Dr. Fuhrman: Not a credible martyr

For those questions and discussions on the McDougall program that don’t seem to fit in any other forum.

Moderators: JeffN, f1jim, John McDougall, carolve, Heather McDougall

Re: Dr. Fuhrman: Not a credible martyr

Postby rickfm » Tue Aug 28, 2012 7:59 am

Dechen wrote:... verbal bitch slapping and cat fighting.

The presentation of, and discussion about, evidence is hardly what I'd call "verbal bitch slapping and cat fighting."

I like to think of myself as a seeker of truth. I think this subject is worth talking about.
~Rick

Mmmm.... cabbage!
Keeping it Simple
User avatar
rickfm
 
Posts: 1555
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 5:13 pm
Location: Spokane, WA

Re: Dr. Fuhrman: Not a credible martyr

Postby veggylvr » Tue Aug 28, 2012 8:08 am

I am no expert but I do know that this fighting is doing nothing for people who are considering a plan based diet and, in their research, come across this, this ... verbal bitch slapping and cat fighting.
Ladies, Gentlemen is this really necessary? This is not doing the cause for a plant based diet any good at all.


This question should've been asked of Dr Fuhrman years ago, and maybe we wouldn't be having this discussion. Fuhrman was the one who started smearing other doctors and scaring people. How many were turned away from Dr. McDougall or Dr. Esselstyn due to Fuhrman's implications that they would likely still get cancer, diabetes, or have heart attacks even after adopting a plant-based diet? How many people decided to return or stick to SAD after hearing these unwarranted and inaccurate attacks?

Dr. Fuhrman is doing more to hurt the plant-based community than anyone realized before. No longer can we afford to dismiss his distortions and attacks on some of our finest and most dedicated public advocates.

To bury our heads in the sand and hope everything just goes away and gets peaceful again is fantasy. This is not going to happen now. Fuhrman has gone too far in trying to discredit the programs and reputations of our best doctors and researchers. We can't sit idly by and continue to offer support to "both" sides. There is only ONE side now - the side of truth and accuracy, the side of defending the reputations of those who are truly acting in their patients' and readers' best interests, not just for profit.

To see how Dr. Esselstyn, who takes some of the sickest heart patients under his care, was smeared and blamed for a patient's death over the issue of nuts is infuriating! How can anyone defend that?

If Dr. Fuhrman's intent was to set himself apart, I believe he has succeeded.
User avatar
veggylvr
 
Posts: 923
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 2:56 pm
Location: Florida

Re: Dr. Fuhrman: Not a credible martyr

Postby f1jim » Tue Aug 28, 2012 8:21 am

I believe that the reasons most of our nutritional gurus avoid painting each other with a bad brush is to eliminate this kind of infighting and isolating from the bigger battle going on. Sometimes a thread or two like we have had is a wonderful reminder to all of our nutritional leaders to stay focused on the bigger battle and avoid the infighting. This may be the kind of discussion that has been most needed. It will hopefully be a wake up call to the people manning our nutritional front lines.
f1jim
While adopting this diet and lifestyle program I have reversed my heart disease, high cholesterol, hypertension, and lost 54 lbs. You can follow my story at https://www.drmcdougall.com/james-brown/
User avatar
f1jim
 
Posts: 11349
Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2008 4:45 pm
Location: Pacifica, CA

Re: Dr. Fuhrman: Not a credible martyr

Postby patty » Tue Aug 28, 2012 8:59 am

didi wrote:How can I find the McD/Fuhrman debate on the website?


I think you still can purchase the last Advance Study Weekend video. It runs for $150, if I am not mistaken.

This is the difference between Dr. McDougall and Dr. Fuhrman.

Jeff Nelson wrote:
In order to show nut consumption doesn't promote weight gain, most of the published studies use calorie-restricted diets as a major feature. That is, study subjects are put on a calorie-limiting program, rather than simply adding nuts to their existing diet. (This is important because many plant-based programs are unlimited and do not require calorie counting.) When the same researchers add nuts to diets without calorie restriction, they report weight gain in subjects.


I have to add, creating a new habit is just as hard to give up as a older one. Before I practiced ETL, I had no interest in nuts or seeds. Volume eating decreases with satiety. We are never upset for the reason we think we are. In dealing with life on life terms, it is important to practice HALT, don't get too hungry, angry, lonely or tired. Satiety makes all the difference to be able to respond vs. react. When reacting, the cortisol shuts down the immune system.

Aloha, patty
Last edited by patty on Tue Aug 28, 2012 9:30 am, edited 1 time in total.
patty
 
Posts: 6977
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 11:46 am

Re: Dr. Fuhrman: Not a credible martyr

Postby RichardK » Tue Aug 28, 2012 9:10 am

I like Campbell/Esselstyn/McDougall for the fact that these guys have based their dietary recommendation on very simple observations such as:

1) "As to the risk factors in predominantly rural African populations in southern Africa, the principal dietary sources of energy were in the past and still are to an extent cereals (maize and kaffir corn or sorghum) and their products, wild spinaches, and a variety of legumes (cowpeas, sugar beans, Jugo beans), along with relatively low intakes of most vegetables and fruits and infrequent consumption of small quantities of milk and meat".

"Serum cholesterol levels of rural Africans in the past ranged from about 3.0 to 3.5 mmol/l and remain low
" (116-135mg/dl)

2) The epidemiology of coronary heart disease in South Africa

"Numerous reviews, past and present, have emphasised the rarity of coronary heart disease (CHD) in Africa. In 1960 in Uganda, CHD was considered to be 'extremely rare'.I In 1977, black Africans were described as being 'virtually free of hypertension and CHD'.' In the same year, at Enugu, Nigeria, over a 4-year period, not one patient out of 348 with cardiac disorders had the disease. In 1983, in the UK, a leading article entitled 'British and African hearts' underlined the tremendous contrast between the experience of CHD in the two population groups: From 1988 to 1993 in Zimbabwe, at Parirenyatwa Hospital, the main referral centre for the country, there was an annual average of 6 black patients with acute myocardial infarction.' Even at present, as concluded in a comprehensive review compiled in Nigeria,6 'CHD is still rare ... despite its increased incidence in recent years.' This rarity applies particularly to rural dwellers, as recently noted in Tanzania.'"

".....Soweto (which now has a population of 3 - 4 million), according to records of the Department of Cardiology at Baragwanath Hospital (3 200 beds), 35 blacks were diagnosed with CHD in 1992,51 in 1993, and 62 in 1994. However, of the latter number only 36 were Sowetans; the rest lived elsewhere.I' Clearly CHD remains very uncommon in urban blacks in South Africa. To afford perspective, it could be asked how uncommon CHD is in urban blacks, compared with its occurrence in Western populations? Of the population of Soweto, almost all attend Baragwanath Hospital when serious illness occurs. If it is assumed that all the 36 patients with CHD mentioned ultimately died from the disease, CHD would be responsible for only about 0.2% of the roughly 20000 deaths occurring annually in Soweto, an extremely low proportion even allowing for uncertainties. In Europe, in the Seven Countries Study,16 for those in the Mediterranean countries and inland the age-standardised 25-year CHD mortality percentages were 4.7% and 7.7%, respectively. The proportions reported for countries in Northern Europe and for the USA were far higher, namely 16.0% and 20.3%, respectively. These comparisons with Western populations underline the very low occurrence of CHD in urban blacks
".

The epidemiology of coronary heart disease in South Africa
CARDIOVASCULAR JOURNAL OF SOUTHERN AFRICA (SAMJ Supplement 1 February 1999) C12

Fuhrman comes from wholly different tradition, natural hygiene, whereas Campbell/Esselstyn/McDougall come from the evidence-based science that relies on scientific method. Essentially Fuhrman acts no differently from the clerks working in health stores and pushing their sales pitch. He must compensate the lack of science in his alternative dietary philosophy with a display of messianic self-confidence along with the typical guru attitude.
RichardK
 
Posts: 75
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2012 3:14 am

Re: Dr. Fuhrman: Not a credible martyr

Postby VeggieSue » Tue Aug 28, 2012 9:56 am

didi wrote:How can I find the McD/Fuhrman debate on the website?


That's one of the few videos from that ASW that's still behind the pay-wall, but Lani does an excellent job in her transcript of how it went down.

http://www.lanimuelrath.com/diet-nutrition/plant-strong-diet/mcdougall-vs-fuhrman-notes-for-you-from-the-great-plant-based-doctors-debate/
User avatar
VeggieSue
 
Posts: 3505
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2006 3:34 pm
Location: gritty urban NJ

Re: Dr. Fuhrman: Not a credible martyr

Postby ParsleyPatch » Tue Aug 28, 2012 9:58 am

How can I find the McD/Fuhrman debate on the website?

You can see it here on YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdxVfi632Xw
One who is forever grateful to Dr. McDougall for showing me the way to optimal health!
User avatar
ParsleyPatch
 
Posts: 535
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 9:45 pm

Re: Dr. Fuhrman: Not a credible martyr

Postby ParsleyPatch » Tue Aug 28, 2012 10:06 am

You can see it here on YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdxVfi632Xw

Sorry, this is a different one, from the past, maybe six years ago? Didn't realize someone was looking for the ASW one from recently. However, it's yet another example of how Dr. McDougall has had to put up with Fuhrman all these years. And the debate is interesting to watch and listen to. You get the voice inflections, facial expressions, etc.
One who is forever grateful to Dr. McDougall for showing me the way to optimal health!
User avatar
ParsleyPatch
 
Posts: 535
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 9:45 pm

Re: Dr. Fuhrman: Not a credible martyr

Postby ParsleyPatch » Tue Aug 28, 2012 10:34 am

This makes my blood boil every time I watch it and I don't know how Dr. McDougall can keep his cool. Oh yeah, it's because he has CLASS.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdxVfi632Xw

The video (from the 2006 Expo) is 13 mins., 26 seconds long. At 6 mins., 30 seconds, Dr. McDougall says to the audience: "You've got to get this straight because I know a lot of you are confused. There are 1.73 billion Asians and not a single one of them is fat living on a diet based on rice.

"I went to Peru. The only fat people were working in restaurants feeding Americans. They (the Peruvians) are living on potatoes. You don't have to get all that sophisticated with all of these different little niche theories. A starch-based diet with fruits and vegetables has never failed a population of billions of people."

Furhman's response: "I think that's kind of silly."

Furhman then continues to bash "white rice" and starches in general, making it sound like the McDougall Plan is all white rice and not much else!

Arrrrgggghhhhhh!!!!!! :shock:
One who is forever grateful to Dr. McDougall for showing me the way to optimal health!
User avatar
ParsleyPatch
 
Posts: 535
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 9:45 pm

Re: Dr. Fuhrman: Not a credible martyr

Postby Adrienne » Tue Aug 28, 2012 10:37 am

The debate that Mark refers to occurred this past February. It is no longer available on Dr McD's website to order or to watch for those who ordered it 6 months ago.

Regarding Lani's article, she was wrong about what Dr F said about beans. See my earlier comment for his quote about agreeing with Dr McD on limiting beans.

Also it's worth noting that not only did he say he also promotes a high carbohydrate or high starch diet, as Mark noted, but Dr F actually began the debate that statement! And he finds it insulting that the majority came to the conclusion that his recommendations are very much similar to Dr McDougall's? Makes no sense.

Also Lani quoted Dr F as saying the optimal diet included vegan with b12 iodine and DHA. However, I remember him saying DHA only to be supplemented if levels showed deficiency. But judging by his recent blog post on omega 3 fatty acids he seems to indicate that we should all supplement if we don't eat fish regardless of whether or not blood test showed a deficiency. He repeatedly fails to mention that people would likely have more DHA if they limited or avoided nuts and seeds, the majority of which are high in omega 6.
Adrienne
 
Posts: 1142
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2007 3:26 pm

Re: Dr. Fuhrman: Not a credible martyr

Postby nurseratchit » Tue Aug 28, 2012 10:52 am

Dechen wrote:I am no expert but I do know that this fighting is doing nothing for people who are considering a plan based diet and, in their research, come across this, this ... verbal bitch slapping and cat fighting.
Ladies, Gentlemen is this really necessary? This is not doing the cause for a plant based diet any good at all.


Does the means justify the end? Fuhrman's pseudoscience makes the rest of the plant-based doctors who base their diets on evidence-based research look bad...so when/if he goes down, unfortunately he will drag many in the plant-based community with him. It is Fuhrman's ego and actions that are harming the plant-based cause, not intellectual inquery.
“Tell me, what is it you plan to do
with your one wild and precious life?”
― Mary Oliver


Image
nurseratchit
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 6:37 am
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Dr. Fuhrman: Not a credible martyr

Postby Norm » Tue Aug 28, 2012 11:38 am

Dechen wrote:I am no expert but I do know that this fighting is doing nothing for people who are considering a plan based diet and, in their research, come across this, this ... verbal bitch slapping and cat fighting.
Ladies, Gentlemen is this really necessary? This is not doing the cause for a plant based diet any good at all.
Sometimes getting to the truth of a matter requires getting a bit dirty. I'm seeing allegations being made against Dr. McDougall that are flat out false and wrong. If it is true that Dr. Furhman is in fact making such accusations, it does nobody any good to just ignore it and move along just for the sake of not getting muddy. Further, if the allegations being made against Dr. Furhman are true, I want to know. We all need to know whom we can believe and trust.

Dr. McDougall has long claimed that the truth is simple. I believe he is correct. My recovery in health is 1000% dependant upon that premise. I've based everything about my personal recovery to health program around the simple notion that it all boils down to centering my diet around starches and adding in some fruit and vegetables on the side. The results have been dramatic.

I'm not opposed to anyone else having different opinions about a plant based diet. But if there is the personal attacks and negativity towards Dr. McDougall that are supposedly coming from "our friends", then you betchya I want to know about it. You should too. Hopefully it can be done without getting any muddier than needed, and there is certainly no need to pile on our own dirt just for the sake of piling on our own dirt. But the bottom line is I want to know what's going on here.

-Norm
Norm
 

Re: Dr. Fuhrman: Not a credible martyr

Postby Melinda » Tue Aug 28, 2012 11:51 am

Everything that Dr. McDougall and Dr. Esselstyn says rings true for me and I have the greatest respect for them. I don't know all that much about Dr. Fuhrman except his 'toxic hunger' concept has always seemed false, at least for me. I think it is quite a stretch. Personally for me, I only feel 'cravings' in my mouth or throat, while I feel true hunger as my stomach growling, feeling empy and very mild contractions - not to say that others may not experience it differently.
I am grateful for Mark Simon's post.
Last edited by Melinda on Tue Aug 28, 2012 11:52 am, edited 2 times in total.
Melinda
 
Posts: 2240
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 1:19 pm
Location: BC Canada

Re: Dr. Fuhrman: Not a credible martyr

Postby rickfm » Tue Aug 28, 2012 11:51 am

ParsleyPatch wrote:Furhman's response: "I think that's kind of silly."

That video was my first exposure to Dr. Fuhrman. He didn't impress me.

Norm wrote:Dr. McDougall has long claimed that the truth is simple. ...it all boils down to centering my diet around starches and adding in some fruit and vegetables on the side.

Yep. Dr. McDougall appeals to my common sense detector.
~Rick

Mmmm.... cabbage!
Keeping it Simple
User avatar
rickfm
 
Posts: 1555
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 5:13 pm
Location: Spokane, WA

Re: Dr. Fuhrman: Not a credible martyr

Postby Dechen » Tue Aug 28, 2012 11:57 am

I love Dr McDougall's starch-is-key approach and I guess some truths about nutrition must be stated but I guess it is the unpleasantness that goes with this bit of a ding-dong. :-(
https://mostlyfatfreemcdougall.wordpress.com/
User avatar
Dechen
 
Posts: 1236
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 5:27 am
Location: Ashton-in-Makerfield, Wigan (halfway between Liverpool and Manchester) Lancashire, UK

PreviousNext

Return to The Lounge

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests



Welcome!

Sign up to receive our regular articles, recipes, and news about upcoming events.