Talk:David Perlmutter

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Articles for creation Start‑class

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article was accepted on 4 November 2013 by reviewer SarahStierch (talk · contribs).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Biography Start‑class

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

United States Start‑class Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

2013 studies not notable.

I intend to delete the last paragraph of main text, as the studies are of poor quality. One of these "studies" basically consisted of three testimonials. The other one was a single testimonial, presented as a study. They are not worthy of inclusion, not notable or anywhere near worthy of comment here.

I'm going to be Bold and not wait for comment. --Roxy the dog (resonate) 17:24, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Sorry, I can't summarize this in one sentence.

It's good that the non-studies he uses to support his conclusions have been removed. However, so have the real studies that he also uses in support of his conclusions. However, his conclusions (at least, his statements on a PBS special airing now on KOCE, as I write) that carbohydrates in general, and grains in particular, are responsible for all neurological disorders (Alzheimer's (and most other memory loss, not even rising to the level of dementia) and depression) and some other disorders (diabetes, etc.) should appear in the article. (I say, "etc.", because, as noted below, I'm not watching the show. I only caught a few sentences, and am taping it at my wife's request.)

I don't think I could improve the article (other than noting that the first critical article is quoting the second), because I believe his reasoning is absurd, and as noted in WP:FRINGE, there are few scientists willing to debate the issue. <redacted my detailed opinion as to the basis of my belief, before posting. It's not relevant. I'm not a medical expert.> Perhaps this argues against my second sentence above, because it gives undue weight to the implication that his conclusions are justified.

Still, we should be able to state his conclusions without commenting or implying whether they are accurate or justified. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 08:58, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]