Why It’s So Hard to Get a Straight Answer About Food

By Chris Baggott, Tyner Pond Farm

I read an article in the Los Angeles Times the other day. It was supposed to be an updated guide to the keto diet—what it is, how it works, and whether it’s still worth following in 2025.

At first, it was promising. The author gave a clear overview: when you reduce carbohydrates and increase fat, your body shifts from burning sugar to burning fat. It’s a metabolic state called ketosis. They even mentioned some of the benefits—better blood sugar control, less inflammation, and more mental clarity. All things I’ve experienced myself.

And these aren’t just anecdotal observations. There’s a growing body of research showing that ketogenic and low-carb diets improve insulin sensitivity, reduce chronic inflammation, and help stabilize mood and mental focus—especially for people dealing with metabolic issues, which now includes the majority of Americans. Even the American Diabetes Association recognizes this as a valid approach.

But instead of following that thread, the article did what a lot of these pieces do: it hedged. Right after listing the benefits, it started in with vague warnings—saying keto might not be sustainable, or that it could be risky in the long term. It wasn’t backed by much. No real context. Just a sense that they didn’t want to say too much without walking it back.

That’s what frustrates me. The science is there. The results are there. But mainstream media still seems reluctant to tell the full story unless it’s followed by a disclaimer.

I don’t think this is about bad intentions. But I do think there are some reasons this kind of bias keeps showing up.

First, there’s inertia. The old low-fat, high-carb model has been around for decades, built into our food guidelines, our institutions, even our school lunches. It’s hard to unwind all that, even when it’s clear it hasn’t worked.

Second, many health writers are stuck between wanting to share new information and not wanting to rock the boat. So instead of standing behind the data, they water it down with caution—just in case someone misinterprets it or takes it “too far.” But the real risk isn’t someone eating too many pastured eggs. The real risk is continuing to eat a Standard American Diet full of processed carbs and industrial oils.

Third, there’s a business side that no one likes to talk about. If you start eating grassfed beef, eggs from pastured hens, raw milk, and real fat from properly raised animals, you’re not buying boxes of pasta, cereal or prescription meds. That kind of food isn’t good for big companies. But it’s good for you. It’s good for the land. And it’s good for farmers like us, who still believe food should come from healthy soil—not a factory.

At Tyner Pond Farm, we raise animals on pasture, without antibiotics or chemical inputs. Our beef is 100% grassfed. Our chickens are moved daily on grass. And the pork and dairy we source from our neighbors follow the same principles. That matters—not just ethically, but nutritionally.

Meat from grassfed animals is naturally higher in omega-3 fatty acids and other hard-to-get nutrients. It’s a source of healthy fat that supports metabolism, not undermines it. And it doesn’t need a nutrition label full of fine print. It’s just real food.

So when I read articles that try to strike a “balanced” tone but end up diluting the truth, I feel a responsibility to say something. You deserve better information. You deserve to know that nutrient-dense food, grown the right way, can be a path toward real health.

You won’t get that from a factory. But you can get it from a farm.