The China Study: What’s the Controversy?

I’m re-reading The China Study for the second time. It’s actually been a few years, so much of what I’m reading is eye-opening. I mean, it further solidifies my food choices. You read stuff, then you forget about it. This is why it is essential to keep educating and re-educating yourself.

I firmly believe that we have the power the create what we want in our lives. This belief applies to all aspects of my life, but especially diet, where I’ve learned that I hold the key to my health: what I put on my plate as well as what I don’t put on my plate.

A lot of people, myself included, have thrown their hands up in despair when they first start reading about anything that has to do with nutrition. I think the following excerpt from Dr. Dean Ornish explains why we don’t need to just give up:

Many people are confused by the conflicting information they hear. For
example, first they are told, “Margarine is better than butter.” Then,
“Uh-oh–margarine isn’t so good either; too many trans fatty acids.”
“High-protein diets are good.” “Low-protein diets are good.” People often
get exasperated: “These damn doctors, they can’t make up their minds,
just bring out the bacon and eggs and quit worrying about it!”
News media report on what’s new, and they like controversy. There can be a hundred studies showing for example, that a diet high in fat and animal protein is
unhealthful, but if a new study comes out purporting that a high-fat diet is
good for you, often it makes headlines, however poorly designed the study might
be.
After reviewing the scientific literature, however, if becomes clear
that the evidence is mostly consistent, not controversial. There is more
scientific evidence than ever that switching from a high-fat diet rich in
animal protein and simple carbohydrates such as sugar to a whole-foods,
plant-based diet high in complex carbohydrates provides a double
benefit: You significantly reduce your intake of disease-promoting
substances such as cholesterol, saturated fat, oxidants, and increase your
intake of protective food substances. (p. xv, The Food Revolution,
John Robbins)

Another one I hear is: I just don’t know what to believe, there is so much controversy. T.C. Campbell tells about Dr. John McDougall’s experience as a medical doctor going against the grain and using diet first as the method to cure chronic diseases such as heart disease, high cholesterol, ect.:

In [the medical] environment, diet was considered quackery. John would ask,
“Doesn’t diet have something to do with heart disease?” and his colleagues
would tell him that the science was controversial. John continued to read
the scientific research and to talk to his colleagues and only became even
more baffled. “When I looked at the literature, I couldn’t find the
controversy. It was absolutely clear what the literature said.”
Through those years, John came to understand why so many physicians claimed diet was controversial: “The scientist sitting down at the breakfast table and in the one
hand he has a paper that says that cholesterol will rot your arteries and kill
you, and in the other hand he has a fork shoveling bacon and eggs into his
mouth, and he says, ‘There’s something confusing here. I’m confused.’ And
that’s the controversy. That’s all it is.” (p. 330-331, The China Study)

It’s sometimes discouraging to see all of the misinformation out there. The sickness, the despair, the confusion. I can honestly say, through my line of work (fitness education) and in my day to day relations I come across people daily who are experiencing the negative effects of all this so-called controversy. No doubt people are confused, and some people may just plain not know some very basics of nutrition (fruits and veggies good, fried foods not so good). What I really think it comes down to though, as they say, is that bad habits die hard, and most people just don’t want to give up some really entrenched ways of living and thinking, no matter if it will eventually prematurely shorten their life or severely limit their current and future quality of life.


Comments