Fans of The China Study?

Anthony Colpo's (Omnivore dude) rebuttal to The China Study:

http://www.theomnivo...hina_Study.html

ill go ahead and trust a 20 year study by Oxford, Cornell, & Chinese Academy of Preventative Medicine... instead of a guy who obviously has vested interest in an omnivorous diet.


he talks about creatine and carnatine, which are made by the body... they dont NEED to be consumed in the diet. B vitamins & Iron which are READILY available in the plant world. omega-3 conversion is more than adaquate in healthy people.

that site, and that guy are obviously searching for scraps.

I hadn't heard of the China Study until I read this thread. I looked it up, and it seems like the guy has done his homework. (large studies over multiple years) It looks like it isn't too expensive on Amazon, I might check it out.

From the china study:

According to Campbell, "The safe proteins were from plants, including wheat and soy."

Can you say food allergy/in tolerance.

Vegetarian propaganda.

Shepard I'm partway through your info, I haven't forgetten about you.

This study has been blasted hard on the CR Society list:

To reiterate: the China Study was crummy, population-comparison ecological crap, not proper prospective epidemiology. In a real prostpective epidemiological study, you take a group of individuals and ask each of them INDIVIDUALLY about hir dietary and other exposures at time X, and then follow them all up for several years and see their health outcomes; then, you correlate specific exposures to specific outcomes.  If you see such correelations (eg, people who consumed more cooked tomato products were less likely to develop aggressive prostate cancer), then because you have a range of other information about EACH of these people as INDIVIDUALS, you can double-check for false positives
  on an individual-by-individual basis: eg, you can say, "were cooked tomato product users mostly of Italian descent (possible genetic influence)? Were they less likely to smoke, or eat a lot of saturated fat? Did they tend to have their cooked tomato products with salads, or eat more vegetables generally?" Etc. The combination of a prospective design and the existence of a range of info about EACH PERSON'S lifestyle gives such studies great power to test for real causal connections -- not definitive proof, but strong evidence.

The China study was not prospective epidemiology, but an "ecological"
study, which aggregates entire populations. That is, they looked at how much meat was consumed in an ENTIRE PROVINCE, and the rates of heart disease in the province AS A WHOLE, and then compared the two variables in another province; if provinces with more meat consumption also have more heart disease, they inferred that meat causes heart disease. As I've often harped in the past, these kinds of studies are MEANINGLESS.
The Japanese smoke more than the Americans; they also die less of lung cancer. That doesn't mean that smoking is protective against lung cancer
-- and you can prove this with proper, prospective epidemiology, because WITHIN *either one* of those populations, INDIVIDUALS who smoke at time X are more likely to die of lung cancer several years down the road.

ill go ahead and trust a 20 year study by Oxford, Cornell, & Chinese Academy of Preventative Medicine... instead of a guy who obviously has vested interest in an omnivorous diet.


he talks about creatine and carnatine, which are made by the body... they dont NEED to be consumed in the diet. B vitamins & Iron which are READILY available in the plant world. omega-3 conversion is more than adaquate in healthy people.

that site, and that guy are obviously searching for scraps.

i havent read the article yet, so this may end up edited lol.

but do to modern preperation, creatine and carnitine are made in fairly low doses as compared to other eras. do you NEED to supplement? well that depends on your lifestyle, but i guess the answers no. and how about carnosine? arent veggies very low in that amino acid?

i was unaware that there were veggie sources of omega-3s. care to share some?

i was unaware that there were veggie sources of omega-3s. care to share some?

ALA from flaxoil/walnuts/etc is converted to EPA at around 5% and DHA at 1-2% in healthy individuals(some studies say higher, some lower so i gave the middle ground).... not counting retroconversion

1 TBSP of flaxoil has about 8000mg ALA, which would covert down to 400mg EPA and 160-80mg DHA

there are also EPA & DHA supplements from algae, but i stick with my flax oil

ALA from flaxoil/walnuts/etc is converted to EPA at around 5% and DHA at 1-2% in healthy individuals

It would seem logical then, if one is going to supplement with fish oil, to choose supplements with a 5:1 or 5:2 EPA:DHA ratio, such as Omega 3 Mood or Omega Brite. Making the assumption that the body knows whats best for it here. Recent studies using fish oil for ADHD and depression seem to support the idea.

It would seem logical then, if one is going to supplement with fish oil, to choose supplements with a 5:1 or 5:2 EPA:DHA ratio, such as Omega 3 Mood or Omega Brite.  Making the assumption that the body knows whats best for it here.  Recent studies using fish oil for ADHD and depression seem to support the idea.

agreed

i also believe epa is higher than dha in fish flesh?

ill go ahead and trust a 20 year study by Oxford, Cornell, & Chinese Academy of Preventative Medicine... instead of a guy who obviously has vested interest in an omnivorous diet.


he talks about creatine and carnatine, which are made by the body... they dont NEED to be consumed in the diet. B vitamins & Iron which are READILY available in the plant world. omega-3 conversion is more than adaquate in healthy people.

that site, and that guy are obviously searching for scraps.

I sincerely hope your joking. Can you please shed light on what this vested interest in an omnivorous diet is?

Colpo is definitely NOT searching for scraps. He tells it like it is to the point with just the FACTS.

Lemme guess, you're a vegetarian for religious reasons that thinks humans are designed to be herbivores?

Edited by paleo, 08 June 2006 - 10:30 PM.

Lemme guess, you're some vegetarian freak

Take it easy with the name-calling. He's a vegetarian with an opinion as valid as yours.

wow... you dont see name calling around here too much lol

he runs a website based around the idea that eating meat is healthy... so he's obviously passionate and has some sort of personal attachement to it. to have something youre SO attached to be proven wrong by hard science, would be a hard thing for any person to deal with... hence the vested interest.

i AM a vegetarian and my reasons for being so are spiritual/religious, what humans were "designed" to be makes no difference to me.

thanks funk

Yes, paleo, let's keep this discussion about ideas. You will find that unlike other boards, calling people names will get you banned from ours.

It is ok to argue against ideas, but please no personal attacks and name calling.

wow... you dont see name calling around here too much lol

he runs a website based around the idea that eating meat is healthy... so he's obviously passionate and has some sort of personal attachement to it. to have something youre SO attached to be proven wrong by hard science, would be a hard thing for any person to deal with... hence the vested interest.

i AM a vegetarian and my reasons for being so are spiritual/religious, what humans were "designed" to be makes no difference to me.

thanks funk

Definitely my bad. I was out of line. I'm rather new here and I guess didn't realize this was a "mature" board. With that being said, it's refreshing to have discovered this.

If your reasons are spiritual/religious for not eating meat, enough said.

As for the TheOmnivore, you can read his rebuttal on the China Study book -- if you find something that doesn't jive, please post here. I've read his opinion on it and it seemed to me like he did a pretty amazing job of discrediting it.

I respect all your opinions and i'm glad i've found such a great site. Please if you have the time look at my 2 posts in the "supplements' category re: fish oil and whey protein supplementation as they have gone unanswered.

Thanks!

dont get me wrong, i still think a vegetarian diet has tons of benefits... and that guys rebuttle is easily discredited

dont get me wrong, i still think a vegetarian diet has tons of benefits... and that guys rebuttle is easily discredited

Vegetarian benefits? I can only think of its unnatural downfalls...have you read beyondveg or theomnivore?

How is Colpo's rebuttal discredited? It systemically debunks the entire book! And for someone without a university degree, I can say i'm impressed.

God I love being an omnivore!

Red meat has some terrible problems with it. Why do you think that when someone goes to the doctor after a heart attack (or getting into the age range for one) the first thing the doctor says (ok maybe not exactly the first, but one of the top 3) is "You need to cut out the red meat". The doctor should have told them that 20 years ago if he/she really wanted to make a difference. Other meats are not as bad for you (as long as they aren't fried or something), but there are still health benefits to staying away from them, save possibly fish, but I think the main reasons are moral ones. There is, of course, a whole thread on this debate. (actually more than one, but a whole recent thread on this debate)

Red meat has some terrible problems with it. Why do you think that when someone goes to the doctor after a heart attack (or getting into the age range for one) the first thing the doctor says (ok maybe not exactly the first]whole thread on this debate[/URL]. (actually more than one, but a whole recent thread on this debate)

Although I vehemently disagree with you, thank you for the link to the debate. I'm looking forward to participating. But just to clear up a couple of key points you made.

Doctors don't have a clue about nutrition. So having them say stay away from red meat is a joke and probably the worst thing that a person can do. As we know, dietary cholesterol has little bearing on serum blood cholesterol. It's in fact when you don't eat cholesterol that the liver must produce much more. Doctors are not exactly clued in, since they are brainwashed with the drug model. Better advice would be to stop all starches/grains/sugars and focus on veggies and small amount of fruits. And completely eliminate any toxic veggie oils.

As for morals? Life feeds on life...that's reality. We have been killing animals for millions of years. If you don't like commercial practices then perhaps it's best to farm.

I look forward to the other thread debate even though I don't think there can be much debate given all the evidence and common sense.

youre playing too much into the paleo diet thing man...i saw those links you posted in the fishoil thread... the whole, lots of meat high saturated fat diet is one that has been consitantly shown to be pro-aging and disease causing... when you can come up with large scale controlled studies on humans proving red meat and saturated fat are beneficial in excess, than we can talk. check out dr. atkins autopsie report.

the main benefit of a vegetarian diet is less calories with more nutrition... not to mention the lack of potent carcinogens that are created when meat is cooked.

the morality issue ill leave alone... this isnt the place for that.

Salmon and sardines--find a veggie argument not to eat them. Sardindes are tiny fish and therefor even heavy metal arguments don't apply.

>90% lean ground beef (hormone free, antibiotic free) cooked properly is part of a healthy diet and provides zinc, carnitine...what else? creatine is it? low in fat, no potent carcinogens.

how much carbs are you getting in your veggie diet? Grains are really bad for a significant percent of the population, far worse then lean anti-biotic and hormone free beef/chicken.

Oh and taking flax and trusting on the conversion...is not the best thing to do. Safest is to take the EPA/DHA fish oil...or perhaps that other stuff...Krill oil.

Oh and taking flax and trusting on the conversion...is not the best thing to do. Safest is to take the EPA/DHA fish oil...or perhaps that other stuff...Krill oil.

I agree, partially. Based on ajnast4r's math, thus assuming ~8g of flax oil is suitable for people with "normal" conversion rates, one should either consume quite a bit more than that (in case one's conversion rate is lower than normal, and/or the normal rate is in fact lower than ajnast4r quoted), or one should consume small amounts of the real deal (maybe the recommended daily dosage, taken every second or third day).

I opt for a version of the latter: consume flax oil in moderate amounts (3-4 tablespoons ground flaxseed, every other day or so) and eat fish once a week (admittedly not the wild Alaskan salmon stuff I hear about, but I make do with what I can).

youre playing too much into the paleo diet thing man...i saw those links you posted in the fishoil thread... the whole, lots of meat high saturated fat diet is one that has been consitantly shown to be pro-aging and disease causing... when you can come up with large scale controlled studies on humans proving red meat and saturated fat are beneficial in excess, than we can talk.  check out dr. atkins autopsie report.

the main benefit of a vegetarian diet is less calories with more nutrition... not to mention the lack of potent carcinogens that are created when meat is cooked.

the morality issue ill leave alone... this isnt the place for that.

I'm playing much into the paleo diet because it's what humans are designed to eat and therefore the healthiest. Like it or not, this is the way we evolved. Grains, dairy, etc. are not part of out natural diet. As for large scale studies, maybe take a look at the eskimos? Or perhaps the mediterraneans? Look at hunter/gatherer tribes in africa and australia? I don't know man, I guess the longest study is the fact that we have evolved on meat and mankind's health started deteriorating about 10000 years ago. Have you even read into Weston Price at all? That may (although I doubt it) make you rethink your believe that fat is so disease causing when in fact it's the starches/sugars/grains and vegetable oils and trans fats that are really disease causing.

As for Atkins, that's a cheap shot. Although i'm not a huge fan of Atkins for various reasons, he fell on his head for crying out loud. Furthermore, his autopsy report was completely bogus and there were tonnes of reasons for his weight, etc. If you do some more research you may get to the bottom of it. He was definitely a pioneer and closer to the truth than many. Nothing but respect.

It's not about only less calories...it's about where the calories come from. Surely you will eat LESS calories on a higher fat diet. I know a fat gram has more than double the calories, HOWEVER you will eat less and be much more satiated but eating the fat and protein. You won't have the insulin roller coaster of always being hungry and tired with carbs.

As for the potent carcinogens, what about gluten? casein? grains are poison. look it up. Carcinogens on meat are only caused by high heat and charring. We've evolved to make it here on meat have we not? Should all the neanderthals died from cancer?

Salmon and sardines--find a veggie argument not to eat them. Sardindes are tiny fish and therefor even heavy metal arguments don't apply.

>90% lean ground beef (hormone free, antibiotic free) cooked properly is part of a healthy diet and provides zinc, carnitine...what else? creatine is it? low in fat, no potent carcinogens.

how much carbs are you getting in your veggie diet?  Grains are really bad for a significant percent of the population, far worse then lean anti-biotic and hormone free beef/chicken.

Oh and taking flax and trusting on the conversion...is not the best thing to do.  Safest is to take the EPA/DHA fish oil...or perhaps that other stuff...Krill oil.

Let me guess, you read alot of mercola? It is convenient that he says it's unfortunate that ALL FISH is polluted since he can't sell fresh fish. But ofcourse he has the krill oil! Please.

I agree and disagree with you. I agree with what you say on grains and flax. However, I don't think it's the lean meat that is healthy. I prefer fatty cuts of meat...the more saturated, the better. Unfortunately I can't find any meat that is more than 40% saturated.

And yes, creatine, carnatine, carnosine, CLA....stearic acid...these are things you can't even find in vegetables.

I'm playing much into the paleo diet because it's what humans are designed to eat and therefore the healthiest.

That's still open to debate.

As for large scale studies, maybe take a look at the eskimos? Or perhaps the mediterraneans? Look at hunter/gatherer tribes in africa and australia?

There are so many confounding variables at play there it isn't even funny.

Like it or not, this is the way we evolved. Grains, dairy, etc. are not part of out natural diet.

I'll agree on the dairy. I've heard quite a bit about the grains as well, though I'm not as convinced. At any rate, dairy has quite a few good things that offset the bad: it's mostly the animal from which the milk is pulled, rather than the milk itself, that's bad for us.

As for Atkins, people have this wonderful ability to throw logic out the window when they look at his diet. It works great for weight loss, but it's horrible as a long-term lifestyle. And it only works for weight loss because it helps people eat fewer calories, and of the calories consumed, protein calories get discounted by a good 20%-30% because of the energy required to break them down.

But the way it opens the floodgates to full fat red meat, real butter, and predominately saturated fat and cholesterol isn't just "borderline" reckless, it IS reckless.

An "atkins" diet stressing leaner white meats and fish in moderation, nuts, low GI carbs in moderation, etc., can be just as effective as your standard full fat burger cooked in butter, as far as weight loss, while promoting better health as well. Not everything that leads to weight loss is necessarily "healthy".

I prefer fatty cuts of meat...the more saturated, the better.  Unfortunately I can't find any meat that is more than 40% saturated.

What about cutting a piece of filet mignon, chewing it up, then taking a square inch of lard and mixing it all together in your mouth. Saturated heaven.

I agree with you on some of your things, but you're taking the exact opposite end of the spectrum as hardcore vegans and seem just as much a zealot as anyone else who thinks they've got it figured out.

I'm going to go vomit, now.

I prefer fatty cuts of meat...the more saturated, the better.  Unfortunately I can't find any meat that is more than 40% saturated.

What about cutting a piece of filet mignon, chewing it up, then taking a square inch of lard and mixing it all together in your mouth. Saturated heaven.

I agree with you on some of your things, but you're taking the exact opposite end of the spectrum as hardcore vegans and seem just as much a zealot as anyone else who thinks they've got it figured out.

I'm going to go vomit, now.

Actually, I eat much lard daily but yep -- it's only 40% saturated! I only cook with lard, coconut oil, occassional olive oil (not much high heat), and butter. NEVER any vegetable oils.

Ofcourse I think the vegan/vegetarian diet is a joke. I think there is enough evidence/common sense out there to just look at the evolution of the biochemistry of our digestive systems to realize we are omnivores by nature. Not to mention how sick and frail vegans are.

That's still open to debate.


There are so many confounding variables at play there it isn't even funny.


I'll agree on the dairy. I've heard quite a bit about the grains as well, though I'm not as convinced. At any rate, dairy has quite a few good things that offset the bad: it's mostly the animal from which the milk is pulled, rather than the milk itself, that's bad for us.

As for Atkins, people have this wonderful ability to throw logic out the window when they look at his diet. It works great for weight loss, but it's horrible as a long-term lifestyle. And it only works for weight loss because it helps people eat fewer calories, and of the calories consumed, protein calories get discounted by a good 20%-30% because of the energy required to break them down.

But the way it opens the floodgates to full fat red meat, real butter, and predominately saturated fat and cholesterol isn't just "borderline" reckless, it IS reckless.

An "atkins" diet stressing leaner white meats and fish in moderation, nuts, low GI carbs in moderation, etc., can be just as effective as your standard full fat burger cooked in butter, as far as weight loss, while promoting better health as well. Not everything that leads to weight loss is necessarily "healthy".

I welcome the "confounding variables" at play.

As for the dairy, no it has more to do with pasteurization/homogenation, but overall we are simply not designed to drink milk. But we can eat the cows!

Once again it is NOT reckless. Please, read up on Dr. Enig and Dr. Fallon on Weston Price's site, Mercola's site, the Omnivore, WHOEVER as they are ALL in agreement.

You are misinformed. Please do some more research on how our bodies thrive on saturated fat and NOT highly unstable polyunsaturated fats. Why is cholesterol reckless?? It's an essential nutrient. Perhaps you're confusing cholesterol with oxidized cholesterol? Or perhaps from excess cholesterol that the liver produces?

[quote][/quote]What about cutting a piece of filet mignon, chewing it up, then taking a square inch of lard and mixing it all together in your mouth. Saturated heaven.[/quote]

That sounds savory [sfty]

Dude, i cannot quote correctly to save my life

paleo, I would honestly throw up if I ate the way you discuss. I would probably throw up if I saw someone else eating that way too. I only know how my body reacts, and when I began eating less meat and more veggies, concentrating more on the nutrients per calorie that I was taking in, it made a world of difference as to how I felt. If eating a high fat, red meat laden diet is for you, go for it man, but that just sounds extremely unhealthy to me.

Actually, I eat much lard daily

Are you from Mississippi? If so, do you eat pig feet?