My thoughts on Fuhrman

[carbs-and-plants]

Here is something I have realized about Fuhrman. While he is great and way, way, way better than most doctors and even dieticians out there, compared to Mcdougall, I far prefer Mcdougall. Why?

After having been studying this for a little while, I feel that much of the Fuhrman stuff just SOUNDS more "evolved" than Mcdougall because he talks a lot more about nutrient density and phytochemicals and other big words but the reality is that for the masses, it's just far simpler to go the Mcdougall way and in the long run, the results will be at least as good (I think Mcdougall is better for weight loss actually).

Much of Furhman's ideas on things like people needing more fat than what Mcdougall suggests are just theories. Also, just because you are flooding yourself with more nutrients, does not totally mean you will see such a difference in your health because there is a point where more is not really going to be so much better. Consistency is key here and that's what one gets on the Mcdougall plan with far, far more simplicity.

I used to think Fuhrman was ahead of Mcdougall because he was being more "advanced" but now, i don't see him that way. It's largely just stuff that sounds more advanced but isn't really. If one stays consistent on the Mcdougall plan and gets in the veggies along with the starches every day, they will be eating amazingly well and it should be at least up to the level of a Fuhrman follower with much less hassles. Also, newbies will be less intimidated to do Mcdougall because it sounds (and is) way simpler than all of a sudden trying to get in tons of veggies and fruits everyday. To a newbie, that sounds super hard.

I still have tremendous respect for Fuhrman and he has helped spread the word about plant based eating. I am just saying that I don't think the more "complex" theories amount to better long term results than Mcdougall. Make no mistake here, if you are following Fuhrman's suggestions, you are eating an excellent diet but I think the masses are better off just going Mcdougall style. I think for certain isolated cases of healing, Fuhrman may be onto something since he tailors certain dietary approaches for healing certain ailments. I am sure in some cases he may get better results with those isolated specific cases, but for the masses that have the common issues of : obesity, high cholesterol, heart issues, type 2 diabetes, fatigue, high blood pressure, stiff joints, difficulty losing weight, constipation, these things will be nicely handled on the Mcdougall plan and the simplicity of it goes a long way.

[f1jim]

I came to the same conclusions after reading his Eat To Live and them my sister sending me old copies of Dr. McDougalls books. Certainly the language was more current and the ideas expressed in a more complex vocabulary but the essence of the programs spoke to the same results. I think if the language and complexity of the message is attractive then that's a success too. They are both moving us away from the killer Western diet and toward eating patterns that will save us. There is no reason both sets of ideas of nutrition and health can't coexist and compliment each other. I gleaned some solid concepts from Eat To Live but also found myself drawn to the simple message and method to Dr. McDougalls program. It's certainly an easier concept to explain and pass on as the basics sound very much like the eating patterns of our ancestors.
f1jim

[vgpedlr]

Basically the same conclusion I came to. Consistency is the most powerful force, and the easier approach has the most chance for success. I like some of his recipes, but often they're too difficult. I wanted a Thai curry the other day, looked in a Fuhrman book and found one. My eyes glazed over by the end of the ingredient list!

But I Still Love Dr. Fuhrman:
1) He is steeped in research, just like McD and Jeff, even if he interprets it differently. I like another perspective.
2) A lot of the "fancy language" is the naming of phytochemical nutrients that sound funny because we haven't grown up thinking about them like we have for vitamins and minerals.
3) While "more is not better" and "enough is best", when it comes to these phytochemicals we still don't know much.
4) He mentioned (at the ASW?) that a simpler, less nutrient dense diet may work fine if you're raised on it, but if you've lived for long on the SAD, you may need to make up for lost time.
5) As an example of the above, Esselstyn described a patient of his who took his recommendations on leafy greens much further than expected. Even Ess was surprised at the benefits.
6) His recent book Superimmunity was a great read. I thought I "knew" Fuhrman, but the new stuff he wrote about there on both cancer and infectious disease was eye opening.

I love learning from Fuhrman, but I downplay the nuts, and incorporate ideas of nutrient density into my favorite McDougall recipes. And I never feel bad about plain starches.

[carbs-and-plants]

Basically the same conclusion I came to. Consistency is the most powerful force, and the easier approach has the most chance for success. I like some of his recipes, but often they're too difficult. I wanted a Thai curry the other day, looked in a Fuhrman book and found one. My eyes glazed over by the end of the ingredient list!

But I Still Love Dr. Fuhrman:
1) He is steeped in research, just like McD and Jeff, even if he interprets it differently. I like another perspective.
2) A lot of the "fancy language" is the naming of phytochemical nutrients that sound funny because we haven't grown up thinking about them like we have for vitamins and minerals.
3) While "more is not better" and "enough is best", when it comes to these phytochemicals we still don't know much.
4) He mentioned (at the ASW?) that a simpler, less nutrient dense diet may work fine if you're raised on it, but if you've lived for long on the SAD, you may need to make up for lost time.
5) As an example of the above, Esselstyn described a patient of his who took his recommendations on leafy greens much further than expected. Even Ess was surprised at the benefits.
6) His recent book Superimmunity was a great read. I thought I "knew" Fuhrman, but the new stuff he wrote about there on both cancer and infectious disease was eye opening.

I love learning from Fuhrman, but I downplay the nuts, and incorporate ideas of nutrient density into my favorite McDougall recipes. And I never feel bad about plain starches.

GREAT REPLY! Yeah, for sure Fuhrman brings a lot of cool stuff to the table. It can just overwhelm newbies a bit, so, they are usually better off just going McDougall for a while and maybe eventually taking in some of the Fuhrman stuff down the road when they are well settled in the McD plan.
It comes down to, if a person makes sure to get a lot of greens along with starches, especially things like Kale, spinach, mustard greens and broccoli, they will get the benefits that Fuhrman is talking about. By doing it more the McD way, it seems easier and less confusing. Simply put, eat a lot of sweet potatoes and back them up with Kale, spinach, mustard greens and broccoli and you will get in high nutrient density. There...nice and simple.

[carbs-and-plants]

I came to the same conclusions after reading his Eat To Live and them my sister sending me old copies of Dr. McDougalls books. but also found myself drawn to the simple message and method to Dr. McDougalls program. It's certainly an easier concept to explain and pass on as the basics sound very much like the eating patterns of our ancestors.
f1jim

Yeah, that's what drew me to the WOE as well.

[nicoles]

I like that both doctors exist, and they certainly complement each other, despite their differences. We all benefit! But I was not even CLOSE to being able to process Dr Fuhrman's information until I had been McDougalling for about 8 months, and already steeped myself in plant-based eating knowledge.

I agree, Dr F can come across as too complicated (and too "far out" IMO) for a newcomer to this basic way of eating.

[rickfm]

I wanted a Thai curry the other day, looked in a Fuhrman book and found one. My eyes glazed over by the end of the ingredient list!

LOL... I can relate. That's how I usually am when looking at many vegan recipes. If it has more than half a dozen ingredients, I'm likely to move on to see what's next.

I have yet to read any of Dr. Fuhrman's material. Only thing I know of him is from video clips. Dr. McDougall just makes sense to me and that's what I'm sticking to.

[patty]

What I love about Dr. McDougall is he has the biological metabolic fat/oil dollar down. His life shows it. Starches inclusive of yellow and green, create satiety. I had a Korean friend tell me that food to Chinese is number one. The greeting in Chinese is "Have you had your rice today". I was amazed the other day when someone asked me to look up oil on my ipod's Chinese dictionary, and character for oil meant you.

I never had a problem with food, until I gave up smoking. My AA sponsor shared when giving up a addiction, is like changing seats in the Titanic. I feel when giving up the food addiction, the money addiction seat quickly replaces it. Dr. Fuhrman's site costs, he sells vitamins that he creates, teaches volume cooking etc. The antidote of course is service.

Dr. McDougall is the epitome of service. He shares you can survive on a healthy diet of 3.00 or less. What a wonderful message to share when you witness someone struggling with systemic health problems from food. Scarcity and lack of self value disappears with satiety from being starch centered. Knowledge of self-knowledge lies at the end of the fork of a potato, or some other type of starch. The body doesn't lie.

I too respect Dr. Fuhrman, because I learned a lot from him, his forum, but my heart belongs to Dr. McDougall. Dr. Fuhrman shares self-care is the best care, and Dr.McDougall has shown me how, body, mind and socially. I no longer fear tomorrow, because I know all my needs can be met. Kindness creates happiness, Dr. McDougall shares he is the luckiest doctor because he sees people get well. I am sure Dr. Fuhrman feels the same way... I just feel Dr. McDougall has gone deeper on the learning curve of service. Not having anything to sell, the fear of not having anyone in your life disappears in the immediacy, because of the feedback loop of service. We are the Oil:) we don't have to play musical chairs, where there isn't enough. Have you had your starch today?

Aloha, patty

[vgpedlr]

Dr. McDougall just makes sense to me and that's what I'm sticking to.

Exactly. I love Dr. Fuhrman, but if I wanted more Fuhrman, I'd hang out on his discussion board. Instead, I want more McDougall! So I hang out here.

[Grammy Ginger]

I learned a lot from Dr. Fuhrman as well as Drs. McDougall, Campbell, Esselstyn, and so on. They each teach taught me a great deal about plant nutrition and health care. I appreciate them all. However, I've found more success eating more potatoes and rice with my greens and beans.

I still start my day with nearly a pound of greens in a large smoothie and bowl of miso soup. But, and this was a big departure for me, I also have a half to whole cup of brown, red, or black rice and maybe some adzuki beans in that soup. I still eat bowls and bowls of veggie/bean stoup, but now I include whole grain rice, brown rice pasta, and/or potatoes in the mix.

I like eating satiating starchy foods until I am comfortably full as often as I like as well as pounds and pounds of veggies and fruits. I still like to start my evening meal with a mega huge green salad sometimes for old time's sake. Nevertheless, I am happy to include an oatmeal bar dessert according to Jeff's recipe or some brown rice pudding. I love baked potatoes topped with frijoles no-refritos and salsa and corn tortillas and potato crust pizza.

Now, I don't feel frantically hungry wondering why I haven't yet learned to enjoy and embrace the feelings hunger. I don't beat myself up for my supposed toxic addiction to fat-free plant foods that I don't believe ever existed. I feel grateful to live in a land, where food is plentiful and varied. I am grateful for Dr. Fuhrman's help with disease reversal and weight reduction but will depend on Dr. McDougall's and Dr. Esselstyn's advice for the long haul.

DF has done a lot of good for a lot of people.

[didi]

To tell you the truth, I don't know what Dr. Fuhrman really thinks about starches because Eat To Live is a six week program and he uses very little starches. His ANDI list, I believe, is based on four different scales used to calculate nutrient density and anti oxident power but according to Dr. Gerber the tests were done in petri dishes and were chemical reactions, so that in the human body, the different nutrients might act in an entirely different way.

I believe I eat more of a MWL diet with fewer starches than regular McDougall but more than Fuhrman, and less vegies than Fuhrman but more than McDougall.

There were a couple of sentences in The Starch Solution that took me aback and with which I have to disagree--unless I misunderstood what Dr. McDougall was saying:

"Green, yellow and orange nonstarchy perishable vegetables contain only small quantities of starch. Their most important role is to contribute flavor, texture, color, and aroma to your starch-based meals. They offer a bonus in the additional nutrients (such as vitamin A and C) that come along for the ride."

This makes those nourishing foods with thousands of phyto chemicals seem as unimportant as the sprig of parsley chefs use to decorate a plate. I think vegetables other than starches are more than decoration for the dinner plate. If our ancestors gathered and farmed starches it was because they recognized that they sustained life and were easy to store and thus they were assured of a reliable food supply. Vegetables, especially leafy greens do not store well especially without refrigeration but that doesn't mean that they are not superior foods and, as far as nutrition is concerned, have to take a back seat to starches.

Didi

[patty]

There were a couple of sentences in The Starch Solution that took me aback and with which I have to disagree--unless I misunderstood what Dr. McDougall was saying:

"Green, yellow and orange nonstarchy perishable vegetables contain only small quantities of starch. Their most important role is to contribute flavor, texture, color, and aroma to your starch-based meals. They offer a bonus in the additional nutrients (such as vitamin A and C) that come along for the ride."

This makes those nourishing foods with thousands of phyto chemicals seem as unimportant as the sprig of parsley chefs use to decorate a plate. I think vegetables other than starches are more than decoration for the dinner plate. If our ancestors gathered and farmed starches it was because they recognized that they sustained life and were easy to store and thus they were assured of a reliable food supply. Vegetables, especially leafy greens do not store well especially without refrigeration but that doesn't mean that they are not superior foods and, as far as nutrition is concerned, have to take a back seat to starches.

Didi

Just to clarify for myself I looked up to see in what context the sentences were used. The sentences prior to the ones quoted indicate to myself, Dr. McDougall is talking about satiety. I don't think he is saying fruits and green and yellow veggie's nutrients are taking a backseat to starches. They take a backseat to satiety.

Fruits offer quick-burning energy mostly in the form of simple sugars, but little of that slow-burning, sustaining starch. As a result, fruits alone won’t satisfy our appetites for very long. Green, yellow, and orange nonstarchy perishable vegetables contain only small quantities of starch. Their most important role is to contribute flavor, texture, color, and aroma to your starch-based meals. They offer a bonus in the additional nutrients (such as vitamin A and C) that come along for the ride.

And this is for myself a extremely important point. In "The End of Overeating" Dr. Kessler shares the hypereater is addicted to the combination of sugar, salt and oil. The hypereater's brain doesn't release the same amount of endorphins as the "normal" eater. The food industry knows this and markets for the hypereater. He shares about the woman who markets Cinnabon, prior to becoming a success, she was bulimic. Making money releases endorphins:) We know that from the the food industry and medical industry transferring their metabolic dollar/fat&oil back and forth at our expense .

In Jeff Novick's Calorie Density Chart below, he shares if a persons stays in the 550 or less range they will lose weight. In understanding starch equates to satiety, it allows the person to eat a "normal" amount of veggie and fruits as Dr. McDougall shares they alone won't satisfy the appetite. We subconsciously eat the same amount of weight of food daily, the subconscious becomes conscious. How great is that? 95% of our day is run on our subconscious. What happens to the cortisol? Our needs are met with a starch.. the fruit and veggies follow. Service is the new addiction, reaching out to someone who is still suffering. There is no greater high.




Mahalo for questioning... you have a wonderful ability to take the viewer to the next place. Aloha, patty





.

[didi]

Well put Patty. It is true that smaller volumes of starches offer more satiety than small volumes of green and yellow vegetables and I do not disagree that starches are great for feeding families too. However, for myself, the reason I eat green and yellow vegetables is not for the aroma and color but for the nutrients. When I eat a salad, I make a giant bowlful of leafy greens and other raw vegetables and some beans. It is very satiating (and I only use about half a cup of beans) and filled with nutrients. But if you are restricting your raw and cooked vegies to a spot on the plate then I agree that that isn't enough to fill you up.

It is much more expensive to eat Fuhrman than McDougall but that doesn't mean that if you can afford it you are not being well nourished with the "greens and beans" way of eating. Especially since nowadays to gather our food we just have to stop in at the local market so hunting and gathering is very efficient and we don't expend very many calories doing it so (other than the cost) it is more calorically economical to eat vegies (where it wouldn't have been in other times.)

P.S. After several months without, I just bought a new refrigerator. I surely was glad to have potatoes and oatmeal and canned corn and beans which didn't need refrigeration. And daily shopping at the supermarket down the street provided the vegetables and greens.

Didi

[Lesliec1]

Dr. McD's program seems like it was made for people like me! After reading some of Furhman, I thought OMG, I hope he isn't the one I must follow because that will certainly be a failure. He represented deprivation and too many diets I had tried and failed at in the past. (Doesn't he say "Salad is the main dish."? Oh heck no! Not for me it aint.)

I do think Furhman materials are valuable inspiration to eat more veggies, which i need. But his plan is much more difficult and too expensive.

I love Dr. McD's plan because it's easy, cheap and most of all, the one I can actually do. I also think he's an AMAZING person for putting his program free on the web. (Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't he the only one who does that? Except for maybe Dr. Barnard.) I bought The Starch Solution after being on his program but in truth you never have to pay him a penny if you don't want to.

[Katydid]

Speaking of Dr. Fuhrman and vegetables, check out his recent article on cruciferous vegetables and cancer prevention on the HuffPost:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joel-fuhr ... 24965.html

Kate