Comments on: Banting’s Letter on Corpulence

By: Jimmy Moore

Jimmy Moore — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 16:04:52 +0000

What’s most amazing is Banting simply thought through this introspective journey by using some good old fashioned common sense and then applied it. Whereas the so-called “experts” of the day insisted on sticking with the insanity of recommending less and less calories while people got fatter and fatter.

Yep, sounds a WHOLE LOT like 2007 to me, Dr. Mike! THANK YOU for sharing Banting’s writings because it arms us low-carbers with documentation that low-carb works and has been for well over a century!

It’s worked a lot longer than that if you believe the Paleolithic and paleopathology data.

Cheers–

MRE

By: Janet (a different one)

Janet (a different one) — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 07:07:08 +0000

Like Bart, I love the language of that time. I have a cookery book from that period (Modern Cookery for Private Families by Eliza Acton), and find it captivating just to read – though I do cook from it, too (excellent steak pudding). Sadly, I don’t have an original copy, just the modern facsimile reprint, but it’s still worth reading.

Thanks for the reminder about Banting. I’d read his book when I did my initial raft looking into low carb, but hadn’t thought of him for a while.

Glad you enjoyed it.

By: bart

bart — Sat, 25 Aug 2007 12:46:54 +0000

Thank you Dr Eades! What a joy it is to read this letter. Apart from the actual very interesting content and merit, the language is simply magnificent. Now my head is filled with quotes waiting to be unleashed on my friends, who, when that happens, will presumably simply reply with: “oh, how quaint”.

That’s why I wanted to scan and post the book. There is something about reading that language on those yellowed pages that makes it all that much better.

Cheers–

MRE

By: simon Fellows

simon Fellows — Fri, 24 Aug 2007 19:45:57 +0000

Yessum they were not one and the same

By: simon fellows

simon fellows — Fri, 24 Aug 2007 17:26:05 +0000

grandfather i meant

By: simon fellows

simon fellows — Fri, 24 Aug 2007 17:25:46 +0000

Cos my great great Granfather was Dr Christopher Peacock something of an amateur medical historian, who also went to Kings Canterbury where i recall Harvey went.

Are you sure you’re not confusing your William Harvey’s? There was a famous William Harvey and the William Harvey who treated Banting. The two were not the same.

By: Hellistile

Hellistile — Fri, 24 Aug 2007 14:20:15 +0000

Dr. Mike:
You and Dave above talk about Banting being scorned without having scientific back-up.

I’ve started rereading Protein Power where you state that in 1996 Dr. Mary Dan and yourself went to a conference where it was admitted by researchers and doctors that low fat diets didn’t work, etc., etc. and where you also quoted that statistically in the US fat consumption in the 70’s and 80’s decreased by 25% and yet all the so-called diseases that were blamed on fat consumption were sky-rocketing, only proves the point that hear-say, anecdotal, or genuine statistical data is of no consequence to those who minds are encased in “bozone.”

I don’t know how Dr. Mary Dan and yourself, being in that field, have the patience to have to deal with the opposition, and I understand your frustration when you write articles like the one you did on Jane Brody. Not only is it enlightening to us readers, but very therapeutic for you in turn.

I don’t know if it was enlightening to readers, but I can assure you it was therapeutic for me.

Cheers–

MRE

By: Kevin

Kevin — Fri, 24 Aug 2007 13:45:20 +0000

Slightly O/T, but related. One of the things I noticed about his diet is dry toast, and a few other carby items. The reason I mention this is a conversation I had recently with a couple of grad students. (one of the benefits of living near several universities is you often get waited on by chatty grad students.) They mentioned a threshold for carb intake and bio- marker improvement that was part of study they were helping with. Apparently they were finding a very narrow range of 130-150g/carb/day beyond which “most” people showed no further bio-marker improvement by continuing to lower their carb intake. But that at more than 200g/carb/day many folks results got worse quickly. I just thought it was interesting.

Interesting, yes, but accurate no. The medical literature is full of studies of people who have improved all kinds of biomarkers by reducing carbs below the 130-150 gram threshold.

Cheers–

MRE

By: gallier2

gallier2 — Fri, 24 Aug 2007 08:51:29 +0000

A propos 19th century paper you should look into the history of hemp, a similar scam of gigantic proportion. Paper was made of hemp, cotton (euro notes are still made out of cotton) or linen until the “invention” of wood pulp paper that needed a lot of chemicals to be produced (sulfuric acid to soften the fibre, chlorine for bleaching etc.). Then look who lobbied to tax hemp out of existence and invented even the marihuana propaganda: Hearst, DuPont and other industrials.
You can read on this at
http://www.jackherer.com/
It might be a bit exagerated on the virtues of (indutrial) hemp, but it is a real eye opener (on the scale of the lie we live in).

Hi gallier2–

Good to hear from you; it’s been a while.

I didn’t realize when I made this post that I was going to get such an education on the history of paper making.

Thanks for the link.

Cheers–

MRE

By: simon fellows

simon fellows — Fri, 24 Aug 2007 03:00:46 +0000

Sir Bantings physician was Jewish by birth, rearing yet not practise and perhaps this might explain the injunction about pork ?

He didn’t ‘dig on swine, baby’

And how do you know that William Harvey was Jewish by birth. If so, that would account for the no-swine admonition. But is it really true?

Cheers–

MRE