I’ve read most of “The China Study” and I don’t find it to be very compelling. The author doesn’t seem to indicate any mechanisms for his assertion about animal protein and disease risk, except concerning casein and aflatoxin specifically. He also makes questionable claims, such as that carbohydrate has a higher thermic effect of feeding than protein. I do not think his book would hold up to a scientific peer review.
Furthermore, the author appears to be connected to PETA through his membership in a PETA-supported advocacy group. While this doesn’t necessarily detract from the validity of his data, it raises questions about his motivations and biases.
This debate between Cordain and Campbell is a good place to start to understand where this disconnect is coming from.
In particular, people will probably be interested in Cordain’s comments.
For my own $.02, stuff like this kind of pisses me off due to the intellectual dishonesty involved.
Certain people clearly have an agenda against “animal products,” and love to use observational, epidemiological research (which is inherently incapable of differentiating cause from correlate) to indict them. Despite the fact that we have direct, clinically controlled trials which show that LEAN animal sources of protein actually IMPROVE markers of health (including cholesterol profile and CRP).
I hate the term “animal product” in general. By a diet “high in animal product,” you are literally lumping people eating 3 big macs a day with people eating a “bodybuilding” style lean meat + quality carbs (including veggies/fruit) diet. How the fuck much sense does that actually make?
[quote]welch_adamt wrote:
Let’s just assume for a minute that this study is true. Would any T-Nationers give up their high protein diets because of a SLIGHTLY elevated cancer risk. HELL NO, we wouldn’t. I know it’s been said on this site before, but if we wanted to be just healthy then we would all be vegetarians and walk several hours a day.[/quote]
Wow, this myth is still incredibly popular… vegetarianism is actually NOT an over-all healthy lifestyle. We have numerous biological processes in which we need various micronutirents (and macros) in animal proteins and animal products. I urge you to check out work by Stephen Byrnes, PhD, RNCP (Doctor of Naturopathy). Dr. Byrnes thoroughly investigates and contradicts this myth (The Myth of Vegetarianism). He also has some great insite on meat causing cancer which I will post here.
[quote]welch_adamt wrote:
You don’t even have to eat “lean”. Just make sure you eat beef, and lots of it. If you’re worried about a heart attack, high cholesterol, or constipation just have a large (2 cups) bowl of oatmeal everyday. It works great at keeping everything in working order for me.[/quote]
If it’s GRASS-fed beef I would definitely agree. However, large amounts of GRAIN-fed beef is NOT healthy, and in fact, can and does cause health problems. See eatwild.com for a ba-zillion scientific resources.
I’ll add that AGE’s (advanced glycated end-products) cause MAJOR systemic inflammation which in turn can cause MAJOR diseases, including heart disease and cancer. How do you get AGE’s?
A high CARB diet! When most folks refer to high carb, they don’t just mean strickly fruits and veggies - they are talking large amounts of grains, both processed and not.
AGE’s are one definite cause of heart disease and many cancers, and are largely responsible for the mobidity associated with diabetes. Not to mention, high-carb generally means high serum insulin. Hyperinsulinaemia can also cause cancer to accelerate.
Also, why didn’t these studies take into account human anthropology? It’s well founded that our ancestors ate a relatively medium to high protein diet, often low in fruits and veggies, yet their cancer rate appeared to be FAR lower than modern man’s. Sometimes the answer appears when looking backwards, not forwards.
[quote]TopSirloin wrote:
welch_adamt wrote:
Let’s just assume for a minute that this study is true. Would any T-Nationers give up their high protein diets because of a SLIGHTLY elevated cancer risk. HELL NO, we wouldn’t. I know it’s been said on this site before, but if we wanted to be just healthy then we would all be vegetarians and walk several hours a day.
Wow, this myth is still incredibly popular… vegetarianism is actually NOT an over-all healthy lifestyle. We have numerous biological processes in which we need various micronutirents (and macros) in animal proteins and animal products. I urge you to check out work by Stephen Byrnes, PhD, RNCP (Doctor of Naturopathy). Dr. Byrnes thoroughly investigates and contradicts this myth (The Myth of Vegetarianism). He also has some great insite on meat causing cancer which I will post here.
TopSirloin[/quote]
There is research indicating that vegetarians are NOT less likely to get cancer than non-vegetarians, interestingly enough.
Cordain points this out to Campbell in the debate above, and Campbell’s only excuse is that vegetarians still eat dairy.
Dur, okay, meat is this cancer-promoting toxin, but when you remove it completely you end up getting no difference in cancer rates? Because you might still have some milk and cheese?
I think that as long as we are adding or keeping fruit and a good source of fiber to out diet, we should be good to go. Not sure if this matters but they also didnt go into the source of the protein, and the quality. I would agree that a high protein McDonalds diet would increase cancer.
This guys sucks.