I was recently a guest on the Lew Rockwell podcast.  Mr. Rockwell is a well-known libertarian writer and speaker, so naturally we had a lot to discuss.  While certainly not all paleo/real-food types are libertarians or vice versa, there does seem to be a strong cross-pollination going on.  There’s even a paleo-libertarian discussion group on the internet.

Well, it makes sense.  When you watch films like Farmageddon and see how the government beats up on small farmers selling unprocessed food to consumers who want to buy it, that will (or should, anyway) tend make you suspicious of government power and a supporter of individual liberty.  And of course, the type of person who believes the USDA and the FDA are corrupt and can’t be trusted isn’t generally your pro-government type.

You can listen to the podcast here.

26 Responses to “Interviewed On The Lew Rockwell Show”
  1. Vesa Tuomi says:

    Brilliant – Two people I greatly admire on the same podcast! I’m not surprised at the correlation/cross-pollination between the two groups (requires objective thinking…maybe just thinking period).

    But at the risk of dragging out an issue covered in past postings (I can hear the groans already)…

    As someone who admires your work and shares your Libertarian ideals, I was caught short by your feelings on Intellectual Property rights.

    I’ve been interested in the IP debate for many years as the changes in technology keep moving the boundaries of the discussion. From before the printing press (when there was no concept of IP) through the advent of analogue recording to digital replication, cheap 3D printers and looking towards the concepts of atomic level replication.

    I saw an earlier comment where Rothbard was quoted to support IP. There is a strong shift against this old order objectivist, Randian thinking about IP. I consider it to be extremely important that the Libertarian collective place the issue of IP to the fore, thus my comment here.

    I know you are very busy but hope you can find some time to read a very thorough post on the Ludwig von Mises Institute site called ‘The Death Throes of Pro-IP Libertarianism’ by Stephan Kinsella (mises.org/daily/4601). Actually I’m counting on your insatiable thirst for knowledge to follow up on this (hopefully ‘the older brother’ would have a go at it as well).

    I can understand how frustrating it must be when one puts as much effort into a work, as you have done, to see it being used ‘freely’. I also see the financial risk undertaken, and understand the overriding desire to keep ones family supported and secure. But no one can deny that as humans these emotions can sometimes color our thinking. I’ve heard many times “it’s just not fair” or “it’s the law” but I think we need to move beyond this to truly rational thought, as many Libertarian concepts require thus mainstream acceptance is still not where we want it to be.

    That being said, I did buy the Fathead dvd, enjoyed it immensely and have promoted it to anyone who seemed open. I believe your work has helped many people live better lives and I will continue to cajole, entice, or just flat out tell folks to visit your site and buy the dvd regardless.

    Thank you for the support. As for Mr. Kinsella’s theories that only physical objects can be owned, I’ll repeat a reply to another commenter in case you didn’t see it:

    If I informed Mr. Kinsella’s bank that he doesn’t believe in property rights except for the physical objects a person owns and they decided to reward me for that information by transferring several thousand dollars from his bank account to mine, that would, according to Mr. Kinsella’s theories, be just fine and dandy. After all, there was no physical property stolen and he can only own the rights to physical property, not a pattern of information. The bits of data constituting his bank account are on the bank’s computers, which they own, so they can do anything they want with those bits, including manipulating them to transfer money out of his account into mine. He could protest that the transfer violated his agreement with the bank, but of course when people upload Fat Head from a DVD, they are also violating the agreement under which they bought the DVD.

  2. Bernardo says:

    This IP issue is really polemic. In this case it is completely fair and right but sometimes people take it too far. For instance, different zones for DVD, not being able to transfer rights that were purchased in one media to another (if I have the physical record, how come I can’t download the mp3 for free?). And what about “Happy Birthday”? It’s part of our culture, and was invented years ago how can someone own it. There are also abuses in patents, as we saw with Apple and the slide-and-lock issue, pathetic. Imagine if a cavemen had patented those Stone Axes or Bows…I know it’s really hard to draw this line, but I also know that ownership over ideas can be very bad and work against the original intent in cases where it’s abused.

    I agree that region codes on DVDs are a pain in the butt and should probably go away, but when I worked at Disney I did hear a couple of explanations for them. One, what’s allowed to be shown on a DVD in one region may not be allowed in another region because of different ratings systems. A trailer approved by the MPAA on a US DVD for a main feature that’s rated PG may not be approved by another region’s rating association for the same main feature, etc. In fact, one of the requirements for a big system I built for Disney was to flag planned DVD products in which a trailer’s rating exceeded the allowed rating in the distribution region. So the region restriction is partly to avoid getting in hot water with a jurisdiction’s rating association.

    Another reason involves the timing of theatrical releases. A film may be released in theaters in the U.S. with a planned DVD release four months later. The same film won’t be released in theaters in, say, China until six months after the U.S. theatrical premiere. So the studios don’t want the DVD hitting China before the film has even premiered in theaters there.

  3. PrimeNumbers says:

    Of course, if that was true about DVD zones, Japan and Europe would have been in different zones because they have very different local censorship regimes and release schedules. In the UK at least, personal importation wasn’t part of the rule-set for movie censorship anyway. (Similarly, again, if the case, then BluRay would have more than the two regions it has) The real reason, as far as I could see, for DVD region coding was to avoid people importing DVDs from cheaper countries, or in other words, to maintain foreign price differentials. DVDs from Canada were about half the price of DVDs in the UK.

    The theatrical release argument really meant that Europeans were receiving second hand prints (no wonder they often looked bad), and of course now that digital distribution is dominating is no longer a valid reason.

    As with any system, copyrights and patents can be abused. From patent trolls to all manner of copyright abuse it’s happening all the time. As a copyright and patent holder, I’m not for seeing the removal of such laws, but they do need to keep in mind the reality that we don’t invent and create in a vacuum. Fair use and non-infringing uses (like transitory copies, backup copies, transcoding) are as important to the user as protecting our works from copyright infringement is to the creator. Such a balance can be struck, but current IP legislation is heading in the wrong direction away from balance towards all user rights being null and void.

    The system actually has to check that a DVD product doesn’t violate ratings in any of the jurisdictions within the zone where it’s released. They have ratings jurisdictions grouped into what they call territories, same as zones. A proposed DVD product is flagged if the contents exceed ratings anywhere within the territory.

    But I agree the whole region-coding thing should go away.

  4. Angele says:

    Libertarians are so funny if you actually listen to them. They want “limiited” government? Meaning limit the government to only my needs and opinions. What about the “green party”? Waht about Rosanne Barr? If you want to be productive open your minds and be an individual that can see many sides to many stories and know that our government is like ourselves……not perfect but helpful in some cases.

    It’s not about limiting government to my needs. It’s about limiting government to its legitimate purposes of protecting us from those who would do us harm, adjudicating disputes, enforcing contracts, building infrastructure and delivering the mail. It would quite helpful and meet my needs if the government decided independent filmmakers should receive federal subsidies, but I’d be against them because it’s not a legitimate function of government to confiscate someone else’s income for the purpose of giving it to me, any more than it’s a legitimate function of government to prohibit small farmers from selling products to people who want to buy them.

    Everything government does is backed up with the threat of violence. There are few justifications for the application of that threat, no matter what Roseanne Barr or the green may want.

  5. Andreas says:

    The example with the bank is about as silly as me charging you for taking my photograph stating you stole from me.
    The bits would have to change would money be transfered. Copied bits does not change. I think you need a better example to convince people that copying is stealing. Perhaps just stick to the ‘violating agreement’ part.

    Besides, have you considered flattr? IMO much easier to use than donations.

    All the very best and love your work.

    The bank owns the bits and can do with them what they please, according to his theories.

  6. Dan says:

    I hope people aren’t getting confused here about ownership of ideas. You can’t really own an idea, but you can own the incarnation of that idea that you brought into life by dutiful execution. For instance, the song, “Happy Birthday”, while in the public domain and can’t be owned, can be performed/arranged by an artist, and that instance should be protected because it was/is that artist’s work that brought that specific instance of “Happy Birthday” into the world. Same as in software. You can’t really own the code (no one else would be able to write an “if” statement without paying royalties to the first writer such statement), but you can “own” many other aspects such as, the order in which it is assembled, the resulting UI, experience etc. So, with regard to your film, I could easily go out and make a film on the same topic covering the exact same ideas as you, but to literally use your work and distribute it as if it were my own, would be criminal. Was it Jefferson or Franklin that wrote something about sharing an idea vs. sharing a physical resource? Share a and you each have 1/2 of a physical object. Share an idea and you both have the whole idea. Anyway, time is short, writing fast. No time to be brief. Cheerio. Dan.

    That’s right, copyrights and patents protect a specific execution of an idea, not the idea itself. A couple of other people have made films in which they lost weight eating fast food, and nobody is complaining about the idea being stolen.

    Comedians are some of the worst when it comes to complaining that someone else stole an idea. Two comedians read the same news story, a similar take on it occurs to both of them (there aren’t all that many ways of structuring a joke), and later one insists the other stole his idea.

    Sometimes, of course, a comedian with no ethics hears a bit he likes and lifts the whole thing, almost word for word. That happened to me once. A guy who opened for me ended up opening for me again about a year later. Imagine my surprise when one of my routines came out of his mouth, pretty much word for word. He’d obviously forgotten who he lifted it from. So when it was my turn on stage, I went ahead and did it again. When the audience looked at me in surprise, I said, “Yeah, I know. Sounds really familiar, doesn’t it?” The opener then decided to forgo his duty of coming up on stage to wish everyone goodnight to close the show, electing instead to leave the club.

    There was a comedian who had a well-deserved reputation for constructing his act almost entirely of bits he lifted from comedians he’d worked with. When he died of heart disease, someone placed a little memorial in a comedian’s magazine that read: When Billy Joe died, a little bit of all us died with him.

  7. Steve says:

    Excellent interview. You really have a command of the subject with a clear, rational approach.

    Thank you.

  8. Greg says:

    Dude, you need to look a little deeper into Rockwell before allowing yourself to be associated with him. I’m not going to listen to the interview because I know the guy’s a jackass. There’s an extremely troubling history of certain branches of libertarians cozying up and pandering to disgusting racist groups and Rockwell is among them.

    I know this quote comes from a Marxist blog, but don’t dismiss it out of hand:

    ” Rockwell has a habit of publishing openly white supremacist material, such as this gem from Samuel Francis:

    In the first place, the natural differentiation of the races in intellectual capacities implies that of the two major races in the United States today, only one possesses the inherent capacity to create and sustain the level of civilization that has historically characterized its homelands in Europe and America [note: this is level of civilization of which Francis is so proud]….And secondly, the recognition of racial realities implies that most of the efforts now deployed to combat racism…are misplaced, based on a profound misconception of racial capacities…Those policies and laws are the fruit of a discredited egalitarian mythology that animates the federal leviathan’s perpetual war against civil society and debilitates white resistance to the gathering storm of racial revolution that the enemies, white and non-white, of the white race and its civilization now openly preach and prepare. (Qtd. in Jean Hardisty, Mobilizing Resentment, 173)

    This appeared in the Rothbard-Rockwell Report, a publication Rockwell edited with Murray Rothbard. ”

    If you need to hear it from Libertarians, here are two more links.

    Bottom line is that you’ve seriously discredited yourself by associating with this racist prick.

    I’ve read some of his writing and never picked up a whiff of racism. It’s a common tactic by the left to try to paint conservatives and libertarians as racists, so I’m always suspicious of those charges, especially when they appear on blogs. If it turns out he is a racist, however, then I would of course keep my distance.

  9. Lori says:

    Thinking about this has changed my attitude about a coworker who’s a meddler, a busybody, a gossip, and micromanages anyone who’ll let her. At least she’s obsessed with office trivia and not in a government job where she could wreak havoc on people’s lives.


  10. SnowDog says:

    Kinsella’s theory of property is based on the idea of scarcity. That’s not a relevant starting point. We should respect property as the product of one’s labor. It’s what gives liberty meaning, for property is both the object of, and product of action.

    There is also the idea of contract, which only makes sense if people own their labor. Then contracts can be viewed as an exchange of property. Otherwise, I could write a contract with a song writer, and as soon as he wrote the song, I could disavow the contract since he doesn’t own the song and can’t contract for it. Without property, broken contracts are just broken promises.

    I read his essay and I don’t buy the scarcity argument either. If I only sell five copies of Fat Head and therefore it’s scarce, now do I get to keep my property rights? At exactly how many sales is it no longer scarce?

    Bingo on the contract point. You buy a DVD with a notice that specifically prohibits duplication, you voluntarily entered a legal agreement. You don’t get to breach the agreement just because you don’t like the idea of intellectual property rights.

  11. Bong Kim says:

    You still don’t understand the difference between the government and the one behind the government. You always complain that the government does this and does that, but who controls your government?

    Think about this. Not all government on the earth forbid small farming. What is that?

    You are missing the point. Government should not have the power to beat up on small farmers, just as my neighbor should not have the legal license to steal from me, even if he decides not to use it. Give government powers it shouldn’t have, and it’s only a matter of time before that power will be abused.

  12. Tom G P says:

    “If I informed Mr. Kinsella’s bank that he doesn’t believe in property rights except for the physical objects a person owns and they decided to reward me for that information by transferring several thousand dollars from his bank account to mine, that would, according to Mr. Kinsella’s theories, be just fine and dandy. After all, there was no physical property stolen and he can only own the rights to physical property, not a pattern of information. The bits of data constituting his bank account are on the bank’s computers, which they own, so they can do anything they want with those bits, including manipulating them to transfer money out of his account into mine. He could protest that the transfer violated his agreement with the bank, but of course when people upload Fat Head from a DVD, they are also violating the agreement under which they bought the DVD.”

    I have no problem with contracts and I believe this was the way that Murray Rothbard defended copyrights (though he opposed patents). He believed that you could have copyrights as an agreement not to copy a work you buy whether it be a DVD or a book or whatever. Kinsella’s objection to the Rothbardian theory is not that contracts are invalid but that they don’t bind third parties.

    As it turns out, in my bank example I was responding to arguments made by another commenter, not Kinsella. My bad for getting the two confused.

    Kinsella told me it’s not “stealing” if I don’t actually deprive someone of something. Someone copies my work without my permission, but I still have my work, so it’s not stealing. Now we’ll toss in the idea that a contract isn’t binding on a third party. Let’s apply those theories elsewhere:

    Since we live out in the sticks, I had to pay Comcast rather a lot of money to extend cable lines out to our area — previously the nearest line was a half-mile away or something like that. I now have a contract with Comcast for cable service. According to Mr. Kinsella, if my neighbor hooks himself up to the new cable lines to provide himself with free cable TV, there’s no theft involved because he didn’t deprive anyone else of cable. He’s not a third party to the contract I signed with Comcast either, so he doesn’t have to abide by that contract. So no harm, no foul, no crime.

    Sorry, but I don’t buy it. If he were caught, my neighbor could in fact be charged with theft. Not copyright infringement, not trespassing, but theft … otherwise known as “stealing.”

  13. Pierce says:

    FYI, Rockwell published an essay by Libertarian hero Murray Rothbard which openly praised former KKK grand wizard David Duke’s various campaigns for public office, saying there was nothing about his campaign that could not be embraced by paleo-libertarians.

    There’s also a significant body of evidence that Rockwell was the primary author of the Ron Paul newsletters that were in the news a while ago, which contained such “news” as stories about gangs of preteen black women roaming cities and deliberately stabbing white women with HIV laden needles.

    A real winner.

    The IP question is an interesting one. My major problem with libertarian/free market ideologies is that unless they are 100% rigid and absolute, they quickly lose their internal logic and consistency and seem to devolve into “Government’s only legitimate functions are those that benefit me and those I care about,” and “Free markets are the only way to pick winners and losers unless I am a loser.”

    It isn’t about supporting policies that benefit me. It’s about restricting government from telling you what you can and can’t do unless you’re harming someone else — almost as if we’re free adults living in a supposedly free country. We should be rigid and absolute when it comes to government taking away our liberties. The statists figured out long ago that the way to take away freedom without sparking a revolution is to peel it away a little bit at a time.

  14. Nathaniel says:

    I guess you could say that arguments against Intellectual Property because someone didn’t produce a physical product is the anti IP libertarians’ version of “you didn’t build that! someone else made that happen!” 😉

    LOL. In a way, yes.

  15. Matt says:

    I have to say Ive never heard of you before or Fathead, but Im an avid Lew Rockwell listener. I went to Hulu and watched Fathead and what a wonderful movie! Im so glad to have a different opinion on the “food debate.” Its quite refreshing. I spoke with a co-worker of mine whos an avid health nut, and he agreed with much of what I learned from your film, and told me about this paleo, primative blueprint style. I defiently think Ill be introducing more meats and less grains into my diet from now on. Thank you Tom for making this film and spreading the message.

    Oh, and by the way, disregard the lefts smear tactics of race baiting Lew, and the late, Rothbard. The claims are unfounded and baseless claims, nothing to back them up. As with Ron Paul, these men have very little against them so the left needs to scrape the bottom of the barrel. Notice how thats the ONLY thing they can claim.

    I haven’t looked into the matter so I won’t pretend to know one way or the other. But I’ve seen so many conservatives and libertarians labeled racists, I tend to assume someone is crying wolf.

  16. SueD says:

    Region free DVD players have been around forever. They cost just a fraction more than the better quality players. We’ve been ordering UK TV show DVDs for at least six/seven years directly from the UK since we didn’t want to wait years or maybe never for some of our favorite programs that were barely shown here in the US. We have owned and watched some shows well before they were shown in the US. And edited for a less restrictive audience.

    We also often pay far less for those DVDs than we eventually would when/if they became available. I could go on, but I admit I’m having a bit of a problem following the rationale for regions, and how this might related to IP. We always purchase through Amazon (the players) or Amazon.co.UK, not some shadowy business. How are DVDs any different than buying books not available in the US directly from the UK?

    As a former International Trademark Paralegal working in the DC area (now happily retired in America’s Dairyland ), I always enjoy discussions about IP, be it copyrights, trademarks or patents, each an VERY distinct field. From professional experience, I can say you ventured into a tough world that cost your wonderful family way too much.

    The region-coding issue is separate from IP. The software system I developed and sell to law firms is for docketing/managing trademark and patents, so I had to learn way more of the IP terminology than I ever thought I’d know.

  17. Janelle says:

    It’s our government. Remember “we the people?” If it isn’t what we want, we should work to change it. If we turn that responsibility over to the rich and powerful, we have only ourselves to blame for the result.

  18. Osama Magdi Elmageid says:

    I listened to the program and it is disgusting that further reduction in saturated fat is recommended by the USDA. No wonder nobody takes them seriously. Further, sending SWAT teams against farmers… I remember this happening in my town of LA. I’m not exactly crazy about raw milk, but is this country not about free choice? You took your chances against the USDA advice and look at you now. 🙂 I would not want to imagine how you would be if you stayed vegan and consumed no fat. Seems to me that listening to the USDA is just risking your life. The program was right to the point, which I like.

    That would have been the raid on Rawesome Foods in L.A. That one is covered in “Farmageddon.” Amazing these raids can happen in a supposedly free country.

  19. CarbSanity says:

    Still waiting on that promised statement on Jack Kruse from ole Jimbo, by the way. He’s probably too preoccupied with frisbee golf… 😉

    Well, you finally convinced me. I’ll call Jimmy immediately and tell him we’re no longer friends because he hasn’t commented on Jack Kruse.

    Thank you very much for your stalker-like persistence in getting through to me. I told you the purpose of this blog isn’t to provide a forum for Jimmy-haters, I tried blocking you several times, I ignored your attempts to get through to me on the YouTube channel. I couldn’t have made it any more obvious that I’m really not interested in hearing any more buzzes from that bee up your butt about Jimmy and Jack Kruse … But by gosh, you had the guts and determination to say to yourself, “No! I don’t care how many times he tries to make me go away! I must persevere because THE WORLD NEEDS TO HEAR MY OPINION OF JIMMY MOORE AND HIS FAILURE TO SHARE MY HATRED OF JACK KRUSE! THAT OPINION WILL BE HEARD, NO MATTER HOW MANY TIMES I NEED TO SWITCH MY IP ADDRESS TO GET THROUGH!”

    Get some professional help. This is not how mentally healthy people behave. All you’re doing is proving that your screen name was intended to be ironic.

  20. CarbSanity says:

    Jimmy’s a tool and you’re not much better. This kind of devaluing – and co-opting – of the ‘paleo’ name is why people like Dr. Kurt Harris want nothing to do with it now.

    Like I said, go get the professional help you so obviously need. Anyone who is so obsessed with me and Jimmy as to continue finding ways around being blocked just to leave yet another dumb-ass comment nobody who reads this blog will take seriously isn’t mentally balanced. I don’t expect you to grasp that, of course, because mentally unbalanced types never believe they’re mentally unbalanced. It’s everyone else who is the problem, ya see. Stalkers never look in the mirror and say “Holy crap, I’m a stalker!” They’re always 100% convinced the stalking is justified and they’re the ones being wronged.

    You’re a stalker. You’re not well. You have issues, big ones. Go see a shrink.

  21. Lea says:

    I’m fairly certain CarbSanity isn’t Carbsane (judging from your responses, it sounds like you assume Carbsane is whom you’re addressing). I’ve seen Carbsanity’s postings around before and he/she sounds suspiciously like someone who has been trolling Paleohacks under various identities, always trying to incite anger toward Jimmy and Jack Kruse. So if you’re going to call someone a “stalker” and “mentally unbalanced”, it would be prudent to know whom you’re addressing.

    I’m addressing whoever CarbSanity is. All I know is that it’s someone in New Mexico, based on the various IP addresses. The same nut-job keeps showing up here and on the YouTube channel and finding ways to get around being blocked. That’s stalker behavior.

  22. CarbSanity says:

    Clever evasion of the issue at hand, Tom. I speak for LOTS of people who actually knew and cared about what ‘paleo’ meant long before Jimbo began elbowing his way in (all for a greater market share, naturally). But of course, financially speaking, you stand as much to gain as anyone – and more than most – from the Livin La Vida Low Cred webpire. So yeah, it’s easy to call me names and completely avoid the substance of my point.

    Hmmm, let me try to follow the nut-job logic here: If Mark Sisson, Robb Wolf, Loren Cordain, Richard Nikoley, Emily Deans or any of dozens of other bloggers promote a paleo lifestyle, they’re promoting a paleo lifestyle. But if Jimmy promotes a paleo lifestyle and brings the aforementioned paleo leaders on his show to share their ideas with his audience, he’s “elbowing his way in.” And of course, I refuse to label it “elbowing his way in” for financial reasons.

    As the saying goes, when your opponent in a debate is making a fool himself, let him talk. Keep talking, nut-job.

  23. CarbSanity says:

    Last question: Why does having a contrary opinion in this context automatically make one a ‘nut job’? Would you prefer your blog to be little more than a glorified amen corner like Jimmy’s? And no, I’m not Evelyn. But last time I checked she didn’t have exclusive rights to carbs and sanity. She deserves major credit, though, for breaking open the formerly back-slapping world of low carb – for being one of the first to look at the supposed science through a critical prism. Without Evelyn, a lot more people would be believing the woo of Taubes, buying the snake oil peddled by Jimmy, and being generally uncritical of the low carb agenda. For that we ALL owe her a debt of gratitude.

    Sure, I’ll waste another few minutes trying to talk logic to a nut-job. No, having contrary opinions doesn’t make you a nut job. Here’s why you’re a nut-job:

    You keep showing up here despite me blocking your IP address several times. You’ve done likewise on my YouTube channel. You apparently go to great lengths to get around being blocked, all so you can leave yet another comment about Jimmy Moore’s crime of failing to write a post about Jack Kruse, or to just slam Jimmy in general. I’ve made it crystal clear I’m not interested in your idiotic and spiteful comments about Jimmy, I’ve told you the purpose of my blog isn’t to provide a forum for Jimmy-haters, and yet you seem to think it’s vitally important that you get through to me with still more nasty comments about Jimmy, no matter what it takes. Sane people don’t act like that. Stalkers act like that. People with unhealthy obsessions act like that.

    If you were doing this on Jimmy’s blog, it would only make you a mild nut-job. But you’re doing it on mine. Tell me, nut-job, what purpose do you, in your mentally unbalanced state, think this serves? I’m not Jimmy Moore, and I have zero relationship with Jack Kruse. I’ve never promoted Jack’s ideas or even speculated on them. And yet here you are, leaving Jimmy-hating and Jack-hating comments on my blog, and going to great lengths to do so. Do you think I’m going lean on Jimmy for you? Call him up and demand he write that post about Jack Kruse? Or do you think if you leave enough nasty comments about Jimmy on my blog, people will stop reading his?

    You’re obsessed, you’re a stalker, you’re irrational. That adds up to nut-job. Go get some help.

  24. Sue says:

    But are you presuming CarbSanity is Evelyn?

    That seems extremely unlikely. I don’t know where she lives, but I believe it’s somewhere on the East Coast. CarbSanity switches IP addresses, but they’re all in New Mexico.

  25. Galina L. says:

    Tom, I understand that you answered to the comment rather than to the person, but it was a troll whose purpose was to steer the pot and to create some drama among nutritional bloggers rather than expressing personal opinion. Unfortunately, it looks like he achieved his purpose again creating an impression among at least some of your readers that he played you well and manipulated you into slapping another blogger who indeed is not a fun of Jimmy but doesn’t troll your blog. It is your business what you put in a trash and what you publish, but as your long time follower, I want to make a suggestion to you to just discard anything what trolls sent to your. I don’t want them to be entertained at other people expense.

    I’m not sure why people would mistake the troll for another blogger, since I didn’t mention another blogger when replying to him. The other blogger hasn’t shown up here in a couple of years. That’s because I blocked her after she began attacking me and pretty much every other blogger I follow on her blog.

    The troll is someone in New Mexico. I agree it’s time to just start deleting his asinine comments again.

  26. In many low fat and fat free foods the fat is replaced with sugar, flour, or other full food energy ingredients, and the reduction in food energy value is small, if any. Furthermore, an excess of digestible sugar is stored as fat. Thanks.

Leave a Reply