Your making yourself look more ignorant with every post you write.
Why don’t you think a little before you spout out information that you know NOTHING about?
Stop reading all the quack sites and instead take some time to read REAL science.
Like I’ve said before, I know where you’re coming from. I used to be a health-food freak too. But over time I have learned that there is a balance in the middle. You need to find that balance before you kill someone with your dumb-ass recommendations.
Rancid and deodorization… I’m not even going to go there again. Wait for my article to come out regarding this at strong-research.com.
Eric: My suggestion is to discontinue trying to explain anything to this jackass, he is simply not worth your time and contributes absolutely nothing of value to this forum.
Thanks for the reply. For the record, I don’t particularly agree with Neil and if I agree it’s entirely coincidental. I have no interest in W.A.P being right or wrong. All I want is the truth.
With that said, I really don’t know what you mean by “can of whoop ass”. I really see little purpose in denigrating people save for angering them. I don’t know Cass personally, all I’ve seen is that she was knowledgeable and helpful. But that in itself means next to nothing to me. With hundreds upon hundreds of doctors, and specialists (and many many many more students) in various health fields, having certain qualifications means little to a layman like myself.
What I want to know is this:
To what extent is the information on the W.A.P site true? Forget the site or the researchers behind it. Their claims: are they true or false? Or somewhere in between? And why? I’d love to see an article on whether saturated fat/dietary cholesterol is healthy or not and in what quantities it is. An unbiased look at the evidence is all I want. I can understand your disgust with the W.A.P site; I’m not contradicting you here. Looks to me like many people would find such an article interesting. Or is it simply a case of the evidence out there being to scarce to draw conclusions yet?
Magnus ? You’re right; it isn’t worth my time. I have no desire to play Neil’s game.
Zulu ? Thanks for clarifying. The “can of whoop ass” comment was more of an expression than an attempt at denigration. I simply feel that Cass did an outstanding job of articulating her viewpoint, which (unlike Neil’s) is supported by years of education and research. And, just for the record, Cass is an absolute sweetheart; for her to get as frustrated with someone as she did with Neil speaks volumes about his approach to making his opinion known.
Regarding Dr. Price, I wouldn’t completely dismiss his site. In fact, I think that there’s a fair amount of good stuff there, particularly in regards to soy and the WAP’s commitment to testing the nutrient content of certain foods. As I alluded to above, I do have a problem with the misrepresentation of facts on the site. I’d also like to see more of the assertions validated with scientific references. Not having references is fine for people like Neil who believe that scientific integrity “doesn’t mean shit,” but it doesn’t sit so well with those of us that understand first-hand the value of a well-structured study. Incidentally, Neil’s second paragraph made absolutely no sense. Science dictates theory. Theory drives practice. Practice prevents and cures diseases; corrects problems; and makes people leaner, faster, stronger, and more muscular. No study is stupid. Just because it doesn’t apply to you doesn’t mean that it won’t potentially have far-reaching implications well beyond your comprehension.
That said, take what you can from Dr. Price’s site. And, as always, I’ll defer to the resident Phat Fat expert, Cass. I do, however, feel that your time would be better spent at PubMed than at a site that proclaims:
“Dr. Price’s research demonstrated that humans achieve perfect physical form and perfect health generation after generation only when they consume nutrient-dense whole foods and the vital fat-soluble activators found exclusively in animal fats.”
You are making a HUGE mistake by just totally dismissing research. Research is going to be the ONLY way that “alternative and complementary medicine” will EVER be accepted. The only thing that separated alternative from mainstream medicine is research. I am not saying that all alternative medicine is bunk? Quite the contrary, I’m saying that there is some that holds promise.
The problem with so many alternative medicine practicioners is that they refuse to put their methods up to scientific inquiry. When they do perform “research” it is usually full of methodology mistakes, not subject to peer review, and not published in a scientifically respected journal. In fact it is pretty common that alternative medicine “journals” are actually just disguised marketing tools and product catalogs.
This is not a matter of academic elitism as you might be thinking, but a quest for truth. If these alternative medicine practicioners are so sure of the efficacy of their methods then they should be jumping at the chance to put them up to scrutiny because that would only show that they worked.
Another problem with some alternative medicine people is that in their “studies” they define what “cured” is, then they claim these high cure rates in comparison to mainstream medical therapies. I can think of one instance where a “doctor” (Hulda Clark) claimed that her patients were cured of cancer based on the results of a blood test. There were no biopsies ever done.
Neil, I know where you are coming from. I grew up reading books by Paul Bragg and his type. I have several alternative medicine books and magazines in my room right now. I also learned over the years to be a bit more critical of what I read, as it’s not always truth. My advice to you is the same as it was before, get grounded in some real science then learn to take a critical look at EVERYTHING you read, whether it’s on t-mag, or the New England Journal of Medicine.
I’m not talking about “alternative medicine.” That is something entirely different from what I am talking about. Dr. Price was not into “alternative medicine.”
I’m about eating good food. That’s it. I’m not saying this or that herb cures this or that disease. That is something far different, and with that, I agree about those types of “therapies” needing some scientific info to back it up.
But eating healthy food is eating healthy food…not scientific medicine. Eating natural foods is the way to go. I’d love for someone to disagree with this.
Now, what causes fat to raise T levels? Doesn’t the fact that it does that say something about its importance?
I remember hearing about a study that said soda can prevent cavities due to the preservatives in it. So does that mean that we should drink soda? Hell no. This is like what Cass is saying about Canola oil. Why try to get benefit from a crappy food (if you can call it that)? There are a million other oils that would be better than something like Canola. It’s downright bad advice.
Yes, I will disregard scientific information when what is being said is just stupid. That’s common sense.
But yall can go supplement with rancid oils if you want. I’ll stick with my unrancid cod liver oil and coconut oil.
I like science, but there is no getting around the fact that Paul Bragg lived to be 95. Jack LaLanne is pushing 90 and still training two hours a day and hawking his juicer on television!
I want to eat what those two did and the countless others like them.
I think a good scientist would call this “empirical” evidence!
“It all falls into the biomedical realm. When you said eating “healthy” you automatically bring health and disease prevention claims into the mix.”
I’ll let you guys wait for all the scientific studies showing exactly what’s good and bad. In the mean time, I’ll continue to eat what humans have been eating for a long time. There’s evidence that this diet is successful…I mean, we’re here, aren’t we?
Humans can survive some pretty harsh conditons Neil. So, I don’t know what you’re trying to get across. I’m sure I could survive on only doughnuts and water if I had too.
deezlodawg…if that was true…then all the masses of people who drink diet sodas and consume aspartame would be either blind or dead…but even after all these years of people consuming aspartame, no ill health effects have ever been diagnosed or documented by any health care professionals…and to Neil…a balance of nutrients will always be healthier than completely excluding one in favor of excess consumption of another…it’s all about proper balance and moderation…and even though saturated fat increases T…more is not necessarily better and a diet with excessive saturates will not push T any higher than a diet with more moderate amounts of saturates…there is a place in our diet for all types of fats and each has it’s importance…including Omega 6’s…health will suffer if Omega 6 is deficient (as it is an EFA also) just as much as if Omega 3’s, saturates or any of the other types of oils found in nature are deficient. I agree natural whole foods are best in general but the only bad oil is hydrogenated…all natural oils will have some type of benefit but excess consumption of any one (including Omega 3’s) is detrimental…you need a balance of all for optimal health
If you eat a balanced natural diet, you’ll be around equal for saturated and monos, and poly’s are usually around the 5% range.
And Jason, YOU might survive on donuts for a while. Maybe. But put yourself back in caveman times. See how long you survive then. And good luck with procreation
