Rant

[Paleowoman]

I was looking through Borders Bookstore this afternoon and saw a book called "Eat to Live" by a guy named Joel Fuhrman, MD. I started browsing through it and in a section where he critiques other diet/lifestyle plans -- he slams Protein Power along with Atkins and The Zone Diet as dangerous and cancer-promoting. I just went to his website www.diseaseproof.com (http://www.diseaseproof.com) and see more anti-Atkins stuff. Why can't these vegans just promote their own plans without slamming other plans? One thing I used to respect about Dr. Atkins was that he never had to resort to slamming vegetarianism. He would say if it works for you, fine -- but if not, here is another way. This Fuhrman fellow advocates a mostly "beans and greens diet" -- that's his phrase. I couldn't eat that way because I have autoimmune thyroid condition and those are the items that contain the most potent thyroid inhibitors. I happen to enjoy greens and all legumes tremendously -- but during a stint as a vegan when I was much younger, I looked and felt like hell. I was thin, but continually tired with hair loss etc and I was eating tons of beans and steamed greens. My vegetarian doc at the time finally convinced me to add animal protein to my diet because he said that it was obvious that my body wasn't metabolizing plant protein well. He said he'd lost several vegetarian patients when he told them to add animal protein back to their diets. They got furious because he himself was a vegetarian but he was also honest -- and he said that when he saw that some people just do not feel well on a vegetarian regime - they should add animal protein. I wasn't a vegan for ethical reasons -- just because I'd read McDougal, Pritikin etc and thought that it would be best for health. Maybe Fuhrman's plan does help some people -- fine -- but why resort to slamming a dead man (Atkins) who isn't around to defend himself???

[James L]

He also has a Web site called www.drfuhrman.com

He's also written a book about fasting, and a reviewer of that book at Amazon.com claims that, This book has a few very critical pieces of information (e.g. never eat between zero and 1200 calories because above 1200 calories you have enough carbohydrates -> glocose for your brain, and at zero calories your brain converts to ketosis and has enough glucose, but between 0 and 1200 calories your brain and organs compete for cabohydrates and you can easily damage your internal organs.)
Such a "magic" range of 0-1200 doesn't make much sense to me. My understanding is that one of the ideas behind therapeutic fasting is that the strong cells survive (whether in the brain or anywhere else in the body) while the weak and diseased cells lose out and die, to be recycled by the stronger and healthier cells.

I suspect that PP/PPLP is more scientifically-based than is Dr. Fuhrman's approach to nutrition.

[cmcole]

People are different.
They respond differently to various menu/dietary plans.
To "preach" one to the detriment of others is only self-proclamation, and not very professional, in my opinion.

Each menu impacts people differently. What worked for him (obviously) does not work for you. What worked/works for me may not work for you, either. Each person needs to improvise/adapt and choose what is best for your own health and well-being.

That's why a plan with guidelines rather than strict "you MUST do it this way" is better. I believe both PP and Atkins have that goal in mind (the guidelines rather than the "must"). Yes, there are specific types of rules that you need to adhere to in order to make it work, but that does not mean that you have to eat something that you would normally not choose for allergic or personal reasons - you just have to adapt the menu to your own circumstances.

[Gabriel Guzman]

Unfortunately, freedom of publishing also comes at a price sometimes. There is no law against published idiocy.

[LisaS]

if you are going to be a vegan, I think Furhman is more acceptable than Ornish or McDougal. He has less emphasis on starches and grains. Rule of thumb - (working up to) 1 lb. cooked veg per day, 1 lb raw veg per day. In fact Fuhrman "allows" animal products - he just limits them. So he has a huge emphasis on phytonutrients in fruits and non-starchy veg with animal products allowed. Not a horrible approach - not PP obviously, but not horrible.

[laughingW]

That's what I think too Lisa.

Plus doctors have a different standard laid on them, ethically and legally. I can do and say all sorts of things just for myself, an experiment of one, that does not have the same weight or purpose to it.

but if a guy is convinced (as Fuhrman seems) that animal protein is so bad he may feel compelled to say so.

[bigdawg_SLC]

I guess that I'm such a carnavoir that I never pay any attention to any "vegan" woe. I think that I would shrivel up and die if I didn't have my daily proportion of meat. Yesterday for example, I had the best 10 oz filet of salmon that I've ever had. After a week on the lake, I've had my share of lake trout too. But all in all.... I'm still a steak and (used to be potato) man....

[MeDieViL]

vegan's have more ages in their body, let him die slowly :)