re: RFK- keto diet as cure for schizophrenia

quote:

---

What, verbatim, did RFKjr say that was incorrect? He cited two examples of diet "cured" mental illness.

---

You still think thats the conclusion from that case series


No comment on you thinking the "remission" in your AI screenshot was discussing schizophrenia? AI can pull stuff for your but clearly it can't read it for you. Kind of embarrassing..

quote:

---

People here rightly point out that the effectiveness was oversold even as it had a public health benefit.

---

The same people in this thread arguing the limited data on dietary changes “curing” certain mental illnesses is proof that it’s not effective were the same ones arguing the limited data presented during COVID was enough to prove the effectiveness of the vaccine and overall benefit to society

They’re hypocrites at best.

You're welcome to think COVID is worse, but I think you get the point. Both involved science communication failures around incomplete knowledge. When science is evolving but language sounds certain, people will naturally fill in the blanks with the stories that best fit their worldview and fears.

quote:

---

Both involved science communication failures around incomplete knowledge. When science is evolving but language sounds certain, people will naturally fill in the blanks with the stories that best fit their worldview and fears.

---

Do you think there is ever a bad time to advocate healthy eating habits?

I get what you’re saying but I feel it is comparing apples to piranhas.

RFKjr says, hey y’all, eat healthy, it could even have a positive impact on your mental defects much less all the physical health benefits.

Walenski and Fauci said, take this shot and you will not get COVID.

Put another way, eating an Apple a day may not always keep the doctor away, but incorporating fruits and other healthy foods into your diet will improve your outcomes.

quote:

---

During COVID, the claim was "this likely reduces harm right now."

---

No, the claim was the science is settled and you deserve to lose your job and possibly face arrest if you resist.

Good post.

No, there’s never a bad time to advocate healthy eating. That’s not the issue.

The issue is the difference between general health guidance (“eat better, it helps many things”) and specific treatment claims (“this cures schizophrenia”). Once you cross that line, words change behavior.

Telling the public to eat well is low-risk and broadly true. Suggesting a condition may be “cured” implies substitution (people hear that as permission to stop other treatments). That’s where harm can occur, even if the intention is good.

So the apples vs piranhas comparison isn’t about which message is morally better. It’s about how much behavioral force the language carries, especially when it comes from someone with authority.

Wouldn’t it be crazy if lifestyle changes helped with a lot of diseases rather than more and more pills?

That would be insane.

quote:

---

Whatever rule you pick should apply to COVID policy and to claims about curing schizophrenia.

---

I’ll bite.

Walensky/Fauci definitively claimed the shot prevented Covid.

RFKjr did not definitively claim that keto cures schizophrenia. He cited an example of such but did not claim that to be a definitive medical truth.

The “rule”, perhaps, could be said to be speaking in absolutes.

I think we’re closer than it might look. You’re right that the clip is short, that intent matters, and that the account posting it clearly had an angle. Context absolutely shapes interpretation. Where I still get uneasy is that when someone in authority says “cure”, listeners don’t hear it as a loose metaphor. They automatically fill in the missing steps - (“this works”, “it’s sufficient”, “other treatments may be unnecessary”, etc.) That isn’t because they’re foolish. It’s how human communication works, especially with health claims.

You’re also right about the X context. When a clip is dropped into a feed primed to see RFK as reckless or dangerous, people will hear his words in the worst possible light. The same clip posted to a pro-RFK audience will be heard in the most charitable light. Neither group is “just reacting to the facts”. They’re both reacting inside an attention environment that rewards certain readings.

So for me, the problem isn’t simply “what did he intend?” or “what did the clip poster intend?”. It’s that once messages are injected into polarized channels, nuance collapses and people stop hearing each other. That makes it harder for us to know things together, even when we’re trying.

quote:

---

So for me, the problem isn’t simply “what did he intend?” or “what did the clip poster intend?”. It’s that once messages are injected into polarized channels, nuance collapses and people stop hearing each other. That makes it harder for us to know things together, even when we’re trying.

---

I can’t disagree with this.

I am excited to see though, if these studies progress into real relief for people suffering from these disorders. Although as another poster stated, if it’s hard enough getting patients to adhere to medication regimens, how much harder will it be to introduce lasting dietary changes?

It’s a neat topic and it sucks to see it reduced to politics and sides- but I doubt ANY topic will be any different so long as it’s coming from “that guy”.