I wouldn't go that far... Nutrition 'science' is quite valid, the only problem is the amount of people in the nutrition space who aren't actually doing 'science'.

> People who pay very close attention to their own habits and results are probably going to be more right about their own nutrition than all the scientists in the world put together.

Doubt it. People are often quite irrational about these things. Which is why there's so many people who follow fad diets (and buy the books).

A rejection of a particularly poor practice of science is not a rejection of science. I doubt we'll see decent nutrition science until we're all equipped with a network of bloodstream nanobots that measures the actual physical response we each display to nutritional input.

that's not very nice. a lot of people on HN lift weights.

It's easy to understand, actually (I take your statement literally).

Being in shape is not rocket science: you eat clean, you do sports, and you're done. Although that sounds ambiguous, everybody does know what clean food is, and what sports mean (ahem, walking doesn't count).

The thing is that it's a damn hard lifestyle, if one doesn't have the right mindset/(self)education/upbring. Nutrition "science" is nothing else that a stream of silver bullets, which are easy to apply (avoid this, avoid that), so the public wants to believe in it, because it makes life much easier.

It's obviously a deception; but truth isn't the point - feeling good about the idea is.

And budget. To do properly requires a pretty good budget for good quality protein sources, vegetables, etc.

> Although that sounds ambiguous, everybody does know what clean food is

Not at all. You project too much. Many people truly believe that healthy food is what the supermarkets & TV tell you is healthy. The popularity of the "NutriBullet" is proof alone - "turn any food into a super food"... Uhh huh.