We don't stitch together Wikipedia articles by quoting exact phrasing. The must be removed immediately language you reference refers to content which is unsourced or poorly sourced and this is neither. MrOllie (talk) 23:29, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Kalem014, you are in agreement he promotes low-carb/keto but you seem to dispute any "fringe" claims. As stated above we have the McGill source that covers this not in regard to his keto/low carb views but his general fringe views on diet. As for the keto thing. A keto/paleo/carnivore diet for weight loss or supposed heart health benefits is not supported by any dietary guidelines or dietetic associations. The ketogenic diet for children with epilepsy is a scientific diet done under controlled conditions - it should not be confused with what Max is promoting. Are you arguing he is promoting mainstream dietary advice in that keto article you link to? Max has a long history of promoting low-carb/keto/carnivore for supposed health benefits. You can see that with the keto link you cited. I am not sure how that article helps your case.

Let's just look at this from a mainstream point of view briefly to put this in context, the American Heart Association have stated "there is insufficient evidence to support any existing popular or fad diets such as the ketogenic diet and intermittent fasting to promote heart health" [2]. But as you know, Max is promoting this keto fad diet for exactly that reason. I understand you are a fan of Max but please do not pretend he is not advocating fringe content. That's like claiming Steven Gundry is not fringe. Psychologist Guy (talk) 23:41, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

It may be hard for you to believe, but I've never read any articles by or about Lugavere prior to yesterday, and have never seen his podcast. He is not a source of health/diet info for me personally. Please Wikipedia:GOODFAITH as I have extended this policy/courtesy to you. Let's discuss the merits; sources and content policy. This is my only interest.

That said, would you be so kind as to point to a specific passage of text in the McGill article that you believe supports the assertion that he is "known for fringe dietary claims" [3]?

If anything, the author (Jonathan Jarry) states that "he can't argue with" the claims he listened to in an 1-hour interview and that they are "balanced and well informed", and only took issue with the apparent "switch" to sales tactics at the end.

This does not read as a overt declaration of "fringe dietary claims". Let's dig into the content and find the specific attribution. Kalem014 (talk) 01:43, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

It may be hard for you to believe, but I've never read any articles by or about Lugavere prior to yesterday

Then you should probably learn more about the subject before coming here to argue on behalf of his viewpoints. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 18:49, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

I don't need an encyclopedic knowledge of the subject to recognize missing or poor sourcing. I'd argue it makes my assessment more objective:

What is the source for the statement that Lugavere is specifically "known for fringe 'dietary' claims". It's an honest question that remains unanswered, other than by means of Wikipedia:SYNTH. -- Kalem014 (talk) 20:38, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Can you reference where Lugavere promotes ketogenic diets or low carb diets? Reliable source from 2023 https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/dementia-killed-my-mum-this-is-what-i-wish-id-known-about-brain-food-7cwll26kk states: "One area he’s changed his mind on is carbs and the fashion for avoiding them. Previously he followed a very low-carb diet but now eats plenty of slow-release carbs to give him more energy to be active. He still gives refined carbs — and sugar — a wide berth 'as they drive hunger, so it’s smart to minimise those'." This statement is evidence based. It's also clear from his interview here https://www.today.com/video/feel-better-from-the-inside-out-with-this-food-reset-203011141957 that he recommends carbohydrate and is not recommending a ketogenic dietary pattern. The McGill article makes no mention of ketogenic diets, low carbohydrate diets, or that Lugavere is known for fringe claims. Can you provide evidence, Psychologist Guy? 76.50.244.14 (talk) 01:54, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

There is a very strong overlap between the above IP and this account [4] which claims to be Max. There is already a keto source cited by Kalem014 that is on the article [5] which gives your views on keto, "Here is how Lugavere's philosophy and the keto diet come together...Lugavere said. "For beef, you want 100 percent grass-fed/grass-finished. Eggs should be pasture-raised or omega-3 enriched. Chicken should be free-range and antibiotic-free. Want to try out a keto-like style of eating for yourself? Lugavere's number one tip is adding extra salt to your diet". A scan through your public social media reveals that you spent 7-8 years promoting keto [6]. There you are promoting "keto snacks". In your own words, you said your book promotes "intermittent ketosis".

All of your social media posts are tagged "#lchf #keto #lowcarb #ketogenic #lowcarbhighfat #paleo #ketosis #primal #ketodiet #paleodiet #paleolifestyle #glutenfree #atkins #grainfree #ketogenicdiet #whole30 #sugarfree #jerf #ketofam #ketolife" which you added, there are literally 1000s of posts by you supporting keto and paleo diets. You have spent a lifetime promoting it. You have not listed any reliable sources. If you have now given up keto or paleo there are no reliable secondary sources published on this. I personally find it hard to believe because less then 14 days ago you were promoting the carnivore diet [7]. There is meat-puppetry and socking here and you are not being honest about what you really promote, so I won't be further discussing this with you. Other editors can weigh in. Psychologist Guy (talk) 03:01, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

I would like to add, I have just spent this afternoon reading Max's own book which promotes many fringe ideas about nutrition. It is online for free, so anyone can read it Genius Foods Become Smarter. Here is Max in his own words "The Genius Plan (fully outlined in chapter 11) is no doubt a variant of the ketogenic diet. It combines intermittent fasting with low-carbohydrate eating to increase ketone availability to the brain". The diet promoted in Max's book is a low carb diet high in animal fat. Anyone can read this book and see that. I believe the above account claiming to be Lugavere should be blocked until there is proof it is him. This may well be an impersonation. I find it odd this user is claiming Max is not low-carb when he has written a whole book promoting it. I will report this to Wikipedia:ANI. Psychologist Guy (talk) 17:45, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Agree, there seems to be no shortage of sources, including very recent, where Lugavere speaks favorably of keto/low-carb type diets. However, more to the point of the topic, keto/low-carb diets are not fringe, nor have I ever seen a reliable source (among the article's existing references or otherwise) claiming it is. -- Kalem014 (talk) 20:46, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Keto diets may not be fringe, but Lugavere’s claims are patently ridiculous. Low-carb diets will not make you smarter. Veganism will not increase your risk of dementia. These are clearly fringe claims. And no I don’t need to cite that because extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Dronebogus (talk) 15:59, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi Dronebogus, if I'm not mistaken, it looks like you added the content being discussed under this topic. Here https://en.m.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Max_Lugavere&oldid=1214767157

I'm happy to suggest closing this discussion if you could just highlight where this specific assertion is made in any reliable source. Just so we all clearly understand. It will help to avoid future objections as well. -- Kalem014 (talk) 00:50, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

“Not supported by scientific evidence” = fringe. Dronebogus (talk) 10:47, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

False definition of "fringe". 69.249.103.131 (talk) 20:07, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Then define fringe. Babysharkboss2 was here!! ^{I killed JFK} 16:34, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

fringe (noun) frinj

often attributive

1: an ornamental border consisting of short straight or twisted threads or strips hanging from cut or raveled edges or from a separate band

2a: something resembling a fringe : EDGE, PERIPHERY — often used in plural

b: (chiefly British) Bangs (an area of hair hanging over the forehead)

c: one of various light or dark bands produced by the interference or diffraction of light

d: an area bordering a putting green on a golf course with grass trimmed longer than on the green itself

3a: something that is marginal, additional, or secondary to some activity, process, or subject

b: a group with marginal or extremist views

c: FRINGE BENEFIT 69.249.103.131 (talk) 18:14, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

"Marginal or extremist views" pretty much sums up Max Lugavere, he claims incorrectly that grains increase Alzheimer's disease risk and that seed oils cause cancer. The only people that make bizarre fringe pseudoscientific claims like this are from the online carnivore diet and keto crazy community. There isn't a shred of evidence that seed oils or grains increase Alzheimer's or cancer risk. Claims like this are very much the definition of fringe. Psychologist Guy (talk) 19:46, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

"According to a 2018 Gallup poll, 5% of U.S. adults consider themselves to be vegetarian." I could call that marginal or fringe as well, but without a direct reliable reference for such a claim, that would be POV pushing, which is what you are doing. You need to provide a reliable source where it is stated that Lugavere's claims are "fringe", in quotes. You can't be the source for this claim. You know the policy. 69.249.103.131 (talk) 21:17, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Poor analogy. Plant-based diets are supported by evidence-based medicine and are endorsed by the worlds leading dietetic and health organizations who have put out evidence-based guidelines and reviews on the topic. In contrast none of Lugavere's claims are supported by scientific evidence. Your claims are WP:OR. We have several references on the article noting that Lugavere's views are at odds with the scientific consensus [8], [9], [10], "Max Lugavere is a somewhat controversial figure in the world of health and wellness, advocating a high-fat, meat-heavy diet that has been lauded by many (indeed, he’s a New York Times bestselling author) and greatly criticised by others. He also spends a lot of time on Twitter/X complaining about ‘vegan propaganda’ and creates content for PragerU, a conservative media platform that has been accused on countless occasions of spreading misinformation around climate change, racism and LGBT+ issues. I know you shouldn’t judge a man by the company he keeps, but unfortunately much of this company shows up in Little Empty Boxes, as the film evolves into something quite different from what its first 30 minutes promised." It's funny that you are arguing his views are not fringe when all the evidence and references says they are. You are not acting in good faith here and are just trolling this talk-page so this discussion should be closed. Psychologist Guy (talk) 00:45, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

You miss the point. I'm not denying the potential benefits of plant-based diets (or any diet) in certain groups or individuals under the right circumstances. The point remains to challenge your definition of "fringe". The vegetarian diet is not fringe, nor is keto, nor is low-carb, nor is mediterranean, etc., etc. Most can be useful [11][12], but outcomes can often be confounding in practice given our current lacking understanding of the many underlying variables. That's why labels such as "fringe" should be used very cautiously in this arena, especially in the context of a BLP.

Again, the simple issue here is the lack of any specific source for the abovementioned smear. The first 2 references you linked above don't speak to "scientific consensus" (I couldn't access the 3rd) and don't even begin to suggest his actual dietary claims are fringe. I'll stand corrected if you are able to quote specific passages that do so. As has been pointed out, the chief complaint in the provided references seems to be his business tactics and for-profit motives rather than his actual dietary claims.

As an aside, one must ask, how is it so obviously "fringe" to discuss an association between a high-carb diet and dementia anyway, at least in certain groups, when we have well-known studies such as this one from the Mayo Clinic & Olmsted Medical Center indicating "A dietary pattern with relatively high caloric intake from carbohydrates and low caloric intake from fat and proteins may increase the risk of MCI or dementia in elderly persons."? [13]

At the same time, plant-based diets, vegan in particular, have been shown to be substantially higher carb (and lower protein) than typical omnivore diets, not to mention as compared to low-carb or keto interventions. [14]

(Remember, this is a "talk" page, not WP:OR, I'm just illustrating the point.)

So, it's not a "fringe hypothesis", it's just a "hypothesis", one of many, and one with some legitimate scientific evidence behind it. But as these papers often state in their conclusions, particularly in this highly unsettled arena of diet and nutrition, "more research is needed".

Perhaps years from now - After far more research and analysis has been done, we will receive pre-programmed diet plans, optimized for our individual genomes and requirements, predictably helping each us reach our fullest potential in every unique aspect of our lives, meanwhile maximizing sustainability and minimizing cruelty. But for now, we're still in our infancy in all of this, therefore we are well over our skis with the fringe label or similar dogma.

At the end of the day, neither of us are experts or reliable sources, are we "psychologist guy"? Which is why we need a reference for the "fringe" statement, or it should be removed.

Re: your comment "You are not acting in good faith here and are just trolling this talk-page." Please don't do that. I have not raised any of the specific evidence of your POV here and have instead challenged the article content in question on the policy and merits. You should do the same. I have no horse in this race other than an open-minded lifelong interest in nutrition, and more importantly the credibility of Wikipedia, which regrettably in decline due to issues like this one. 69.249.103.131 (talk) 17:32, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

It isn't Psychologist Guy's definition of fringe, it is Wikipedia's. You're not going to get anywhere challenging it on the talk page of this article, but feel free to take it up at the relevant policy-change venues. This also isn't the place to argue about if he's right or not, since this isn't a general discussion forum. MrOllie (talk) 17:45, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

"Caution should be exercised when evaluating whether there are enough sources available to write a neutral biography that neither unduly promotes nor denigrates the subject."

"It is of vital importance that controversial ideas simply restate what is said by independent secondary sources of reasonable reliability and quality."

Your synthesis of what constitutes fringe is insufficient to denigrate the subject of a BLP. In the absence of a specific verifiable source for the fringe claim or anything even approaching its definition, we are compelled by policy to defer to neutrality. 69.249.103.131 (talk) 18:02, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

WP:CRYBLP is not going to work either - and you have misunderstood that WP:NPOV requires. It is not false balance. MrOllie (talk) 18:50, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

69.249.103.131, low-carb, paleo and keto diets are fringe, this is a well accepted fact in the medical community. Max Lugavere's dietary ideas are not evidence-based.

The ketogenic diet for epilepsy in children under controlled medical care is a scientific diet, it should not be confused with what Max has promoted. No dietetic, health or medical organizations or dietary guidelines advocate or promote the low-carb, paleo or keto diet because they all drive up ApoB, LDL-c and total cholesterol increasing atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and cancer risk if done long-term. In fact, many such as the American Heart Association, American Cancer Society, European Society of Cardiology, American Institute for Cancer Research, British Dietetic Association, European Association for the Study of Diabetes, National Heart Foundation of Australia have warned against low-carb and keto diets. By default you are arguing from a fringe position. Max Lugavere authored a book Genius Foods with a paleo diet pseudoscientist advocating a pseudoscientific diet high in red meat. You are ignoring our policies on WP:Fringe and as cited above WP:NPOV.

Anyone can find a single cohort study to support their POV, there will always be an outlier study. That is not how evidence-based medicine works. Why not look at the totality of the evidence? Of course Max doesn't because he wouldn't have a book to sell if he did. Max Lugavere often cites a single rodent study or a cohort study to make sweeping statements about disease risk. He ignores the Bradford Hill criteria. If you want to argue that grains increase dementia risk you need consistent results from long-term studies in different populations with follow up data. If the effect was valid there should be between 10 and 20 systematic reviews supporting this conclusion but of course there isn't, that's why you cherry-pick one study from 2012. Epidemiologists do not make judgements calls about disease risk or make recommendations based on one or two studies.

What do the meta-analyses actually say about diet and dementia risk? If you check the literature there is hardly any consistent data. We do not have enough research on the topic currently. It is ignorance at this stage to make sweeping statements about dementia risk and nutrition when the data is limited. Max keeps going on podcasts telling everyone that grains, sugar and processed foods cause dementia but there is no good evidence for this. The Wikipedia articles cites 3 references that tell us Max is promoting non-scientific views about nutrition. If you disagree with the sources take it up with the authors of said articles off Wikipedia. We just cite reliable sources here, it is not up to us to question them or conduct WP:OR. It's a waste of time to keep talking about this, multiple users have explained to you Wikipedia policy on Fringe. Psychologist Guy (talk) 21:16, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Appreciate the substantive response @Psychologist Guy. This will be my last post on this topic, promise.

"It is ignorance at this stage to make sweeping statements about dementia risk and nutrition when the data is limited."

Agreed. "Further research is needed" - a caveat given in many if not most study conclusions in this arena. Yet, recommendations are made. It's not pharmacology, a little perspective.

Statements like these undermine your position:

"low-carb, paleo and keto diets are fringe, this is a well-accepted fact in the medical community."

"No dietetic, health or medical organizations or dietary guidelines advocate or promote the low-carb, paleo or keto diet..."

Are these fringe articles?:

"To manage or prevent diabetes, the American Diabetes Association recommends the Mediterranean diet and other low-carb diets, as long as they minimize added sugars and refined grains and include non-starchy vegetables. The ultra-low-carb ketogenic diet fulfills these criteria."

https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2022/070/keto-mediterranean-diet-diabetes.html

"A Mediterranean-based ketogenic diet may help lower Alzheimer's disease risk"

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/a-mediterranean-based-ketogenic-diet-may-help-lower-alzheimers-disease-risk

There are countless scholarly articles and studies suggesting the dietary interventions we've discussed are worthy of further exploration & research, in some cases outright recommended, and are certainly not the third rails you make them out to be. I started listing a dozen or so more before deciding it would be obnoxious on my part and ultimately futile (but yes, these include meta-analyses, RCTs, human studies, and mostly fairly recent).

Cherry-picking or not, research is ongoing and will be for some time before anyone can say whether these diets are truly "fringe" or not, and to what extent generalized recommendations at the national level from an AHA, etc. apply to an individual in practice, all things considered, under the advice of their clinician. "Further research is needed".

For the record, I did not join this discussion as a Max Lugavere "fan" (still not). I'm not even an adherent to anything approaching any of the diets we've discussed. My own diet is something more akin to flexitarian. I'm just a reader who saw the statement "known for fringe dietary claims", and like several others wanted to know more about which claims were allegedly fringe. I have found nothing in the linked sources that explain or back that up directly without a lot of heavy lifting by contributors. That's an issue that will likely come up again.

Honest feedback! But it's been said multiple times, by multiple users, and you've outlasted me at least.

Take care and be well,

Sláinte! 69.249.103.131 (talk) 07:22, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Unreliable source

This is not a reliable source per WP:MEDRS [15]. This study has recently been promoted by Max Lugavere all over his social media. We are not going to link to one primary study. Also WP:OR, the paper does not mention Max Lugavere. Psychologist Guy (talk) 20:36, 18 June 2024 (UTC)