I've made a new video against low-carb diets

[FlatAssembler]

But making a more rigorous study testing whether coconuts cause heart disease in humans is unethical, isn't it? And, in the absence of better information, it is reasonable to assume coconuts do indeed cause heart disease, right?

Yes, it would be unethical, and no, we don’t jump to a scientific conclusion in the absence of better information. That’s the opposite of how science works. We say “we don’t/can’t know for sure.” Especially considering the fact that not everyone with elevated LDL levels will eventually develop heart disease. That’s why it’s not scientific to say “food X causes disease Y.” We normally say nutrient X can raise bio markers that are associated with certain disease risks. If I eat one coconut, will I develop heart disease? Two? One a week for six months? Three a week for six months?

If we say "We don't/can't know for sure.", then we basically say we do not know anything, since there is hardly anything in science we know for sure. What do you mean not everyone with elevated LDL levels will eventually develop heart disease? That is, as far as I understand it, true only because there are other causes of death, such as cancer and car crashes, that might kill us before we had a chance to develop heart disease. But one cannot live into the old age with elevated LDL levels, right?

---

Well, I have published a few papers about linguistics, so I know something about how science works.

Nah, you don’t.

Boru

Well, I certainly understand how science works better than the vast majority of the people, since the vast majority of people have never published a scientific paper and I have.

---

Well, I have published a few papers about linguistics, so I know something about how science works.

How does studying linguistics lead to 'expertise' in the health benefits, or lack thereof, of coconuts?

It does not, but it familiarizes you with how science works.