The guy links to so many controlled, double-blind experiments. It's not like he is just making wild health claims out of nowhere. Why do you think he's a quack?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

he often misinterprets the study, or claims it shows the exact opposite of what the researchers concluded. you shouldn't believe him just because he links to something: you need to read the actual literature and the body of work around it to understand the subject. he is an ideologue who will grasp onto any datapoint he can find that he believes supports his position.