| Author |
Message |
|
Written on: 02. 03. 09 [21:42]
|
|
KathyPollard
Kathy Pollard
Topic creator
registered since: 03.02.2009
Posts: 1
|
How do we respond to the Michael Pollen phenomenon?
So much of what he says is right on: Eat mostly plants; nutrition science is not solid; we are just at the beginning of understanding nutrition; fast food is evil....
Bu he also implies that milk and meat has been part of human culture for 10,000 years and puts this in the category of "good" food, as long as the cow is grass fed and organic.
Hasn't he even heard of "China Study?" Is he in denial? How can one make an argument against his "logic?"
|
|
Written on: 02. 22. 09 [08:52]
|
|
glenda
glenda pinkham
registered since: 03.12.2008
Posts: 2
|
For me, finding The China Study was a journey....I am noticing that Michael Pollin is gradually also changing....I am glad there are voices who are saying something needs to change ....he has increased the awareness of people to what is in food...
I don't find it helpful to tell people where they are wrong in their thinking....
|
|
Written on: 03. 20. 09 [09:00]
|
|
DouglasE
Douglas NotOnAFirstDate
registered since: 20.03.2009
Posts: 3
|
Humans are not vegan by nature. We eat meat. People in China eat meat. It is the amount that needs to be looked at. Milk and eggs in large quantities seems to be a new thing as are white grains, massive dose of sugar and fat. It seems that all diets of a fundamental nature had some meat but not much.
Even eating nothing but plant will still give you more sugar than someone from 2000 year ago got due to the sugar that has been breed into plants.
|
|
Written on: 04. 24. 09 [23:59]
|
|
leaderinfront
KARL BORRIS
registered since: 24.04.2009
Posts: 2
|
Michael Pollan's books are great, and I agree with a lot of what he has to say. I recall Dr. McDougall mentioning that Pollan was coming around to our way of thinking, but is not quite there yet.
Pollan is on a massive book signing tour that hits CA in May, check his website for more info.
|
|
Written on: 05. 05. 09 [21:51]
|
|
Michele@WellnessAtRedRock.com
Michele Comeau
registered since: 03.02.2009
Posts: 2
|
DouglasE wrote:
Humans are not vegan by nature. We eat meat. People in China eat meat. It is the amount that needs to be looked at. Milk and eggs in large quantities seems to be a new thing as are white grains, massive dose of sugar and fat. It seems that all diets of a fundamental nature had some meat but not much.
-----
In light of this Douglas, thought you might find the following quote interesting. First a little about the author. He is a Cardiac Surgeon and former Professor and Chairman of Cardiothoracic Surgery at Loma Linda University Medical Center who is currently getting impressive results treating patients through diet.
In his recent book, “Dr. Gundry’s Diet Evolution†he writes, “our primate relatives seem to need at least 6 % animal-based protein in their diet to thrive . . . During my fifteen-year stint as a professor at a medical school that espouses vegetarianism, I encountered very few long-term vegetarians and vegans who were in thriving good health. This is largely because the eating habits of most vegetarians in this country make them pasta and grain dependent. They might be more appropriately called grain-eaters.â€
Gundry’s diet is heavy on the vegetables (especially greens) light on fruits, grains and legumes with a small amount animal protein. He introduces a term “vegephile,†as “one who likes to eat vegetables.â€
Dr. Campbell's landmark research showed rats thriving on a diet of 5% animal protein and mentioned in tonight's Q&A session they could go up to 10% with no added risk of cancer. I'm wondering if the same could be true for humans.
[This article was edited 1 times, at last 05.05.2009 at 21:54.]
|
|
Written on: 08. 04. 09 [12:43]
|
|
given2fly
Kristin Keller
registered since: 04.08.2009
Posts: 2
|
I agree with Dr. Gundry's observation of veg*n diets often overrelying on grains. I used to eat too many grains also. While I now know that grains are not ideal, I would never replace those calories with animal products. (Cancer is not the only drawback of animal products.) Instead, I've replaced them with fruit. My health has drastically improved and this is the first time I've been completely satisfied with my diet.
|
|
Written on: 08. 28. 09 [14:50]
|
|
PeteC
Peter Chmiel
registered since: 28.08.2009
Posts: 2
|
In The China Study Dr Campbell states that he used casein, an animal based protein found in milk, on rats and found that those consuming 20% of their calories from protein got cancer. When he substituted gluten, a plant based protein found in grains, the rats at a 20% protein consumption did not get cancer. Unless I missed it I do not remember reading about him trying any other animal based proteins in this expirement. Did he try feeding the rats whey or whatever proteins are found in chicken, beef and fish? Or other types of plant based proteins. If not then isn't it is a huge generalization to reach a conclusion that animal based protienns increase cancer risks and plant based proteins reduce cancer risk? Is anyone aware of additional stidies and the results of testing a wider range of animal and plant based proteins and there association with cancer?
|
|
Written on: 09. 02. 09 [11:43]
|
|
classicfitness
Lise Guillet
registered since: 18.08.2009
Posts: 1
|
Although casein was the subject at hand for the cancer growth, in the other studies including heart disease, m.s., diabetes, etc. it was animal protein in general that affected people's health. Although mentioned that "animal protein" in the study of breast cancer, per the low fat diet of some monitored breast cancer subjects.
Casein being the main study in cancer, but plants being the focus of possible disease reversal and that, I think, being the message. In a perfect world should we have started out with low animal protein intake, and kept it under the 10%, perhaps the pure vegan diet wouldn't be needed. I think for healing purposes, depending on "what ails you" or what your diet exposure has been, the vegan "healing" diet is suggested for that reason, and then a modest animal protein intake may be deemed "acceptable" provided you are not a cardiac patient prone to such illness. I would think cancer patients would want to avoid possible advancement in the former state as well.
|
|
Written on: 09. 03. 09 [12:45]
|
|
PeteC
Peter Chmiel
registered since: 28.08.2009
Posts: 2
|
Lise...you stated that in the other studies including heart disease, m.s., diabetes, etc. it was animal protein in general that affected people's health.
Without knowing what animal proteins are being consumed or the health and dietary habits of the animals being consumed isn't it premature and faulty science to draw the conclusion that any and all animal protein increases the risk of getting one of these diseases?
Maybe if the source of animal protein is from fish that are low in mercury instead of beef, or organically raised grass feed beef instead of cows pumped full of steroids and hormones and feed non organic corn and soy the risk of falling victim to one of these diseases goes down. I do not know. Are you aware of any research studies that answer these questions?
|
|
Written on: 01. 08. 10 [23:21]
|
|
exp2000
Brett Stevenson
registered since: 11.11.2009
Posts: 4
|
Hi Pete,
The answer to your question is yes. Other experiments have been performed. Of all the animal proteins tested Casein proved to be the worst. It is the “complete†amino acid profile in animal foods that promotes the cancer process.
“Incomplete†plant based proteins do not until you add the “missing†amino acids at which point the same cancer promoting effect occurs.
Dr Campbell has two more books yet to be published which hopefully will elucidate this.
Also, experiments aside, the most striking statistical correlation of Cancer incidence in The China Study was the consumption of animal foods. Even a small increase in consumption showed a corresponding rise in incidence.
In the meantime, there is an online course in Plant Based Nutrition offered by the T. Colin Campbell Foundation in conjunction with Cornell University.
After over 30 years of researching nutrition to which I owe my life, I can honestly say that it is the best money I have ever spent.
Brett.
|
