talkaboutdiet.com Forum Index
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

The China Study
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    talkaboutdiet.com Forum Index -> Vegetarian foods
Author Message
Bawl



Joined: 17 Aug 2007
Posts: 20

PostPosted: Sat Apr 02, 2005 3:47 pm    Post subject: The China Study Reply with quote

From: "Robert Cohen"
Date: Sat Apr 2, 2005 12:08 pm
Subject: The China Study
..

The China Study

Oprah has a book club, and now, so do I! Each week, I manage
to read two or three books, and from time to time, I'll
be sharing my favorites with you. This past week, I
made the exception to my own rule, and read one book from
comer to cover--twice! This must-read book is "The China
Study," by T. Colin Campbell and his son, Thomas. T. Colin
Campbell (the dad) is a great writer in his own right, but
this new father and son team have synergized their energies
to create a classic in the genre of nutritional texts.

Early on in their brilliantly written book (page 21),
the Campbells tell their readers:

"So, what is the prescription for good health? In short, it
is about the multiple health benefits of consuming plant-
based foods, and the largely unappreciated health dangers
of consuming animal-based foods, including all types of
meat, dairy, and eggs."

That's a pretty good start, and it gets even better.

T. Colin Campbell's perspectives are simply amazing. On page
21, he expresses a contrarian philosophy to most modern-day
health gurus:

"One of the more exciting benefits of good nutrition
is the prevention of diseases that are thought to be
due to genetic predisposition."

Campbell has learned throughout his esteemed career that
disease can easily be reversed and cured by adopting
a plant-based diet.

By quoting Goethe on page 27, Campbell exposes America's
great protein myth, as promoted by the all-powerful milk
and meat industries. He writes:

"We are best at hiding those things which are in plain site."

Campbell's sense of humor is at its best in this upscale
well-documented book. His chapter on protein consumption
should be read by every American. Healthy people should
reinforce good physiology by Campbell's advice, and ill people
should be inspired to take the cure by eating a plant-based
diet. On page 30, Campbell asks:

"Can you guess what food we might eat to most efficiently
provide the building blocks for our replacement proteins?
The answer is human flesh."

Very funny! Of course, most are not willing to live on Mrs.
Lovett's human meat pies. Or are we? The trouble is, with
human and animal flesh, there are many dangerous byproducts
to consider. The urea, ammonia, and dirty residues of animal
proteins and saturated fats compromise carnivores.

Campbell is at his best when writing about "Broken Hearts"
on page 111. You will learn that during the Korean War, 77.3
percent of healthy hearts autopsied from American casualties
revealed advanced heart disease. These diseased hearts were
taken from the bodies of so-called healthy males who had
eaten the standard American diet. Campbell offers the hows
and whys of heart disease...and the cure-all.

On page 255, Campbell walks you through the American
government's relationship with milk and meat producers.
Conspiracy? Absolutely, and Campbell's detailed evidence
and research reads like a detective story. One smoking gun
after another overwhelms the reader into recognizing
that things could have been different for our children
had only those men in power possessed ethics. If only they
had respected real science and not the almighty dollar.
We have been betrayed, and T. Colin Campbell has survived
in an academic environment despite those pressures exerted by
bureaucrats with enormous financial conflicts of interest.

Campbell's commentary on nutritional training, or the lack
thereof for doctors is magnificent. On page 327, Campbell writes:

"The situation is dangerous. Nutrition training of doctors
is not merely inadequate; it is practically nonexistent...The
bulk of these nutrition hours are taught in the first year of
medical school, as part of other basic science courses...When
nutrition education is provided in relation to public health
problems, guess who is supplying the 'educational' material?
The Dannon Institute, Egg Nutrition Board, National Cattlemen's
Beef Association, National Dairy Council, Nestle Clinical
Nutrition, Wyeth-Ayerst Labortories, Briston-Myers Squibb
Company..."

Campbell then asks:

"Do you think that this all-star team of animal foods and drug
industries representatives is going to objectively judge and
promote optimal nutrition, which science has shown to be a
whole foods, plant-based diet that minimizes the need for drugs?"

The book is a must read for those who know a thing or two, and
those who have not a clue. I've read no better book on nutrition
than this one, which will arm you in nutritional arguments
presented by meat-eating doubting Thomases.

The China Study, by T. Colin Campbell, PhD, with Thomas
Campbell is available on Amazon.com:

http://tinyurl.com/6ggan

Robert Cohen
http://www.notmilk.com

Archived from group: sci>med>nutrition
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Roger Rabbit



Joined: 17 Aug 2007
Posts: 118

PostPosted: Sun Apr 03, 2005 8:38 pm    Post subject: Re: The China Study Reply with quote

So the answer to great health is following an unnatural, low-fat
plant-based diet? First off, humans were never vegetarian, despite
what the vegetarian's will have you believe. Secondly, low-fat is a
modern (1970s, 1980's, etc) manmade creation and is difficult to
follow. Hmmmm, could it be that when you restrict fat your body is
trying to tell you something? It is sad when one's diet becomes their
religion. Surprised(

rr

On 2 Apr 2005 10:47:59 -0800, "Bawl"
wrote:

>From: "Robert Cohen"
>Date: Sat Apr 2, 2005 12:08 pm
>Subject: The China Study
>.
>
>The China Study
>
>Oprah has a book club, and now, so do I! Each week, I manage
>to read two or three books, and from time to time, I'll
>be sharing my favorites with you. This past week, I
>made the exception to my own rule, and read one book from
>comer to cover--twice! This must-read book is "The China
>Study," by T. Colin Campbell and his son, Thomas. T. Colin
>Campbell (the dad) is a great writer in his own right, but
>this new father and son team have synergized their energies
>to create a classic in the genre of nutritional texts.
>
>Early on in their brilliantly written book (page 21),
>the Campbells tell their readers:
>
>"So, what is the prescription for good health? In short, it
>is about the multiple health benefits of consuming plant-
>based foods, and the largely unappreciated health dangers
>of consuming animal-based foods, including all types of
>meat, dairy, and eggs."
>
>That's a pretty good start, and it gets even better.
>
>T. Colin Campbell's perspectives are simply amazing. On page
>21, he expresses a contrarian philosophy to most modern-day
>health gurus:
>
>"One of the more exciting benefits of good nutrition
>is the prevention of diseases that are thought to be
>due to genetic predisposition."
>
>Campbell has learned throughout his esteemed career that
>disease can easily be reversed and cured by adopting
>a plant-based diet.
>
>By quoting Goethe on page 27, Campbell exposes America's
>great protein myth, as promoted by the all-powerful milk
>and meat industries. He writes:
>
>"We are best at hiding those things which are in plain site."
>
>Campbell's sense of humor is at its best in this upscale
>well-documented book. His chapter on protein consumption
>should be read by every American. Healthy people should
>reinforce good physiology by Campbell's advice, and ill people
>should be inspired to take the cure by eating a plant-based
>diet. On page 30, Campbell asks:
>
>"Can you guess what food we might eat to most efficiently
>provide the building blocks for our replacement proteins?
>The answer is human flesh."
>
>Very funny! Of course, most are not willing to live on Mrs.
>Lovett's human meat pies. Or are we? The trouble is, with
>human and animal flesh, there are many dangerous byproducts
>to consider. The urea, ammonia, and dirty residues of animal
>proteins and saturated fats compromise carnivores.
>
>Campbell is at his best when writing about "Broken Hearts"
>on page 111. You will learn that during the Korean War, 77.3
>percent of healthy hearts autopsied from American casualties
>revealed advanced heart disease. These diseased hearts were
>taken from the bodies of so-called healthy males who had
>eaten the standard American diet. Campbell offers the hows
>and whys of heart disease...and the cure-all.
>
>On page 255, Campbell walks you through the American
>government's relationship with milk and meat producers.
>Conspiracy? Absolutely, and Campbell's detailed evidence
>and research reads like a detective story. One smoking gun
>after another overwhelms the reader into recognizing
>that things could have been different for our children
>had only those men in power possessed ethics. If only they
>had respected real science and not the almighty dollar.
>We have been betrayed, and T. Colin Campbell has survived
>in an academic environment despite those pressures exerted by
>bureaucrats with enormous financial conflicts of interest.
>
>Campbell's commentary on nutritional training, or the lack
>thereof for doctors is magnificent. On page 327, Campbell writes:
>
>"The situation is dangerous. Nutrition training of doctors
>is not merely inadequate; it is practically nonexistent...The
>bulk of these nutrition hours are taught in the first year of
>medical school, as part of other basic science courses...When
>nutrition education is provided in relation to public health
>problems, guess who is supplying the 'educational' material?
>The Dannon Institute, Egg Nutrition Board, National Cattlemen's
>Beef Association, National Dairy Council, Nestle Clinical
>Nutrition, Wyeth-Ayerst Labortories, Briston-Myers Squibb
>Company..."
>
>Campbell then asks:
>
>"Do you think that this all-star team of animal foods and drug
>industries representatives is going to objectively judge and
>promote optimal nutrition, which science has shown to be a
>whole foods, plant-based diet that minimizes the need for drugs?"
>
>The book is a must read for those who know a thing or two, and
>those who have not a clue. I've read no better book on nutrition
>than this one, which will arm you in nutritional arguments
>presented by meat-eating doubting Thomases.
>
>The China Study, by T. Colin Campbell, PhD, with Thomas
>Campbell is available on Amazon.com:
>
>http://tinyurl.com/6ggan
>
>Robert Cohen
>http://www.notmilk.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Phil Scott



Joined: 17 Aug 2007
Posts: 112

PostPosted: Mon Apr 04, 2005 7:16 am    Post subject: Re: The China Study Reply with quote

"Roger Rabbit" wrote in message@4ax.com...
> So the answer to great health is following an unnatural,
low-fat
> plant-based diet? First off, humans were never vegetarian,
despite
> what the vegetarian's will have you believe. Secondly,
low-fat is a
> modern (1970s, 1980's, etc) manmade creation and is
difficult to
> follow. Hmmmm, could it be that when you restrict fat your
body is
> trying to tell you something? It is sad when one's diet
becomes their
> religion. Surprised(
>
> rr

Your remarks are not impressive, you do not argue the
points but resort to ad hominem insults...anonomously..
not impressive. Have you written a book? nah.. do you know
enough to argue the issues even? no.


>
> On 2 Apr 2005 10:47:59 -0800, "Bawl"

> wrote:
>
> >From: "Robert Cohen"
> >Date: Sat Apr 2, 2005 12:08 pm
> >Subject: The China Study
> >.
> >
> >The China Study
> >
> >Oprah has a book club, and now, so do I! Each week, I
manage
> >to read two or three books, and from time to time, I'll
> >be sharing my favorites with you. This past week, I
> >made the exception to my own rule, and read one book from
> >comer to cover--twice! This must-read book is "The China
> >Study," by T. Colin Campbell and his son, Thomas. T. Colin
> >Campbell (the dad) is a great writer in his own right, but
> >this new father and son team have synergized their energies
> >to create a classic in the genre of nutritional texts.
> >
> >Early on in their brilliantly written book (page 21),
> >the Campbells tell their readers:
> >
> >"So, what is the prescription for good health? In short, it
> >is about the multiple health benefits of consuming plant-
> >based foods, and the largely unappreciated health dangers
> >of consuming animal-based foods, including all types of
> >meat, dairy, and eggs."
> >
> >That's a pretty good start, and it gets even better.
> >
> >T. Colin Campbell's perspectives are simply amazing. On
page
> >21, he expresses a contrarian philosophy to most modern-day
> >health gurus:
> >
> >"One of the more exciting benefits of good nutrition
> >is the prevention of diseases that are thought to be
> >due to genetic predisposition."
> >
> >Campbell has learned throughout his esteemed career that
> >disease can easily be reversed and cured by adopting
> >a plant-based diet.
> >
> >By quoting Goethe on page 27, Campbell exposes America's
> >great protein myth, as promoted by the all-powerful milk
> >and meat industries. He writes:
> >
> >"We are best at hiding those things which are in plain
site."
> >
> >Campbell's sense of humor is at its best in this upscale
> >well-documented book. His chapter on protein consumption
> >should be read by every American. Healthy people should
> >reinforce good physiology by Campbell's advice, and ill
people
> >should be inspired to take the cure by eating a plant-based
> >diet. On page 30, Campbell asks:
> >
> >"Can you guess what food we might eat to most efficiently
> >provide the building blocks for our replacement proteins?
> >The answer is human flesh."
> >
> >Very funny! Of course, most are not willing to live on Mrs.
> >Lovett's human meat pies. Or are we? The trouble is, with
> >human and animal flesh, there are many dangerous byproducts
> >to consider. The urea, ammonia, and dirty residues of
animal
> >proteins and saturated fats compromise carnivores.
> >
> >Campbell is at his best when writing about "Broken Hearts"
> >on page 111. You will learn that during the Korean War,
77.3
> >percent of healthy hearts autopsied from American
casualties
> >revealed advanced heart disease. These diseased hearts were
> >taken from the bodies of so-called healthy males who had
> >eaten the standard American diet. Campbell offers the hows
> >and whys of heart disease...and the cure-all.
> >
> >On page 255, Campbell walks you through the American
> >government's relationship with milk and meat producers.
> >Conspiracy? Absolutely, and Campbell's detailed evidence
> >and research reads like a detective story. One smoking gun
> >after another overwhelms the reader into recognizing
> >that things could have been different for our children
> >had only those men in power possessed ethics. If only they
> >had respected real science and not the almighty dollar.
> >We have been betrayed, and T. Colin Campbell has survived
> >in an academic environment despite those pressures exerted
by
> >bureaucrats with enormous financial conflicts of interest.
> >
> >Campbell's commentary on nutritional training, or the lack
> >thereof for doctors is magnificent. On page 327, Campbell
writes:
> >
> >"The situation is dangerous. Nutrition training of doctors
> >is not merely inadequate; it is practically
nonexistent...The
> >bulk of these nutrition hours are taught in the first year
of
> >medical school, as part of other basic science
courses...When
> >nutrition education is provided in relation to public
health
> >problems, guess who is supplying the 'educational'
material?
> >The Dannon Institute, Egg Nutrition Board, National
Cattlemen's
> >Beef Association, National Dairy Council, Nestle Clinical
> >Nutrition, Wyeth-Ayerst Labortories, Briston-Myers Squibb
> >Company..."
> >
> >Campbell then asks:
> >
> >"Do you think that this all-star team of animal foods and
drug
> >industries representatives is going to objectively judge
and
> >promote optimal nutrition, which science has shown to be a
> >whole foods, plant-based diet that minimizes the need for
drugs?"
> >
> >The book is a must read for those who know a thing or two,
and
> >those who have not a clue. I've read no better book on
nutrition
> >than this one, which will arm you in nutritional arguments
> >presented by meat-eating doubting Thomases.
> >
> >The China Study, by T. Colin Campbell, PhD, with Thomas
> >Campbell is available on Amazon.com:
> >
> >http://tinyurl.com/6ggan
> >
> >Robert Cohen
> >http://www.notmilk.com
>
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Juhana Harju



Joined: 17 Aug 2007
Posts: 419

PostPosted: Mon Apr 04, 2005 7:10 pm    Post subject: Re: The China Study Reply with quote

Roger Rabbit wrote:
:: On 2 Apr 2005 10:47:59 -0800, "Bawl"
:: wrote:
::
::: The China Study
::: [...]
::: "So, what is the prescription for good health? In short, it
::: is about the multiple health benefits of consuming plant-
::: based foods, and the largely unappreciated health dangers
::: of consuming animal-based foods, including all types of
::: meat, dairy, and eggs."
::: [...]
:::
::: Campbell is at his best when writing about "Broken Hearts"
::: on page 111. You will learn that during the Korean War, 77.3
::: percent of healthy hearts autopsied from American casualties
::: revealed advanced heart disease. These diseased hearts were
::: taken from the bodies of so-called healthy males who had
::: eaten the standard American diet. Campbell offers the hows
::: and whys of heart disease...and the cure-all.
::: [...]
:: So the answer to great health is following an unnatural, low-fat
:: plant-based diet? First off, humans were never vegetarian, despite
:: what the vegetarian's will have you believe. Secondly, low-fat is a
:: modern (1970s, 1980's, etc) manmade creation and is difficult to
:: follow. Hmmmm, could it be that when you restrict fat your body is
:: trying to tell you something? It is sad when one's diet becomes their
:: religion. Surprised(

Here are some of my impressions after reading the book. As I have said
before the title of the book is misleading as the book is *not* mostly about
the China study. It is a general book about what Campbell considers to be a
healthy diet. I have admit that Campbell is very convincing when he speaks
about the health benefits of plant-based diets, but at the same time there
is also a certain bias through out the whole book and I don't feel that
Campbell is totally honest in his approach. Even though Campbell writes
about the prevention of cardiovascular diseases he fails to mention the
Seven Countries Study, the Lyon Heart Study, Greece and Crete. Even the
Mediterranean diet is not mentioned at all, which is strange as Campbell
speaks very strongly in favor of the Ornish diet and its benefits in the
cardiovascular diseases. Campbell also passes the omega-3 fatty acids and
fish oils very briefly and with contempt. If the book were mainly about
China, these defects might be understandable, but the book is not. I would
say that it is a book worth of reading but with certain reservations.

--
Juhana
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Roger Rabbit



Joined: 17 Aug 2007
Posts: 118

PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2005 12:41 am    Post subject: Re: The China Study Reply with quote

I have heard Campbell speak and yes, he is very convincing.
Unfortunately he is also caught up in this vegetarian propaganda. Surprised(

You mention the Seven Countries Study. Unfortunately for that study it
is flawed. There are many countries left out of the study that would
prove Key's theory incorrect or at least inconclusive.

There are many so-called health concerned people that feel that an
unnatural, low-fat, plant-based diet is the way to go. Unfortunately,
this low-fat myth is based upon studies that supposedly show a
diet/heart link. When you look at the data you will wonder how this
link has managed to last this long.

rr


On Mon, 4 Apr 2005 15:10:11 +0300, "Juhana Harju"
wrote:

>Roger Rabbit wrote:
>:: On 2 Apr 2005 10:47:59 -0800, "Bawl"
>:: wrote:
>::
>::: The China Study
>::: [...]
>::: "So, what is the prescription for good health? In short, it
>::: is about the multiple health benefits of consuming plant-
>::: based foods, and the largely unappreciated health dangers
>::: of consuming animal-based foods, including all types of
>::: meat, dairy, and eggs."
>::: [...]
>:::
>::: Campbell is at his best when writing about "Broken Hearts"
>::: on page 111. You will learn that during the Korean War, 77.3
>::: percent of healthy hearts autopsied from American casualties
>::: revealed advanced heart disease. These diseased hearts were
>::: taken from the bodies of so-called healthy males who had
>::: eaten the standard American diet. Campbell offers the hows
>::: and whys of heart disease...and the cure-all.
>::: [...]
>:: So the answer to great health is following an unnatural, low-fat
>:: plant-based diet? First off, humans were never vegetarian, despite
>:: what the vegetarian's will have you believe. Secondly, low-fat is a
>:: modern (1970s, 1980's, etc) manmade creation and is difficult to
>:: follow. Hmmmm, could it be that when you restrict fat your body is
>:: trying to tell you something? It is sad when one's diet becomes their
>:: religion. Surprised(
>
>Here are some of my impressions after reading the book. As I have said
>before the title of the book is misleading as the book is *not* mostly about
>the China study. It is a general book about what Campbell considers to be a
>healthy diet. I have admit that Campbell is very convincing when he speaks
>about the health benefits of plant-based diets, but at the same time there
>is also a certain bias through out the whole book and I don't feel that
>Campbell is totally honest in his approach. Even though Campbell writes
>about the prevention of cardiovascular diseases he fails to mention the
>Seven Countries Study, the Lyon Heart Study, Greece and Crete. Even the
>Mediterranean diet is not mentioned at all, which is strange as Campbell
>speaks very strongly in favor of the Ornish diet and its benefits in the
>cardiovascular diseases. Campbell also passes the omega-3 fatty acids and
>fish oils very briefly and with contempt. If the book were mainly about
>China, these defects might be understandable, but the book is not. I would
>say that it is a book worth of reading but with certain reservations.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Roger Rabbit



Joined: 17 Aug 2007
Posts: 118

PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2005 12:46 am    Post subject: Re: The China Study Reply with quote

I am sorry that you are not impressed but then again impressing you
was not my intention nor will it ever be. The points have been
discussed, here in this ng and in literature. If you are caught up in
this vegetarian myth then that's your problem, not mine. Written a
book? Many a quack has written a book. I recall some writing a book
about a blood type/diet concept. Do you have a point or do you just
like hearing yourself talk?

Regards.

rr


On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 03:16:38 GMT, "Phil Scott"
wrote:

>
>"Roger Rabbit" wrote in message
>@4ax.com...
>> So the answer to great health is following an unnatural,
>low-fat
>> plant-based diet? First off, humans were never vegetarian,
>despite
>> what the vegetarian's will have you believe. Secondly,
>low-fat is a
>> modern (1970s, 1980's, etc) manmade creation and is
>difficult to
>> follow. Hmmmm, could it be that when you restrict fat your
>body is
>> trying to tell you something? It is sad when one's diet
>becomes their
>> religion. Surprised(
>>
>> rr
>
> Your remarks are not impressive, you do not argue the
>points but resort to ad hominem insults...anonomously..
>not impressive. Have you written a book? nah.. do you know
>enough to argue the issues even? no.
>
>
>>
>> On 2 Apr 2005 10:47:59 -0800, "Bawl"
>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >From: "Robert Cohen"
>> >Date: Sat Apr 2, 2005 12:08 pm
>> >Subject: The China Study
>> >.
>> >
>> >The China Study
>> >
>> >Oprah has a book club, and now, so do I! Each week, I
>manage
>> >to read two or three books, and from time to time, I'll
>> >be sharing my favorites with you. This past week, I
>> >made the exception to my own rule, and read one book from
>> >comer to cover--twice! This must-read book is "The China
>> >Study," by T. Colin Campbell and his son, Thomas. T. Colin
>> >Campbell (the dad) is a great writer in his own right, but
>> >this new father and son team have synergized their energies
>> >to create a classic in the genre of nutritional texts.
>> >
>> >Early on in their brilliantly written book (page 21),
>> >the Campbells tell their readers:
>> >
>> >"So, what is the prescription for good health? In short, it
>> >is about the multiple health benefits of consuming plant-
>> >based foods, and the largely unappreciated health dangers
>> >of consuming animal-based foods, including all types of
>> >meat, dairy, and eggs."
>> >
>> >That's a pretty good start, and it gets even better.
>> >
>> >T. Colin Campbell's perspectives are simply amazing. On
>page
>> >21, he expresses a contrarian philosophy to most modern-day
>> >health gurus:
>> >
>> >"One of the more exciting benefits of good nutrition
>> >is the prevention of diseases that are thought to be
>> >due to genetic predisposition."
>> >
>> >Campbell has learned throughout his esteemed career that
>> >disease can easily be reversed and cured by adopting
>> >a plant-based diet.
>> >
>> >By quoting Goethe on page 27, Campbell exposes America's
>> >great protein myth, as promoted by the all-powerful milk
>> >and meat industries. He writes:
>> >
>> >"We are best at hiding those things which are in plain
>site."
>> >
>> >Campbell's sense of humor is at its best in this upscale
>> >well-documented book. His chapter on protein consumption
>> >should be read by every American. Healthy people should
>> >reinforce good physiology by Campbell's advice, and ill
>people
>> >should be inspired to take the cure by eating a plant-based
>> >diet. On page 30, Campbell asks:
>> >
>> >"Can you guess what food we might eat to most efficiently
>> >provide the building blocks for our replacement proteins?
>> >The answer is human flesh."
>> >
>> >Very funny! Of course, most are not willing to live on Mrs.
>> >Lovett's human meat pies. Or are we? The trouble is, with
>> >human and animal flesh, there are many dangerous byproducts
>> >to consider. The urea, ammonia, and dirty residues of
>animal
>> >proteins and saturated fats compromise carnivores.
>> >
>> >Campbell is at his best when writing about "Broken Hearts"
>> >on page 111. You will learn that during the Korean War,
>77.3
>> >percent of healthy hearts autopsied from American
>casualties
>> >revealed advanced heart disease. These diseased hearts were
>> >taken from the bodies of so-called healthy males who had
>> >eaten the standard American diet. Campbell offers the hows
>> >and whys of heart disease...and the cure-all.
>> >
>> >On page 255, Campbell walks you through the American
>> >government's relationship with milk and meat producers.
>> >Conspiracy? Absolutely, and Campbell's detailed evidence
>> >and research reads like a detective story. One smoking gun
>> >after another overwhelms the reader into recognizing
>> >that things could have been different for our children
>> >had only those men in power possessed ethics. If only they
>> >had respected real science and not the almighty dollar.
>> >We have been betrayed, and T. Colin Campbell has survived
>> >in an academic environment despite those pressures exerted
>by
>> >bureaucrats with enormous financial conflicts of interest.
>> >
>> >Campbell's commentary on nutritional training, or the lack
>> >thereof for doctors is magnificent. On page 327, Campbell
>writes:
>> >
>> >"The situation is dangerous. Nutrition training of doctors
>> >is not merely inadequate; it is practically
>nonexistent...The
>> >bulk of these nutrition hours are taught in the first year
>of
>> >medical school, as part of other basic science
>courses...When
>> >nutrition education is provided in relation to public
>health
>> >problems, guess who is supplying the 'educational'
>material?
>> >The Dannon Institute, Egg Nutrition Board, National
>Cattlemen's
>> >Beef Association, National Dairy Council, Nestle Clinical
>> >Nutrition, Wyeth-Ayerst Labortories, Briston-Myers Squibb
>> >Company..."
>> >
>> >Campbell then asks:
>> >
>> >"Do you think that this all-star team of animal foods and
>drug
>> >industries representatives is going to objectively judge
>and
>> >promote optimal nutrition, which science has shown to be a
>> >whole foods, plant-based diet that minimizes the need for
>drugs?"
>> >
>> >The book is a must read for those who know a thing or two,
>and
>> >those who have not a clue. I've read no better book on
>nutrition
>> >than this one, which will arm you in nutritional arguments
>> >presented by meat-eating doubting Thomases.
>> >
>> >The China Study, by T. Colin Campbell, PhD, with Thomas
>> >Campbell is available on Amazon.com:
>> >
>> >http://tinyurl.com/6ggan
>> >
>> >Robert Cohen
>> >http://www.notmilk.com
>>
>
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Juhana Harju



Joined: 17 Aug 2007
Posts: 419

PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2005 3:32 pm    Post subject: Re: The China Study Reply with quote

Roger Rabbit wrote:
:: I have heard Campbell speak and yes, he is very convincing.
:: Unfortunately he is also caught up in this vegetarian propaganda. Surprised(
::
:: You mention the Seven Countries Study. Unfortunately for that study
:: it is flawed. There are many countries left out of the study that
:: would prove Key's theory incorrect or at least inconclusive.
::
:: There are many so-called health concerned people that feel that an
:: unnatural, low-fat, plant-based diet is the way to go. Unfortunately,
:: this low-fat myth is based upon studies that supposedly show a
:: diet/heart link. When you look at the data you will wonder how this
:: link has managed to last this long.

Actually I do believe that plant-based diets are healthy. Even if you don't
believe in the Seven Countries Study there are countless other studies
showing the association of red meat and dairy fat to degenerative diseases
and also countless of studies showing the benefits of a diet high in
vegetables and fruits. My point was rather that Campbell refuses to partake
to the intelligent nutritional discourse. He exercises his shadowboxing
against the Atkins diet, but he refuses to partake to an intelligent
discussion about the health benefits of a traditional Mediterranean type of
diet, which would be the real, competing alternative to his low fat vegan
suggestions.

Juhana

::
::
:: On Mon, 4 Apr 2005 15:10:11 +0300, "Juhana Harju"
:: wrote:
::
::: Roger Rabbit wrote:
::::: On 2 Apr 2005 10:47:59 -0800, "Bawl"
::::: wrote:
:::::
:::::: The China Study
:::::: [...]
:::::: "So, what is the prescription for good health? In short, it
:::::: is about the multiple health benefits of consuming plant-
:::::: based foods, and the largely unappreciated health dangers
:::::: of consuming animal-based foods, including all types of
:::::: meat, dairy, and eggs."
:::::: [...]
::::::
:::::: Campbell is at his best when writing about "Broken Hearts"
:::::: on page 111. You will learn that during the Korean War, 77.3
:::::: percent of healthy hearts autopsied from American casualties
:::::: revealed advanced heart disease. These diseased hearts were
:::::: taken from the bodies of so-called healthy males who had
:::::: eaten the standard American diet. Campbell offers the hows
:::::: and whys of heart disease...and the cure-all.
:::::: [...]
::::: So the answer to great health is following an unnatural, low-fat
::::: plant-based diet? First off, humans were never vegetarian, despite
::::: what the vegetarian's will have you believe. Secondly, low-fat is
::::: a modern (1970s, 1980's, etc) manmade creation and is difficult to
::::: follow. Hmmmm, could it be that when you restrict fat your body is
::::: trying to tell you something? It is sad when one's diet becomes
::::: their religion. Surprised(
:::
::: Here are some of my impressions after reading the book. As I have
::: said before the title of the book is misleading as the book is
::: *not* mostly about the China study. It is a general book about what
::: Campbell considers to be a healthy diet. I have admit that
::: Campbell is very convincing when he speaks about the health
::: benefits of plant-based diets, but at the same time there is also a
::: certain bias through out the whole book and I don't feel that
::: Campbell is totally honest in his approach. Even though Campbell
::: writes about the prevention of cardiovascular diseases he fails to
::: mention the Seven Countries Study, the Lyon Heart Study, Greece and
::: Crete. Even the Mediterranean diet is not mentioned at all, which
::: is strange as Campbell speaks very strongly in favor of the Ornish
::: diet and its benefits in the cardiovascular diseases. Campbell also
::: passes the omega-3 fatty acids and fish oils very briefly and with
::: contempt. If the book were mainly about China, these defects might
::: be understandable, but the book is not. I would say that it is a
::: book worth of reading but with certain reservations.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MMu



Joined: 17 Aug 2007
Posts: 385

PostPosted: Wed Apr 06, 2005 6:09 pm    Post subject: Re: The China Study Reply with quote

> There are many so-called health concerned people that feel that an
> unnatural, low-fat, plant-based diet is the way to go. Unfortunately,
> this low-fat myth is based upon studies that supposedly show a
> diet/heart link. When you look at the data you will wonder how this
> link has managed to last this long.

Can you provide evidence (that is: studies) that plant based diets are bad?
Also: please add some evidence that diets high in fat and low on plants are
beneficial.
...I would love to read that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Roger Rabbit



Joined: 17 Aug 2007
Posts: 118

PostPosted: Wed Apr 06, 2005 11:03 pm    Post subject: Re: The China Study Reply with quote

On Wed, 6 Apr 2005 14:09:41 +0200, "MMu" wrote:

>> There are many so-called health concerned people that feel that an
>> unnatural, low-fat, plant-based diet is the way to go. Unfortunately,
>> this low-fat myth is based upon studies that supposedly show a
>> diet/heart link. When you look at the data you will wonder how this
>> link has managed to last this long.
>
>Can you provide evidence (that is: studies) that plant based diets are bad?
>Also: please add some evidence that diets high in fat and low on plants are
>beneficial.
>..I would love to read that.
>

I don't ever recall making the statement that there are studies that
clearly show high fat diets to be beneficial. Please do not
misrepresent me.

Now, what I *have* been saying in this ng was that studies that try to
show a diet/CHD link are flawed or actually prove the opposite. i.e.
Seven Countries, MRFIT, etc. The Framingham study data don't show a
diet/heart link. To try to pin the blame on fat or cholesterol as the
cause for CHD is ridiculous and has yet to proven.

Keys hand-picked seven countries that would prove his conclusion
(before the study had even been done). Sure enough, the study results
agreed with his theory of a diet/CHD link. Unfortunately though Keys
ignored other countries that would have produced much different
results. If he had included data from the 22 countries from which data
was available, the study would actually have shown no conclusive link
between diet and CHD! Dishonest to say the least.

All that has resulted thus far from studies attempting to show a
diet/CHD relationship is that there is no direct causal effect. You
have results showing high instances of CHD correlating with high serum
cholesterol levels but you also have results showing high serum
cholesterol levels and low to fairly low instances of CHD! The Swiss
are a prime example.

By plant-based do you mean vegan? If that is your definition of
plant-based then, yes, they are sub-optimal. There have never been any
vegetarian civilizations in human history. You may find some that
follow largely plant-based diets but pure vegetarian, uh uh.

Humans did not begin consuming large quantities of carbohydrates
until the domestication of animals and cultivation of plants. The
detrimental results can be seen by studying the fossil records. This
isn't exactly news.

I recall reading an article on a BBC web site that reported that
eating less meat was conducive to a longer life. They were clear to
indicate "less meat", not "no meat". Excerpt below:

"But completely avoiding meat was not the healthiest diet, the
researchers found.

For every 100 deaths among vegans, there were 66 among vegetarians and
60 among occasional meat eaters."

Link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/2838083.stm

If I encounter any useful studies in my Internet travels, I'll be sure
to post them here.

rr
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Juhana Harju



Joined: 17 Aug 2007
Posts: 419

PostPosted: Thu Apr 07, 2005 2:13 pm    Post subject: Re: The China Study Reply with quote

Roger Rabbit wrote:
:: On Wed, 6 Apr 2005 14:09:41 +0200, "MMu" wrote:
::
:::: There are many so-called health concerned people that feel that an
:::: unnatural, low-fat, plant-based diet is the way to go.
:::: Unfortunately, this low-fat myth is based upon studies that
:::: supposedly show a diet/heart link. When you look at the data you
:::: will wonder how this link has managed to last this long.
:::
::: Can you provide evidence (that is: studies) that plant based diets
::: are bad? Also: please add some evidence that diets high in fat and
::: low on plants are beneficial.
::: ..I would love to read that.
:::
::
:: I don't ever recall making the statement that there are studies that
:: clearly show high fat diets to be beneficial. Please do not
:: misrepresent me.
::
:: Now, what I *have* been saying in this ng was that studies that try
:: to show a diet/CHD link are flawed or actually prove the opposite.
:: i.e. Seven Countries, MRFIT, etc. The Framingham study data don't
:: show a diet/heart link. To try to pin the blame on fat or
:: cholesterol as the cause for CHD is ridiculous and has yet to proven.
::
:: Keys hand-picked seven countries that would prove his conclusion
:: (before the study had even been done). Sure enough, the study results
:: agreed with his theory of a diet/CHD link. Unfortunately though Keys
:: ignored other countries that would have produced much different
:: results. If he had included data from the 22 countries from which
:: data was available, the study would actually have shown no
:: conclusive link between diet and CHD! Dishonest to say the least.

There is also a /within/ country association between high cholesterol and
CHD in almost all countries, so it is very difficult to deny that
cholesterol wouldn't count. I recall that Japan was the only exception in
this respect. However, I don't think it is a black and white question
whether cholesterol is a risk factor or not. It would be more accurate to
say that cholesterol is one risk factor among others (hs-CRP, hypertension,
smoking, visceral adiposity, homocysteine, triglyserides etc.). Total
cholesterol:HDL ratio is much better in predicting risk than total
cholesterol.

:: "But completely avoiding meat was not the healthiest diet, the
:: researchers found.
::
:: For every 100 deaths among vegans, there were 66 among vegetarians
:: and 60 among occasional meat eaters."
::
:: Link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/2838083.stm

In the Oxford vegetarian study the fish eaters had the lowest mortality,
slightly lower than lactovegetarians and occational meat eaters. Meat eaters
and vegans had the highest mortality.

I wonder what would be the nutritional reasons to eat meat in addition to
(fatty) fish. Fish has better fatty acids than meat and fish also contains
phospholipids that can be beneficial to human cognitive functions.

--
Juhana
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MMu



Joined: 17 Aug 2007
Posts: 385

PostPosted: Thu Apr 07, 2005 2:29 pm    Post subject: Re: The China Study Reply with quote

> All that has resulted thus far from studies attempting to show a
> diet/CHD relationship is that there is no direct causal effect. You
> have results showing high instances of CHD correlating with high serum
> cholesterol levels but you also have results showing high serum
> cholesterol levels and low to fairly low instances of CHD! The Swiss
> are a prime example.

I do not say that saturated fat, per se, is killing people.
I say that in an average diet saturated fat content and the ammount of
micronutrients and antioxidants consumed are inversely correlated; and this
leads to an increased risk to health.

> By plant-based do you mean vegan? If that is your definition of
> plant-based then, yes, they are sub-optimal. There have never been any
> vegetarian civilizations in human history. You may find some that
> follow largely plant-based diets but pure vegetarian, uh uh.

No, by plant based I mean that the emphasis should be on the consumption on
vegetables, fruit and plant-derived products (because of higher
micronutrient density, lower fat level and level of antioxidants). Meat/fish
should not be excluded since its a great source for quality protein, some
minerals and some vitamins.

> Humans did not begin consuming large quantities of carbohydrates
> until the domestication of animals and cultivation of plants. The
> detrimental results can be seen by studying the fossil records. This
> isn't exactly news.

> I recall reading an article on a BBC web site that reported that
> eating less meat was conducive to a longer life. They were clear to
> indicate "less meat", not "no meat". Excerpt below:
>
> "But completely avoiding meat was not the healthiest diet, the
> researchers found.

Which I would sign any time.
It's impossible to bring that to vegan ears though..
I understand that they do have an opinion on animal handling and so forth
and I do support that to some degree (animal rights etc.) but thinking that
this diet is healthy is just possible with closed eyes and closed ears to
the outside world.

> For every 100 deaths among vegans, there were 66 among vegetarians and
> 60 among occasional meat eaters."
> Link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/2838083.stm

Too bad they didn't put an actual reference to the source literature there..
I would have liked to read the full study.

It's bad however, that they didn't include people who eat meat _excessively_
or at least not just "occasionally" in this comparison.. that would have
been quite an interesting information. leaving that out seems quite odd.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Juhana Harju



Joined: 17 Aug 2007
Posts: 419

PostPosted: Thu Apr 07, 2005 5:44 pm    Post subject: Re: The China Study Reply with quote

MMu wrote:

:: Meat/fish should not be excluded since its a great
:: source for quality protein [...]

Not getting enough protein from a vegetarian diet is a persistent myth which
has no valid basis. There might be other good reasons to eat some fish (or
chicken) but this is not one of them.

--
Juhana
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MMu



Joined: 17 Aug 2007
Posts: 385

PostPosted: Thu Apr 07, 2005 9:07 pm    Post subject: Re: The China Study Reply with quote

> Not getting enough protein from a vegetarian diet is a persistent myth
> which...

I said nothing about not getting enough protein I said something about
protein quality.

> There might be other good reasons to eat some fish (or
> chicken) but this is not one of them.

" Meat/fish should not be excluded since its a great source for quality
protein, some
*minerals* and some *vitamins*."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Juhana Harju



Joined: 17 Aug 2007
Posts: 419

PostPosted: Thu Apr 07, 2005 11:14 pm    Post subject: Re: The China Study Reply with quote

MMu wrote:
::: Not getting enough protein from a vegetarian diet is a persistent
::: myth which...
::
:: I said nothing about not getting enough protein I said something
:: about protein quality.

Vegetarian food sources have an equal protein quality in the context of a
whole diet. Actually vegetarian proteins are /better/ as they are packed in
a more healthy package than meat. Alongside with meat you get also saturated
fat and cholesterol but no phytochemicals or fiber.

::: There might be other good reasons to eat some fish (or
::: chicken) but this is not one of them.
::
:: "Meat/fish should not be excluded since its a great source for
:: quality protein, some
:: *minerals* and some *vitamins*."

There are better reasons for fish eating than those. To my knowledge
meat/fish do not contain any minerals that you can not obtain from
vegetarian sources. Actually it is a advantage that you get non-heme iron if
you are familiar with recent studies about the subject. As far as I know
there are no nutritional reasons to eat meat in addition to fish. However, I
do admit that getting long-chain omega-3 fatty acids (especially DHA) and
certain phospholipids /are/ good reasons for fish eating.

--
Juhana
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rene



Joined: 17 Aug 2007
Posts: 79

PostPosted: Thu Apr 07, 2005 4:25 pm    Post subject: Re: The China Study Reply with quote

"Juhana Harju" wrote in message @individual.net...
>

> I wonder what would be the nutritional reasons to eat meat in addition to
> (fatty) fish. Fish has better fatty acids than meat and fish also contains
> phospholipids that can be beneficial to human cognitive functions.
>
> --
> Juhana
>
>
When beef is raised on grass, the fatty acid profile is much better.
http://news.ucanr.org/newsstorymain.cfm?story=531
So, in the past when the majority of beef was grass fed, you may not have
needed so much fish, which may have been harder to get hold of if you lived
inland.

René

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Related Topics:
New Study: Meat-eating Raises Cancer Risks: Lung, Liver, Eso Meat raises lung cancer risk, too, study finds by Maggie Fox, Health and Science Editor - Mon Dec 10, 5:15 PM PST Source: WASHINGTON (Reuters) - People who eat a lot of red meat and processed meats

New Study: Meat-eating Raises Cancer Risks: Lung, Liver, Eso New Study: Meat-eating Raises Cancer Risks: Lung, Liver, Esophageal, Pancreatic Cancers Meat raises lung cancer risk, too, study finds by Maggie Fox, Health and Science Editor - Mon Dec 10, 5:15 PM PST Source:

starches and new Mayo study released today margo

Tubbies Rejoice At New Fat Freedom: Study "New Findings On Diet And Fat Spark Rejoicing Among The Hefty" By Jowlie Bigaman Dietary Journal Staff Writer February 8, 2006 "This confirms what I've been saying for years - fat is good for you," said Lena Lumford, a chef in Reading, Pa. "I weigh 422 p

Article/Study--Almonds On Diet ARE ALL CALORIES CREATED EQUAL? New Study Shows a Moderate-Fat Almond Diet May Result in Greater Weight Loss than a Low-Fat Diet Containing the Same Daily Calories November 1, 2003 - Adding fuel to the latest debate in the nutrition community, a study pub
Post new topic   Reply to topic    talkaboutdiet.com Forum Index -> Vegetarian foods All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group