Re: Nourishing Traditions by Sally Fallon/Mark

[Guest guest]

--- In , " Mark S " <senorsuave@h...>

wrote:

It's another matter of " he said, she said, " who are you going to

believe, the mainstream scientific community or a few radicals of the

bunch? My advice is to proceed with caution. Until these supposed

health benefits can be irrefutably demonstrated to the rest of the

scientific community (i.e. other researchers, PhD's), and that the

benefits outweigh the risks, I'd suggest that you proceed with

caution and take some comfort in knowing that you have forgone a few

potential benefits (which may or may not really exist, i.e. hold up

to scientific scrutiny) for a little extra security against

infectious diseases (which is a very real concern).

*****Thank you, Mark. You put into words what I couldn't. I am

highly suspect of the " radicals " in any community, including the

scientific. Regardless of their credentials. I think

the " mainstream scientific community " is " mainstream " because their

work has a solid, credible (reproducible) foundation. Not that they

are always correct. They have their " blind spots " also.

And this is not to suggest that their perspective is the last word on

any subject. Just that I am hesitant to hop on the " radical "

bandwagon without some very solid research.

I think what most disturbs me about the communications that emanate

from the Sally Fallon- Enig camp is the " tone " of their

writings. It is highly aggressive, almost pugalistic (e.g., they

refer to the traditional perspective as " diet dictocrats " ). And that

leads me to suspect that their position is as much based on

emotionality as it is on " science. " (Like they have a chip on one,

or both, shoulders.)

~ Andy

[Guest guest]

When you consider that we've been told to go ahead and eat 11 portions

of white bread along with some mazola oil I'd take my chances with the

opposite point of view. In fact, I'd favor independent researchers

like Fallon and Enig over those sponsored by million dollar companies.

(No accusations of conspiracies, please).

-

--- In , " Andy " <endofthedream@y...> I

think what most disturbs me about the communications that emanate

from the Sally Fallon- Enig camp is the " tone " of their

writings. It is highly aggressive, almost pugalistic (e.g., they

refer to the traditional perspective as " diet dictocrats " ). And that

leads me to suspect that their position is as much based on

emotionality as it is on " science. " (Like they have a chip on one,

or both, shoulders.)

[Guest guest]

> When you consider that we've been told to go ahead and eat 11

> portions of white bread along with some mazola oil I'd take my

> chances with the opposite point of view.

*****You've certainly got a point about past advice of our

governmental " watchdogs. " But you practice " moderation, " so why the

need to go to the other end of the spectrum? Perhaps the " middle

way " is more ... mmmm ... moderate?

> In fact, I'd favor independent researchers like Fallon and Enig

over those sponsored by million dollar companies. (No accusations of

conspiracies, please).

*****No, but I don't believe ANY of us are " independent. " Fallon and

Enig have their own axes to grind too. Don't doubt that. They too

want to be recognized, both financially and professionally. They too

have their " supporters. " While they may not be beholden to large

(and influential) special interests groups, neither are *some* of the

more " traditional " research scientists (some, of course, are...and

have been bought out by Big Bucks...which is why one must tread

carefully in this morass).

The best advice I can think of is: whatever you do, whatever dietary

approach you adopt, at least, have fun with it! It's got to " fit "

you and your lifestyle, otherwise much cognitive dissonance (e.g.,

feeling consistently " deprived " ) arises on a persistent basis and

THAT is not healthy either.

~ Andy

[Guest guest]

I don't practice moderation in vegetable oils or refined grains in the

same way that I don't moderately smoke.

For me, half this calorie restriction talk is intellectually

stimulating. I'm sure I worry about it far, far less than most people

here.

-

>

> > When you consider that we've been told to go ahead and eat 11

> > portions of white bread along with some mazola oil I'd take my

> > chances with the opposite point of view.

>

> *****You've certainly got a point about past advice of our

> governmental " watchdogs. " But you practice " moderation, " so why the

> need to go to the other end of the spectrum? Perhaps the " middle

> way " is more ... mmmm ... moderate?

>

>

> > In fact, I'd favor independent researchers like Fallon and Enig

> over those sponsored by million dollar companies. (No accusations of

> conspiracies, please).

>

>

> *****No, but I don't believe ANY of us are " independent. " Fallon and

> Enig have their own axes to grind too. Don't doubt that. They too

> want to be recognized, both financially and professionally. They too

> have their " supporters. " While they may not be beholden to large

> (and influential) special interests groups, neither are *some* of the

> more " traditional " research scientists (some, of course, are...and

> have been bought out by Big Bucks...which is why one must tread

> carefully in this morass).

>

> The best advice I can think of is: whatever you do, whatever dietary

> approach you adopt, at least, have fun with it! It's got to " fit "

> you and your lifestyle, otherwise much cognitive dissonance (e.g.,

> feeling consistently " deprived " ) arises on a persistent basis and

> THAT is not healthy either.

>

> ~ Andy