I'm thinking (at risk of being pounded by both sides) that the reason this
generates so much heat is that it is both obviously wrong and obviously right
at the same time.

It is obviously right in the sense that if you follow it rationally, you will
lose weight - assuming you are overweight. (Don't know about a 90lb person in
a wheelchair - but they would not need it.)

It is obviously wrong in the sense that it is not as simple as that. There are
a bunch of footnotes and cautions. For example, as Dr. Chung points out, if
you eat 2 lbs of Crisco a day you will probably not lose weight. There are
some nutritional issues too - obviously if you don't include the right stuff,
over time you could get scurvey, etc. Also, in proclaiming its simplicity it
can appear that the proponets are claiming that a pound of butter is the same
(in terms of weight gain) as a pound of watermellon - which I'm pretty sure
they are not.

So without the footnotes and cautions there is plenty of ammunition for the
opponents. And, with them, the proponents have at least an argument.

To me the bottom line is whether it works in the sense that a typical dieter
can stay on it for a long period of time - years. And I sure don't know the
answer to that.

Remember  - blessed are the peacemakers. :)

Bill  (ducking!)