Splinter Groups (was: Re: pork question)

[Guest guest]

>>>>:

> I'm in agreement with those of you who want unsubstantiated/incorrect

> statements changed and more things specifically referenced, but we should

> remember that NT is a cookbook, and as such it's probably the most

> extensively referenced and annotated cookbook in history! (I still wish a

> couple elements would be revised and/or eliminated, like the reference to

> the 150-year-old man, but I don't think a cookbook needs to resemble a

> research paper.)

***Well, it's the ONLY cookbook I've ever seen with a political statement as

the sub title:

" The Cookbook that Challenges Politically Correct Nutrition and the Diet

Dictocrats. " If that's not a provocative political statement, I don't know

what is. There are similar statements in the content, so I would not

consider it to be 'just a cookbook.'

Having said that, I agree that I'm *less* concerned with the content of NT

as I am with that of the WAP foundation web site, journal, and brochures. I

do think the cookbook is making a political statement, and as such, may come

under the keen scrutiny of industries that would suffer economically from

people following NT, so I do think the first 70 pages or so that are

dedicated to nutritional information (not recipes) *should* be strongly

sourced (which they are) and accurate.

Also, I simply think *consumers* should have accurate information. period.

But, again, I'm much more concerned that the WAP foundation's literature,

whether printed or digital, be accurate and rigorously sourced.

Suze Fisher

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg/

mailto:s.fisher22@...