The other day when I posted, I named it before I wrote it, and then managed to forget to say something. Oh well, whenever I post while busy, I often make mistakes of that nature!
The redundancy I was referring to is what has been going on in the LC nutrition world I frequent. There is very little under the sun which is new, unfortunately. ;-) I'm the member of a few private groups on facebook, and a lot of the posted studies and articles are either repetitions or confirmations of everything we low-carbers are already convinced-of.
Resolved: that butter is good for you; that sugar is bad for you; that the amount of starch you can handle is extremely variable, depending on many things; that the people who make our policy are dangerously influenced by processors of junk-food....
I suppose I should be glad that good studies/articles that support my own observations are out there -- the best-written of them I pass along to my friends who are interested in diet-influencing-health but who don't have my free time or passion for the subject. I should also be unsurprised by the corruption of researchers (it's much harder to fool clinicians) who insist that metabolic and neurological toxins are okay "in moderation," but it still infuriates me.
In the end, that's why so many bloggers slow way down in producing fact-filled posts, or like me, change the discussion to observations of anomalies of experience. I really miss the frequent expositions that Wooo used to treat us to, concerning everything from sociology to pharmacology, to her entertaining rants. I sadly miss J Stanton, too, but he pointed this situation out a long time ago, here.
It's kinda like a version of "evolve or die," isn't it? ;-)