Dr Greger and Dr McDougall

[Jaggu]

Why so hostile?

Donna

I'm frustrated reading about how a 95% diet is fine and then when great results aren't seen well of course it's because they aren't 100%... this is not being honest with people, imo.

The hypothesis that if the data doesn't back up improved life among vegans/vegetarians/healthy dieters then they must not be eating healthy diet is dangerous one. It would be unscientific to extrapolate like that.

It is possible that most vegans/vegetarians may not be following healthy diet, in that case we should say that we don't have good data on efficacy of healthy diet as not many people follow it. Well, that may even bring a bigger question i.e. If we didn't have many people who ate healthy diet and hence didn't have data to back up the assertions, how do we then know what is healthy diet and whether it will produce desired results(optimal health, long life etc)?

[HealthFreak]

I started this whole thread and it has obviously piqued interest. From what I've gathered so far from reading every post, is that there aren't many if any, large studies done in the US comparing people who eat a low fat, whole food, plant based diet against a group eating a SAD diet. I was so blown away by The China Study that I changed my diet immediately. The populations in China that they studied really did eat a healthy plant based diet with a minimal amount of animal protein. They ate that way because they were poor and had no choice.

In the US vegans, vegetarians and SADs all have access to an abundance of junk food so it's hard to track exactly what they eat. What we need are large scale studies on McDougallers and others who truly stick to a plant based low fat diet. Do any of these studies exist?

The confusion for me started with Dr Greger's presentation. Do we know specifically which studies he was talking about? Was he talking about the Seventh Day Adventist studies or some other studies. He seemed to be referring to the "biggest and best studies" in existence.

[starchcurious]

I got the impression that it was the Seventh Day Adventist studies.

[JeffN]

The hypothesis that if the data doesn't back up improved life among vegans/vegetarians/healthy dieters then they must not be eating healthy diet is dangerous one.

Time & time again and again, the data clearly supports that those who follow "healthy eating" guidelines are indeed, healthier. And, the closer they adhere to those guidelines, the healthier they are. That is a very safe and powerful conclusion that has been proven out, over & over.

The problem is that there are many who assume that because someone has become a vegetarians & /or vegan that they are automatically following those same "healthy" guidelines and as these studies have proven, that is not so &, I agree, a dangerous hypothesis.

But there is a very clear distinction between the way you phrased it & the way I did.

Someone should not automatically assume that if they have chosen to become a vegan & /or vegetarian that they will be automatically healthier.

They will be healthier only if they also incorporate those principles/guidelines of healthy living.

The 7th Day Adventist studies are explained and linked in my newsletter.

In Health,
Jeff

[Jaggu]

Someone should not automatically assume that if they have chosen to become a vegan & /or vegetarian that they will be automatically healthier.

In Health,
Jeff

I whole heartedly agree with you there. From my own personal experience I have been vegetarian for last 40 yrs and up untill few months ago thought that I was doing the best and didn't know the science behind healthy and unhealthy food. There was so much room for improvement. So yes, unknowingly you could be bad vegan/vegetarian

The quest still continues... Is there anything you are missing? vegans/vegetarians/meat eaters get heart diease, cancer etc. Is there something else besides what we think we know that is the root cause for these problem? There are many people around the world eat meat/fish/eggs/dairy/oil and they have lived long. Is there anything that has been protecting them or counterbalancing inspite of high fat, high cholesterol diet such as what scientists have lately come to know about B12, homocystein levels etc.

So we also can not ignore the question as to why so many meat eaters live long life? What is the end result difference in healthy and unhealthy dieters?

We have designated some diets as healthy and some as unhealthy, the data/research should back them up whether they are healthy or unhealthy.

[JeffN]

I whole heartedly agree with you there. From my own personal experience I have been vegetarian for last 40 yrs and up untill few months ago thought that I was doing the best and didn't know the science behind healthy and unhealthy food. There was so much room for improvement.

So, what have we learned?

The Good....

What are those things (dietary &/or lifestyle) that contribute to health & longevity that vegans may be doing right?

The Bad....

What are those things (dietary &/or lifestyle) that contribute to disease & increased mortality that vegans may be doing wrong?

I'll begin..

The Bad...

-Smoking
-Excess calories (obesity)
-Inadequate fruit/vegetable intake
-Sedentary Lifestyle
-Exces Alcohol Consumption
- Excess saturated fat (from animal or vegetable sources) intake

In Health,
Jeff

[erin]

if all you did was change from animal meat to faux meat you would improve your diet by leaps and bounds. just take a few minutes one day and compare vegan sausage to animal sausage, vegan chicken nuggets to real chicken nuggets, vegan hamburgers to real hamburgers, vegan lunchmeat to real lunchmeat. the difference in most instances is like 12 grams or more of mostly saturated fat. here's an example:

jimmy dean sausage patties:

Serving Size: 2 patties
Amount per Serving
Calories 240 Calories from Fat 200
% Daily Value *
Total Fat 23g 35%
Saturated Fat 8g 40%
Trans Fat 0g
Cholesterol 50mg 17%
Sodium 610mg 25%
Total Carbohydrate 1g 0%
Dietary Fiber 0g 0%
Sugars 0g
Protein 9g 18%

compared to gardenburger sausage patties:

Serving Size: 1 patty
Amount per Serving
Calories 45 Calories from Fat 23
% Daily Value *
Total Fat 2.5g 4%
Saturated Fat 0g 0%
Trans Fat 0g
Cholesterol 0mg 0%
Sodium 270mg 11%
Total Carbohydrate 3g 1%
Dietary Fiber 2g 8%
Protein 5g 10

i wouldn't say vegans are automatically healthier than sad eaters but it doesn't seem farfetched.

as a side note, the vegans i know who don't eat for health are much trimmer looking than the sad eaters who are equally blase about diet and nutrition.

~erin

[SactoBob]

Some vegans might consider the gardenburger in the above example healthy. But it would not come close to what Jeff or Dr. Esselstyn would recommend for best health. The Gardenburger has more than half of its calories from fat, and six times the recommended sodium.

[erin]

i agree with you sactobob but my point wasn't that the veggie sausage is healthy, just that it is much healthier than animal sausage.

personally, i do include faux meat in my diet occasionally (3-4 times a week) and am still able to keep my total fat ~10%.

~ erin

[xetaprime]

There's this Video that Jeff mentioned, I believe on his blog 'How to live to be 101'.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 5180267912

How do we explain the Sardinians?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/7250675.stm

If we're talking studies of populations, how do we explain this? You can eat an animal based and live to be 100 only if you inter-marry? Not that they all did that. Or did they. Though they have lead very isolated lives so is it that? Is it the wine? I mean, we're not just talking a study of 19 people.

I found it interesting that one centenarian in the video was eating 1200 calories a day- Pictured eating white rice and boiled vegetables. I know what I'm having for dinner

[Nettie]

Some vegans might consider the gardenburger in the above example healthy. But it would not come close to what Jeff or Dr. Esselstyn would recommend for best health. The Gardenburger has more than half of its calories from fat, and six times the recommended sodium.

Yes, and, in order to compare them fairly, you'd have to double the ingredient amounts (in grams) because a "serving size" is listed as only 1 patty instead of 2. So, we'd be looking at 5 grams of fat, and 540 mg sodium for 2 gardenburger patties.

Nettie

[JeffN]

How do we explain the Sardinians?

Good question.

But, not only the Sardinians, but also the Okinawans, and the 7th Day Adventists and those in rural Japanese and the Chinese centenarians.

This is why it is good to not just look at one population but all the long lived populations and see what they have in common. Because if those in Crete are long lived and use olive oil and those in Okinawa are long lived, but do not use olive oil, than it can't be the olive oil. Just as if those in Okinawa use soy but those in Crete don't, than it can't be the soy.

In Health
Jeff

[xetaprime]

But the Sardinians are like, eating like, the anti-diet to McDougall. And the Okinawans may not use olive oil, but lard instead. And if someone can smoke and drink and be "healthy" at 100...

...then what? If you leave the Sardinaians out of the equation, one might conclude less animal protein in our diet may be beneficial. But with them in the equation it makes one wonder if it is animal protein at all and not something else entirely. They also don't count calories which could put a damper on CR

And make no mistake, I am totally enjoying eating potatoes and oatmeal and more veggies and fruits than I ever have- and save an emotional mood/food binge I'm trying whole heartedly to eat whole foods...

but this stuff is whack yo!

Best wishes,
Xeta

[Heretic]

How do we explain the Sardinians?

Good question.

But, not only the Sardinians, but also the Okinawans, and the 7th Day Adventists and those in rural Japanese and the Chinese centenarians.

This is why it is good to not just look at one population but all the long lived populations and see what they have in common. Because if those in Crete are long lived and use olive oil and those in Okinawa are long lived, but do not use olive oil, than it can't be the olive oil. Just as if those in Okinawa use soy but those in Crete don't, than it can't be the soy.

In Health
Jeff

They also seem to use pork and lard in Okinawa, at least according to some (but not all sources). No, not from "The Okinawa Study" book (sorry), from: Deborah Franklyn, "Take a Lesson from the People of Okinawa," Health, September 1996 ) Here is a quote:

Okinawan cuisine, according to gerontologist Kazuhiko Taira, "is very healthy--and very, very greasy," in a 1996 article that appeared in Health Magazine.19 And the whole pig is eaten--everything from "tails to nails." Local menus offer boiled pigs feet, entrail soup and shredded ears. Pork is cooked in a mixture of soy sauce, ginger, kelp and small amounts of sugar, then sliced and chopped up for stir fry dishes. Okinawans eat about 100 grams of meat per day--compared to 70 in Japan and just over 20 in China--and at least an equal amount of fish, for a total of
about 200 grams per day, compared to 280 grams per person per day of meat and fish in America. Lard--not vegetable oil--is used in cooking.

Okinawans also eat plenty of fibrous root crops such as taro and sweet
potatoes. They consume rice and noodles, but not as the main component of the diet. They eat a variety of vegetables such as carrots, white radish, cabbage and greens, both fresh and pickled. Bland tofu is part of the diet, consumed in traditional ways, but on the whole Okinawan cuisine is spicy. Pork dishes are flavored with a mixture of ginger and brown sugar, with chili oil and with "the wicked bite of bitter melon."


( see also http://www.manhealthissue.com/2007/02/o ... -life.html )

Regards,
Stan (Heretic)

[JeffN]

But the Sardinians are like, eating like, the anti-diet to McDougall. And the Okinawans may not use olive oil, but lard instead. And if someone can smoke and drink and be "healthy" at 100...

We shouldnt base our recommendations for optimal health on exceptions. Otherwise lets just use the Inuit and the Masai.

We addressed the lard issue already. The Okiwanas may have used lard, but their total fat intake was 9% and their saturated fat intake was under 4%, So, go ahead and use as much lard as you can as long as you can keep fat under 9% and sat fat under 4%.

Same with the Sardinia and their exceptions.

And lets not be fooled by what they are eating today. It is much worse than they used to eat, getting worse all the time, and they are showing the consequences.

Diabetes Care 27:1623-1629, 2004 Type 1 Diabetes Among Sardinian Children Is Increasing

Mean levels and distribution of some risk factors for atherosclerosis in Sardinia: The ATS-Sardegna survey Journal of Epidemiology, Volume 7, Number 1 / January, 1991

What really matters is what they ate between 1900 and 1960 before the "west" starting influencing them, of which, I have posted that info also. It is nothing like they eat today. And at that time, they were already well in to their 60s if not 70s and it is what will have the biggest influence on their longevity.

In Health
Jeff