RE: Swank diet and MS and the fat wars

[Guest guest]

My Brother-in-Law has MS and has followed the Swank diet for over a year now.

He's looks AWFUL!!! He has no energy - PERIOD! Prior to starting this diet

he swam everyday including many open ocean swims. He hasn't been in a pool

for months and spends a good portion of his day sleeping. On his last visit

here I sent him home with two books in his suitcase - NT and the Cholesterol

Myth.

[Guest guest]

Welcome Carolyn,

ly I am not familiar with Dr/Mr?? Swank. However I am familiar

with the huge amount of contradictive information out there. I can

show you study after study by reasonably reputable people who clearly

demonstrate that the next time you eat a pat of butter you will

instantly die on the spot and if your not careful your arteries will

explode so violently that if your spouse is too close he will be

injured or worse. I can show you the same number of studies that

clearly demonstrate exactly the opposite and your quandy is the same

one every honest person who does their homework faces at one time or

another. Realize I speak to you as a former vegetarian low fat

dude. Do you have any idea how hard it is to convert the patients

you've educated so well into veggie low fat to NT/WAP. Let's just

say its been fun. Just because I'm a professional doesn't exclude me

from all this conflicting information. And any professional who says

they are above it is either lying or just plain foolish. My decision

once and for all in sorting all this out came following

reading " Nutrition and Physical Degeneration " because as an insider

of health care I know exactly how easy it is to make reasearch prove

any point you'd like to prove, which on the face of it makes its

credibility questionable 100% of the time. WAP simply observed what

traditional peoples ate. So quite honestly regardless of what modern

day contrived studies say whether they agree with fat eating or not

they are irrelevant except in the case of possibly deepening our

understanding. However the FACT that traditional peoples have

conducted the most valid experiment of all for thousands of years

should be proof enough to clearly say that anyone who is saying fats

are bad may just make their next statement regarding the flatness of

the earth. Although all the people studied by WAP would work to

highlight, for those who would question the healthfulness of healthy

properly made animal fats I only have two words... MASAI,ESKIMO.

Researchers can take you out of your element and bamboozle you with

tricky words and concepts. However you can avoid these tactics by

not allowing them to surgically remove your common sense. When

someone says healthy fats are bad ... ask yourself " in the greatest

living human nutrition study of all time, how many masai diet of

clogged arteries? " Answer? None.

Carolyn, you're doing great. Keep asking questions and keep

learning, you're on the right track, just don't let them remove your

common sense from the discussion and you'll be fine.

Sincerely,

Dr. Marasco, BS,DC

Cincinnati, Oh

> Hi,

>

> I listened to a radio interview of Roy Swank yesterday (on KBOO in

Portland) and just wanted to get some feedback from you well-informed

folks. I am new to all this, and not a student of nutrition. The

interview left me feeling as I usually do when I hear information

about diet, especially fats: confused, distrustful, exasperated, and

worried about what I am doing to my body. I am frankly blown away at

the " war " out there concerning dietary fats. I have lately been

picking up book after book and just skimming the section on fats...

quite amazing, after reading NT. It is truly incredible the

differences in opinions, even when evaluating the same studies.

>

> I think I may represent a large group of folks who have read NT:

we are very taken with what we read in NT (and in my case my dr

recommended the book to me, so I feel a sense of trust in it) and we

may adopt many of the recommendations. BUT in the back of our minds

some of us are still wondering " is this just yet another opinion that

will be challenged and debunked, or is it close to " the truth? " .

Just my honest feelings here. I generally am very, very excited

about the NT approach and am quite " sold " on it. And I have been

working hard to change my ways. But I guess that being a " layperson "

in the field of nutrition it is hard to defend the NT position as

well as many of you who are more well-informed. Thus, my question

about Swank and your opinions on him.

>

> I haven't even looked at his book, but for those who don't know who

he is here is what I do know: he did a long term study on the

affects of diet on some MS patients. Low levels of fat from animals

(other than fish and vegetables, i.e. olive oil -- notice how I am

avoiding the fat acronyms, they confuse me!) allowed many of the MS

sufferers they followed to live normal and long lives, according to

the study. Okay, so what is up with that? Bad study? It is based

on info he gathered in Norway that showed that those living off their

farms had lots more MS than those living off of the fish at in the

coastal towns.

>

> I am also curious if anyone has written a critique of Sally's book/

Weston Price. I am asking in the spirit of research... I am just

curious to hear what those who disagree with NT have said

specifically about the book. I guess I like to hear the other side,

it helps me learn.

>

> Also, the same radio show host who interviewed Swank will be

interviewing the guy who wrote " The 8 week Cholesterol Cure " (not

sure of authors name) and so once again I am sure I will feel

massively confused! :-) Oh, well, at least I am climbing that

steep learning curve at a steady pace. :-)

>

> P.S. I intend to write a short intro of myself soon and discuss my

own health problems (briefly!). I don't have MS, but I do

(supposedly) have fibromyalgia and have been achy, tired, and in pain

every (* & *%^%# day for six years now. I hope it won't be too off-

topic but I am interested to hear what your opinions are on the NT

diet and fibromyaliga (as well as hypothyroidism).

>

> P.S.S. I am making chicken and rice soup today with lovely stock

which simmered all day yesterday. In fact, I was skimming the stock

as I listened to the Swank interview yesterday!

>

> Thanks

> Carolyn

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Carolyn:

Dr. Swank has been pushing his " no-saturated-fat-for-MS " diet for many

decades, but he has still yet to prove the connection. Just because some

cases of MS correlate with animal fat intake and reduced EFA intake does not

mean that animal fats cause MS. What is likely going on with MS is a

deficiency of EFAs, rather than toxicity of animal fats. You might want to

read my article on MS at my website. I have a small section on the fat

issue.

To my knowledge, no one has critiqued NT, but you can read a half-assed

critique of Weston Price at http://www.quackwatch.com in the section on

" Holistic Dentistry. " I wrote a rebuttal to this drivel in my article on

Price posted at http://www.sumeria.net.

Robbins wrote a critique of Sally and 's soy research at his

website. I don't think much of the critique, however.

Always remember that the diet recommended by NT is based on what people have

historically eaten. Since our ancestors were healthier than us and did not

have diseases like MS, it is reasonable to conclude that that diet is better

for us.

Also do not forget that much of the anti-fat rhetoric comes from people or

health professionals who know jacksh*t about lipids. They are simply

repeating misinformation they heard from someone else, who heard it from

someone else, etc. This ignorance is found at the professional level as

well.

All the best,

Byrnes, PhD, RNCP

http://www.PowerHealth.net

>From: " Carolyn Gutman-Dey " <cgd@...>

>Reply-

>< >

>Subject: Swank diet and MS and the fat wars

>Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 00:49:36 -0000

>

>Hi,

>

>I listened to a radio interview of Roy Swank yesterday (on KBOO in

>Portland) and just wanted to get some feedback from you well-informed

>folks. I am new to all this, and not a student of nutrition. The

>interview left me feeling as I usually do when I hear information about

>diet, especially fats: confused, distrustful, exasperated, and worried

>about what I am doing to my body. I am frankly blown away at the " war " out

>there concerning dietary fats. I have lately been picking up book after

>book and just skimming the section on fats... quite amazing, after reading

>NT. It is truly incredible the differences in opinions, even when

>evaluating the same studies.

>

>I think I may represent a large group of folks who have read NT: we are

>very taken with what we read in NT (and in my case my dr recommended the

>book to me, so I feel a sense of trust in it) and we may adopt many of the

>recommendations. BUT in the back of our minds some of us are still

>wondering " is this just yet another opinion that will be challenged and

>debunked, or is it close to " the truth? " . Just my honest feelings here. I

>generally am very, very excited about the NT approach and am quite " sold "

>on it. And I have been working hard to change my ways. But I guess that

>being a " layperson " in the field of nutrition it is hard to defend the NT

>position as well as many of you who are more well-informed. Thus, my

>question about Swank and your opinions on him.

>

>I haven't even looked at his book, but for those who don't know who he is

>here is what I do know: he did a long term study on the affects of diet on

>some MS patients. Low levels of fat from animals (other than fish and

>vegetables, i.e. olive oil -- notice how I am avoiding the fat acronyms,

>they confuse me!) allowed many of the MS sufferers they followed to live

>normal and long lives, according to the study. Okay, so what is up with

>that? Bad study? It is based on info he gathered in Norway that showed

>that those living off their farms had lots more MS than those living off of

>the fish at in the coastal towns.

>

>I am also curious if anyone has written a critique of Sally's book/ Weston

>Price. I am asking in the spirit of research... I am just curious to hear

>what those who disagree with NT have said specifically about the book. I

>guess I like to hear the other side, it helps me learn.

>

>Also, the same radio show host who interviewed Swank will be interviewing

>the guy who wrote " The 8 week Cholesterol Cure " (not sure of authors name)

>and so once again I am sure I will feel massively confused! :-) Oh,

>well, at least I am climbing that steep learning curve at a steady pace.

>:-)

>

>P.S. I intend to write a short intro of myself soon and discuss my own

>health problems (briefly!). I don't have MS, but I do (supposedly) have

>fibromyalgia and have been achy, tired, and in pain every (* & *%^%# day for

>six years now. I hope it won't be too off-topic but I am interested to

>hear what your opinions are on the NT diet and fibromyaliga (as well as

>hypothyroidism).

>

>P.S.S. I am making chicken and rice soup today with lovely stock which

>simmered all day yesterday. In fact, I was skimming the stock as I

>listened to the Swank interview yesterday!

>

>Thanks

>Carolyn

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

:

Download my article on MS at my website and give it to your brother.

All the best,

Byrnes, PhD, RNCP

http://www.PowerHealth.net

>From: BrenRuble@...

>Reply-

>

>Subject: Re: Swank diet and MS and the fat wars

>Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 01:12:03 EST

>

>My Brother-in-Law has MS and has followed the Swank diet for over a year

>now.

> He's looks AWFUL!!! He has no energy - PERIOD! Prior to starting this

>diet

>he swam everyday including many open ocean swims. He hasn't been in a pool

>for months and spends a good portion of his day sleeping. On his last

>visit

>here I sent him home with two books in his suitcase - NT and the

>Cholesterol

>Myth.

_________________________________________________________________

Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com

[Guest guest]

Hi Doctor, and everyone on the list

The WAP approach, its history, etc. make sense to me, too. However, when I talk

about this with other people, they counter with comments about how these people

(i.e. Masai) are very physically active, or, that our hunter-gatherer ancestors

had short life spans. I haven't seen much (that I remember) proving that these

traditional peoples lived long lives. I'd really like to have more back-up for

this aspect of the issue.

Thank you.

Meighen

>>> mmarasco@... 03/05/02 05:28PM >>>

Welcome Carolyn,

ly I am not familiar with Dr/Mr?? Swank. However I am familiar

with the huge amount of contradictive information out there. I can

show you study after study by reasonably reputable people who clearly

demonstrate that the next time you eat a pat of butter you will

instantly die on the spot and if your not careful your arteries will

explode so violently that if your spouse is too close he will be

injured or worse. I can show you the same number of studies that

clearly demonstrate exactly the opposite and your quandy is the same

one every honest person who does their homework faces at one time or

another. Realize I speak to you as a former vegetarian low fat

dude. Do you have any idea how hard it is to convert the patients

you've educated so well into veggie low fat to NT/WAP. Let's just

say its been fun. Just because I'm a professional doesn't exclude me

from all this conflicting information. And any professional who says

they are above it is either lying or just plain foolish. My decision

once and for all in sorting all this out came following

reading " Nutrition and Physical Degeneration " because as an insider

of health care I know exactly how easy it is to make reasearch prove

any point you'd like to prove, which on the face of it makes its

credibility questionable 100% of the time. WAP simply observed what

traditional peoples ate. So quite honestly regardless of what modern

day contrived studies say whether they agree with fat eating or not

they are irrelevant except in the case of possibly deepening our

understanding. However the FACT that traditional peoples have

conducted the most valid experiment of all for thousands of years

should be proof enough to clearly say that anyone who is saying fats

are bad may just make their next statement regarding the flatness of

the earth. Although all the people studied by WAP would work to

highlight, for those who would question the healthfulness of healthy

properly made animal fats I only have two words... MASAI,ESKIMO.

Researchers can take you out of your element and bamboozle you with

tricky words and concepts. However you can avoid these tactics by

not allowing them to surgically remove your common sense. When

someone says healthy fats are bad ... ask yourself " in the greatest

living human nutrition study of all time, how many masai diet of

clogged arteries? " Answer? None.

Carolyn, you're doing great. Keep asking questions and keep

learning, you're on the right track, just don't let them remove your

common sense from the discussion and you'll be fine.

Sincerely,

Dr. Marasco, BS,DC

Cincinnati, Oh

> Hi,

>

> I listened to a radio interview of Roy Swank yesterday (on KBOO in

Portland) and just wanted to get some feedback from you well-informed

folks. I am new to all this, and not a student of nutrition. The

interview left me feeling as I usually do when I hear information

about diet, especially fats: confused, distrustful, exasperated, and

worried about what I am doing to my body. I am frankly blown away at

the " war " out there concerning dietary fats. I have lately been

picking up book after book and just skimming the section on fats...

quite amazing, after reading NT. It is truly incredible the

differences in opinions, even when evaluating the same studies.

>

> I think I may represent a large group of folks who have read NT:

we are very taken with what we read in NT (and in my case my dr

recommended the book to me, so I feel a sense of trust in it) and we

may adopt many of the recommendations. BUT in the back of our minds

some of us are still wondering " is this just yet another opinion that

will be challenged and debunked, or is it close to " the truth? " .

Just my honest feelings here. I generally am very, very excited

about the NT approach and am quite " sold " on it. And I have been

working hard to change my ways. But I guess that being a " layperson "

in the field of nutrition it is hard to defend the NT position as

well as many of you who are more well-informed. Thus, my question

about Swank and your opinions on him.

>

> I haven't even looked at his book, but for those who don't know who

he is here is what I do know: he did a long term study on the

affects of diet on some MS patients. Low levels of fat from animals

(other than fish and vegetables, i.e. olive oil -- notice how I am

avoiding the fat acronyms, they confuse me!) allowed many of the MS

sufferers they followed to live normal and long lives, according to

the study. Okay, so what is up with that? Bad study? It is based

on info he gathered in Norway that showed that those living off their

farms had lots more MS than those living off of the fish at in the

coastal towns.

>

> I am also curious if anyone has written a critique of Sally's book/

Weston Price. I am asking in the spirit of research... I am just

curious to hear what those who disagree with NT have said

specifically about the book. I guess I like to hear the other side,

it helps me learn.

>

> Also, the same radio show host who interviewed Swank will be

interviewing the guy who wrote " The 8 week Cholesterol Cure " (not

sure of authors name) and so once again I am sure I will feel

massively confused! :-) Oh, well, at least I am climbing that

steep learning curve at a steady pace. :-)

>

> P.S. I intend to write a short intro of myself soon and discuss my

own health problems (briefly!). I don't have MS, but I do

(supposedly) have fibromyalgia and have been achy, tired, and in pain

every (* & *%^%# day for six years now. I hope it won't be too off-

topic but I am interested to hear what your opinions are on the NT

diet and fibromyaliga (as well as hypothyroidism).

>

> P.S.S. I am making chicken and rice soup today with lovely stock

which simmered all day yesterday. In fact, I was skimming the stock

as I listened to the Swank interview yesterday!

>

> Thanks

> Carolyn

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Carolyn,

I can't address any off your questions from a professional point of view

and I've never heard of Dr. Swank, but let me tell you about my experience

with fats. I have never had any really severe health problems, just been

fascinated with diet as it pertains to health. For most of my life I've been

from the low fat high carb camp. Although I've never done any food program

religiously, I've dabbled in several. I did the vegetarian thing for a short

while, but my family wanted meat so it was difficult to stick with it,

thankfully. BTW I know two people that are very strict vegetarians who also

happen to be the two sickest people I know. Especially when taking their age

into consideration.

I am not especially overweight, but always would love to lose ten pounds

or so. When I did severe restriction of fats, it never altered my weight in

any way whatsoever. What did cause me to lose weight in the most amazing way

and feel great was the ne Summers diet (please don't laugh). This was

before I knew of NT, but I can see now why this diet worked so well. While

it certainly does not have many the components of NT, it was starting me in

that direction of thinking in regard to fats. Her diet is mostly based on

food combining, which I don't think is the main reason it works. ne

does say fat is your friend any recommends things like 100% cream for your

decafe coffee, meat, olive oil, etc.

While on vacation last summer a nurse friend recommend the Weston Price

website to me and I bought NT. It has been a slow, but steady conversion for

me. It would be hard for me to do all at once. It's a whole knew way of

thinking, finding food, and cooking. Bottom line is, I feel great. Several

things have improved. I think the avoidance of MSG and other preservatives

has stopped me from having a sort of dull continues headache. I have a mild

case of mitrol valve prolapse, which I normally would have experienced daily

symptoms for several weeks near the winter solstice. This year I had no

symptoms. I don't know the explanation. Perhaps the calcium in a quart a day

of raw milk helps the muscle function of the heart??? My PMS is improving. I

love the food. Fat tastes good! Who wouldn't rather eat their toast dripping

with real butter and raw honey as opposed to that awful low fat diet spread

junk in the grocery store...yuk. And to be able to sprinkle sea salt on my

food without feeling guilty. NT lets you feel good about eating food you

used to think was going to kill you. I'm amazed how my taste buds are

becoming sensitive to fake food . One thing in particular is store bought

bottled dressing. After having real salad dressing the other is terrible.

I think that NT strikes a chord within us that just makes sense. My

parents both have very low " bad " cholesterol. My dad still had to have

quadruple bypass. I really was wondering about the correlation between

cholesterol and heart disease. NT gave me the answers.

Hope this helps you enjoy your fats,

Carmen

[Guest guest]

>>Dr. Swank has been pushing his " no-saturated-fat-for-MS " diet for many

decades, but he has still yet to prove the connection.

Yeah. It was really interesting: he said at the end of the interview that he

was about to publish a paper on his theory of WHY it worked (his diet). But he

sounded very frustrated and admitted that he really hadn't " proved " that it was

saturated fats etc, but rather that he felt that in the future it will be found

that he was right. He was betting he was right, but hadn't found the smoking

gun, so to speak. It kinda seems like that is what the establishment diet folks

are saying. That technically they haven't proved the connection very well, but

still they just HAVE to be right! He was a really sweet old man (93!) and

seemed very bright and active. I am sure he believes in his heart that he is

right, and that he is helping people. That is where it is confusing to me: so

many people (researchers) etc must really believe that saturated fats are the

culprit. I am actually quite cynical politically and don't for a moment trust

corporate funded ANYTHING, but I also keep thinking that maybe there must be

SOME truth to what, for example, the Heart Association puts out. I want to

believe that it isn't all a bunch of bunk, and in essense a conspiricy to have

Americans stay unhealthy and eat profitable fake fats.

Why can't there be more honest research and DEBATE over this issue, and maybe

(gasp) some agreement. .. .but that is just my outsiders view.

[Guest guest]

The lifespan issue is dealt with in my vegetarian paper. I think it is myth

number 7. The belief that hunter/gatherers had short lives is simply a lie.

The physical activity is a lie as well. Its true that the Masai got more

exercise from running with their cattle, but what about other heavy

fat-eating native peoples who did not do such things? The idea that

hunter/gatherers lived these physically demanding lifestyles is another lie

that has no foundation in fact--it is the agricultural peoples who bust

their asses for food. Hunter/gatherers typically work only 2-3 hours a

day--hardly a huge amount of physical activity. You can see Marvin '

book CANNIBALS AND KINGS for more on this comparison.

All the best,

Byrnes, PhD, RNCP

http://www.PowerHealth.net

>From: " Meighen " <russellm@...>

>Reply-

>< >

>Subject: Re: Swank diet and MS and the fat wars

>Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 12:42:42 -0500

>

>Hi Doctor, and everyone on the list

>

>The WAP approach, its history, etc. make sense to me, too. However, when I

>talk about this with other people, they counter with comments about how

>these people (i.e. Masai) are very physically active, or, that our

>hunter-gatherer ancestors had short life spans. I haven't seen much (that

>I remember) proving that these traditional peoples lived long lives. I'd

>really like to have more back-up for this aspect of the issue.

>

>Thank you.

>

>Meighen

>

> >>> mmarasco@... 03/05/02 05:28PM >>>

>Welcome Carolyn,

>

>ly I am not familiar with Dr/Mr?? Swank. However I am familiar

>with the huge amount of contradictive information out there. I can

>show you study after study by reasonably reputable people who clearly

>demonstrate that the next time you eat a pat of butter you will

>instantly die on the spot and if your not careful your arteries will

>explode so violently that if your spouse is too close he will be

>injured or worse. I can show you the same number of studies that

>clearly demonstrate exactly the opposite and your quandy is the same

>one every honest person who does their homework faces at one time or

>another. Realize I speak to you as a former vegetarian low fat

>dude. Do you have any idea how hard it is to convert the patients

>you've educated so well into veggie low fat to NT/WAP. Let's just

>say its been fun. Just because I'm a professional doesn't exclude me

>from all this conflicting information. And any professional who says

>they are above it is either lying or just plain foolish. My decision

>once and for all in sorting all this out came following

>reading " Nutrition and Physical Degeneration " because as an insider

>of health care I know exactly how easy it is to make reasearch prove

>any point you'd like to prove, which on the face of it makes its

>credibility questionable 100% of the time. WAP simply observed what

>traditional peoples ate. So quite honestly regardless of what modern

>day contrived studies say whether they agree with fat eating or not

>they are irrelevant except in the case of possibly deepening our

>understanding. However the FACT that traditional peoples have

>conducted the most valid experiment of all for thousands of years

>should be proof enough to clearly say that anyone who is saying fats

>are bad may just make their next statement regarding the flatness of

>the earth. Although all the people studied by WAP would work to

>highlight, for those who would question the healthfulness of healthy

>properly made animal fats I only have two words... MASAI,ESKIMO.

>Researchers can take you out of your element and bamboozle you with

>tricky words and concepts. However you can avoid these tactics by

>not allowing them to surgically remove your common sense. When

>someone says healthy fats are bad ... ask yourself " in the greatest

>living human nutrition study of all time, how many masai diet of

>clogged arteries? " Answer? None.

>

>Carolyn, you're doing great. Keep asking questions and keep

>learning, you're on the right track, just don't let them remove your

>common sense from the discussion and you'll be fine.

>

>Sincerely,

>Dr. Marasco, BS,DC

>Cincinnati, Oh

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> > Hi,

> >

> > I listened to a radio interview of Roy Swank yesterday (on KBOO in

>Portland) and just wanted to get some feedback from you well-informed

>folks. I am new to all this, and not a student of nutrition. The

>interview left me feeling as I usually do when I hear information

>about diet, especially fats: confused, distrustful, exasperated, and

>worried about what I am doing to my body. I am frankly blown away at

>the " war " out there concerning dietary fats. I have lately been

>picking up book after book and just skimming the section on fats...

>quite amazing, after reading NT. It is truly incredible the

>differences in opinions, even when evaluating the same studies.

> >

> > I think I may represent a large group of folks who have read NT:

>we are very taken with what we read in NT (and in my case my dr

>recommended the book to me, so I feel a sense of trust in it) and we

>may adopt many of the recommendations. BUT in the back of our minds

>some of us are still wondering " is this just yet another opinion that

>will be challenged and debunked, or is it close to " the truth? " .

>Just my honest feelings here. I generally am very, very excited

>about the NT approach and am quite " sold " on it. And I have been

>working hard to change my ways. But I guess that being a " layperson "

>in the field of nutrition it is hard to defend the NT position as

>well as many of you who are more well-informed. Thus, my question

>about Swank and your opinions on him.

> >

> > I haven't even looked at his book, but for those who don't know who

>he is here is what I do know: he did a long term study on the

>affects of diet on some MS patients. Low levels of fat from animals

>(other than fish and vegetables, i.e. olive oil -- notice how I am

>avoiding the fat acronyms, they confuse me!) allowed many of the MS

>sufferers they followed to live normal and long lives, according to

>the study. Okay, so what is up with that? Bad study? It is based

>on info he gathered in Norway that showed that those living off their

>farms had lots more MS than those living off of the fish at in the

>coastal towns.

> >

> > I am also curious if anyone has written a critique of Sally's book/

>Weston Price. I am asking in the spirit of research... I am just

>curious to hear what those who disagree with NT have said

>specifically about the book. I guess I like to hear the other side,

>it helps me learn.

> >

> > Also, the same radio show host who interviewed Swank will be

>interviewing the guy who wrote " The 8 week Cholesterol Cure " (not

>sure of authors name) and so once again I am sure I will feel

>massively confused! :-) Oh, well, at least I am climbing that

>steep learning curve at a steady pace. :-)

> >

> > P.S. I intend to write a short intro of myself soon and discuss my

>own health problems (briefly!). I don't have MS, but I do

>(supposedly) have fibromyalgia and have been achy, tired, and in pain

>every (* & *%^%# day for six years now. I hope it won't be too off-

>topic but I am interested to hear what your opinions are on the NT

>diet and fibromyaliga (as well as hypothyroidism).

> >

> > P.S.S. I am making chicken and rice soup today with lovely stock

>which simmered all day yesterday. In fact, I was skimming the stock

>as I listened to the Swank interview yesterday!

> >

> > Thanks

> > Carolyn

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

On Wed, 6 Mar 2002 00:49:36 -0000 " Carolyn Gutman-Dey " <cgd@...>

writes:

Hi,

I listened to a radio interview of Roy Swank yesterday (on KBOO in

Portland) and just wanted to get some feedback from you well-informed

folks. I am new to all this, and not a student of nutrition. The

interview left me feeling as I usually do when I hear information about

diet, especially fats: confused, distrustful, exasperated, and worried

about what I am doing to my body. I am frankly blown away at the " war "

out there concerning dietary fats. I have lately been picking up book

after book and just skimming the section on fats... quite amazing, after

reading NT. It is truly incredible the differences in opinions, even

when evaluating the same studies.

ME: Hi Carolyn,

Roy Swank is an interesting gentleman, and seemingly a very nice guy who

has been around for a very long time. Unfortunately I have dealt with

many of his patients who were having a very tough go of it following his

recommendations. It is not necessary to critique his approach in a forum

like native nutrition. The differences between what he suggests and the

observations of Dr. Price are rather obvious.

But I do think it would be helpful to comment not just on the " fat wars "

but on the " nutrition wars " in general. The problem for many of us, and

where I think we get confused, is that we tend to look at " experts "

outside of our own field as benign folks who are just objective observers

dutifully searching for and reporting the truth. On the contrary, such a

perception by many of us is not at all congruent with reality.

Think about your profession or job for a moment. Are there people on your

job, in your community, at city hall, who are backbiters, sloppy with the

facts, committed to their own agendas, not team players, etc.? Sure there

is. We all have to deal with this in our own particular sphere, sometimes

even within our own family! The problem is when we look outside of our

own sphere, especially in an area that requires lots of expertise, we

lose sight of this fact, and somehow think they are more pure than we

are. But just because someone is a doctor, or lawyer, or clinical

psychologist, or scientist, or what have you doesn't change human nature.

*Every* sphere of human activity has the exact same problems that your

sphere does. Do people do things just for money in your line of work? Of

course they do? Have people been known to fudge the truth because they

have a vested interest in the outcome? Of course they do. This doesn't

change just because we are talking about nutrition. I'm not saying this

true of Roy Swank, most likely it is not. But there is a whole school of

people who have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo - no

matter where the truth lies. There are others who *sincerely* think they

are right on both sides of any issue. Thus the " wars " which have always

been going on since time immemorial on every issue imaginable.

There is a school of economics known as Public Choice. It's purpose? To

educate people on the fact when an elected official takes office, he/she

doesn't magically set aside their biases, prejudices, goals , agenda,

etc. but rather upon election they carry those biases into office and use

government to advance those very things, which is usually why they are

drawn to public service in the first place.

In the world of nutrition, as in every other sphere of life, there are

wars because people have conflicting agendas, biases, goals, vested

interests, etc. Sometimes people are sincere and sometimes they are not.

Some folks sincerely belive something even though they may be sincerely

wrong. Perhaps like Dr. Swank. Others advocate things because they have

invested so much time and energy it would be a great risk to them to do

otherwise. And there are a hundred other reasons, often having little to

do with the truth.

You can't get away from this in any area of life, which is why you have

to gird up your mind and think hard, think rigorously, sometimes

furiously, for yourself, *if* you don't want to be like sheep led to the

slaughter, as it is with most folks on a myriad of topics, of which

nutrition is just one.

You: I think I may represent a large group of folks who have read NT: we

are very taken with what we read in NT (and in my case my dr recommended

the book to me, so I feel a sense of trust in it) and we may adopt many

of the recommendations. BUT in the back of our minds some of us are

still wondering " is this just yet another opinion that will be challenged

and debunked, or is it close to " the truth? " . Just my honest feelings

here.

ME: Any opinion will be challenged if it goes against the prevailing

dogma no matter how true it is. If you decide to adopt that opinion you

too will be challenged. The challenges can come in many forms, from the

subtle pressure of your family trying to get you to compromise, to the

all out assault on your sensibilities that comes from an expert warning

you of the dire consequences if you abandon the current nutritional dogma

concerning fat.

Nonetheless, the reason you are struggling in the first place is because

you originally held to a different view and have now adopted a new view.

But how did you adopt your original view? Did you read the studies? Did

you remarkably restore your health? For most folks they hold a view

because it is what they have always known or admired someone else who

held that view. And consciously or not, they adopt it as their own.

Then at a later date they may decide to step away for their original

paradigm, and for many this is uncomfortable. Most of us don't like the

pressure of having to think independently, and often revert to our old

paradigm just because it is more comfortable.

This is why, for many people (but not all), a drastic change in diet

often happens when they hit bottom, when they are sick and tired of being

sick and tired, or they have others they are concerned about, like their

kids, or they see a loved one greatly harmed by the medical profession.

At that point, self preservation takes over, and no amount of pressure

can ever send them back. But for some, change never occurs, they cling to

their old paradigm, even on their death bed.

Changing previously held beliefs IS TOUGH. We all go through it. In fact

it can be downright painful, *particularly* if you have a lifetime

invested in the old paradigm and/or you are not very comfortable with

your analytical skills. So you are not alone and in the words of our

former President, " I feel your pain " :-)

Take care,

Bianca

[Guest guest]

Thank you - I'll look for it. I'm on the mailing list for your twice-monthly

newsletter, and I really appreciate your doing that. I often forward it to

others.

Best wishes,

Meighen

>>> daxx404@... 03/07/02 07:24AM >>>

The lifespan issue is dealt with in my vegetarian paper. I think it is myth

number 7. The belief that hunter/gatherers had short lives is simply a lie.

The physical activity is a lie as well. Its true that the Masai got more

exercise from running with their cattle, but what about other heavy

fat-eating native peoples who did not do such things? The idea that

hunter/gatherers lived these physically demanding lifestyles is another lie

that has no foundation in fact--it is the agricultural peoples who bust

their asses for food. Hunter/gatherers typically work only 2-3 hours a

day--hardly a huge amount of physical activity. You can see Marvin '

book CANNIBALS AND KINGS for more on this comparison.

All the best,

Byrnes, PhD, RNCP

http://www.PowerHealth.net

>From: " Meighen " <russellm@...>

>Reply-

>< >

>Subject: Re: Swank diet and MS and the fat wars

>Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 12:42:42 -0500

>

>Hi Doctor, and everyone on the list

>

>The WAP approach, its history, etc. make sense to me, too. However, when I

>talk about this with other people, they counter with comments about how

>these people (i.e. Masai) are very physically active, or, that our

>hunter-gatherer ancestors had short life spans. I haven't seen much (that

>I remember) proving that these traditional peoples lived long lives. I'd

>really like to have more back-up for this aspect of the issue.

>

>Thank you.

>

>Meighen

>

> >>> mmarasco@... 03/05/02 05:28PM >>>

>Welcome Carolyn,

>

>ly I am not familiar with Dr/Mr?? Swank. However I am familiar

>with the huge amount of contradictive information out there. I can

>show you study after study by reasonably reputable people who clearly

>demonstrate that the next time you eat a pat of butter you will

>instantly die on the spot and if your not careful your arteries will

>explode so violently that if your spouse is too close he will be

>injured or worse. I can show you the same number of studies that

>clearly demonstrate exactly the opposite and your quandy is the same

>one every honest person who does their homework faces at one time or

>another. Realize I speak to you as a former vegetarian low fat

>dude. Do you have any idea how hard it is to convert the patients

>you've educated so well into veggie low fat to NT/WAP. Let's just

>say its been fun. Just because I'm a professional doesn't exclude me

>from all this conflicting information. And any professional who says

>they are above it is either lying or just plain foolish. My decision

>once and for all in sorting all this out came following

>reading " Nutrition and Physical Degeneration " because as an insider

>of health care I know exactly how easy it is to make reasearch prove

>any point you'd like to prove, which on the face of it makes its

>credibility questionable 100% of the time. WAP simply observed what

>traditional peoples ate. So quite honestly regardless of what modern

>day contrived studies say whether they agree with fat eating or not

>they are irrelevant except in the case of possibly deepening our

>understanding. However the FACT that traditional peoples have

>conducted the most valid experiment of all for thousands of years

>should be proof enough to clearly say that anyone who is saying fats

>are bad may just make their next statement regarding the flatness of

>the earth. Although all the people studied by WAP would work to

>highlight, for those who would question the healthfulness of healthy

>properly made animal fats I only have two words... MASAI,ESKIMO.

>Researchers can take you out of your element and bamboozle you with

>tricky words and concepts. However you can avoid these tactics by

>not allowing them to surgically remove your common sense. When

>someone says healthy fats are bad ... ask yourself " in the greatest

>living human nutrition study of all time, how many masai diet of

>clogged arteries? " Answer? None.

>

>Carolyn, you're doing great. Keep asking questions and keep

>learning, you're on the right track, just don't let them remove your

>common sense from the discussion and you'll be fine.

>

>Sincerely,

>Dr. Marasco, BS,DC

>Cincinnati, Oh

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> > Hi,

> >

> > I listened to a radio interview of Roy Swank yesterday (on KBOO in

>Portland) and just wanted to get some feedback from you well-informed

>folks. I am new to all this, and not a student of nutrition. The

>interview left me feeling as I usually do when I hear information

>about diet, especially fats: confused, distrustful, exasperated, and

>worried about what I am doing to my body. I am frankly blown away at

>the " war " out there concerning dietary fats. I have lately been

>picking up book after book and just skimming the section on fats...

>quite amazing, after reading NT. It is truly incredible the

>differences in opinions, even when evaluating the same studies.

> >

> > I think I may represent a large group of folks who have read NT:

>we are very taken with what we read in NT (and in my case my dr

>recommended the book to me, so I feel a sense of trust in it) and we

>may adopt many of the recommendations. BUT in the back of our minds

>some of us are still wondering " is this just yet another opinion that

>will be challenged and debunked, or is it close to " the truth? " .

>Just my honest feelings here. I generally am very, very excited

>about the NT approach and am quite " sold " on it. And I have been

>working hard to change my ways. But I guess that being a " layperson "

>in the field of nutrition it is hard to defend the NT position as

>well as many of you who are more well-informed. Thus, my question

>about Swank and your opinions on him.

> >

> > I haven't even looked at his book, but for those who don't know who

>he is here is what I do know: he did a long term study on the

>affects of diet on some MS patients. Low levels of fat from animals

>(other than fish and vegetables, i.e. olive oil -- notice how I am

>avoiding the fat acronyms, they confuse me!) allowed many of the MS

>sufferers they followed to live normal and long lives, according to

>the study. Okay, so what is up with that? Bad study? It is based

>on info he gathered in Norway that showed that those living off their

>farms had lots more MS than those living off of the fish at in the

>coastal towns.

> >

> > I am also curious if anyone has written a critique of Sally's book/

>Weston Price. I am asking in the spirit of research... I am just

>curious to hear what those who disagree with NT have said

>specifically about the book. I guess I like to hear the other side,

>it helps me learn.

> >

> > Also, the same radio show host who interviewed Swank will be

>interviewing the guy who wrote " The 8 week Cholesterol Cure " (not

>sure of authors name) and so once again I am sure I will feel

>massively confused! :-) Oh, well, at least I am climbing that

>steep learning curve at a steady pace. :-)

> >

> > P.S. I intend to write a short intro of myself soon and discuss my

>own health problems (briefly!). I don't have MS, but I do

>(supposedly) have fibromyalgia and have been achy, tired, and in pain

>every (* & *%^%# day for six years now. I hope it won't be too off-

>topic but I am interested to hear what your opinions are on the NT

>diet and fibromyaliga (as well as hypothyroidism).

> >

> > P.S.S. I am making chicken and rice soup today with lovely stock

>which simmered all day yesterday. In fact, I was skimming the stock

>as I listened to the Swank interview yesterday!

> >

> > Thanks

> > Carolyn

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

< Low levels of fat from animals (other than fish and vegetables, i.e. olive oil

-- notice how I am

avoiding the fat acronyms, they confuse me!) allowed many

of the MS sufferers they followed to live normal and long lives, according to

the study. Okay, so

what is up with that? Bad study? It is based on info he gathered

in Norway that showed that those living off their farms had lots more MS than

those living off of

the fish at in the coastal towns.>

Hi, Carolyn,

my two cents <S>.

It's probably the fish oil that helps prevent MS rather than the animal fats

causing it. If you do

an internet search on fish oil and mental illness you'll see that it has

developed a great

reputation in curing or relieving a great many mental disorders--because it

contains fatty acids

that are used specifically in the brain.

Animal fats--if they become dominant in a diet--may tip the balance away from

the omega-3 fatty

acids. Apparently, animal fat no longer contains adequate levels of omega-3

since animals have begun

receiving omega-6 dominant feed, such as corn and soy.

No way to say therefore that animal fats cause MS; but a pretty good bet that

taking fish oil is

preventative. It is also a natural anti-inflammatory, and MS appears to be

initiated by inflammation

in the brain. Another anti-inflammatory, turmeric, has recently also been

associated with lower

levels of MS.

BTW -- what are the initial symptoms of 'supposed' Fib?

son

[Guest guest]

Bianca-

> Think about your profession or job for a moment. Are there people

on your

> job, in your community, at city hall, who are backbiters, sloppy

with the

> facts, committed to their own agendas, not team players, etc.? Sure

there

> is. We all have to deal with this in our own particular sphere,

sometimes

> even within our own family! The problem is when we look outside of

our

> own sphere, especially in an area that requires lots of expertise,

we

> lose sight of this fact, and somehow think they are more pure than

we

> are. But just because someone is a doctor, or lawyer, or clinical

> psychologist, or scientist, or what have you doesn't change human

nature.

> *Every* sphere of human activity has the exact same problems that

your

> sphere does. Do people do things just for money in your line of

work? Of

> course they do? Have people been known to fudge the truth because

they

> have a vested interest in the outcome? Of course they do. This

doesn't

> change just because we are talking about nutrition.

Extremely well-said, but for some reason some people just put doctors

(and particularly medical institutions like the American Heart

Association) on what seems like an inviolable pedestal.