最近看了一本书<<The China Study>>，作者是T. Colin Campbell and Thomas M. Campbell II 。去年年底在Amazon.com买东西的时候看见Amazon.com向我推荐这本 书，Amazon追踪顾客买东西的偏好，然后投其所好推荐产品。不过我当时有点纳闷： 我只在Amazon买保健饮食之类的书，比如<<Atkin's Diet>>, <<The South Beach
第一作者Dr. Campbell是Cornell University的营养生物化学教授，他主导了一项 由中国-Cornell-Oxford联合参加的，20年的研究项目。第二作者Thomas M. Campbell是 他的儿子，书里几乎是老爸的口气，老爸的经历，他应该没有参加项目，只是帮助 老爸出书。
Dr. Campbell书中介绍了他为什么选择到中国做这个项目原因：中国不像美国，人 种相对单一，容易排除不同人种因为基因不同而对疾病的反应不同，将饮食与疾病 的关系更好地凸显出来，进行研究。同时在中国做比在美国做便宜很多。美国NIH， American Cancer Society, American Institute for Cancer Research前后共批 准$2,900,000的研究经费，中国方面派出研究人员，车辆，后勤人员，以及其他物 质支援。Dr. Campbell估计，算上中方人员的工资，中方实际花费会在$5,000,000 - 6,000,000。如果这个项目在美国做，他估计至少需要$50,000,000以上。
简单吃素不一定对谁都好的一个反例是印度族群。我周围的印巴同事基本100%吃素，胖子一点不少。昨天上网查了一下印度人心血管病率很高的。说是有一种defect protein 在他们体内造成的。你也说了，个体之间的差别有时是决定性的。别说老虎和咱们有不同。印度人体内那种劳什子咱中国人可能就没有，这种差别多好啊。想知道猴子吃什么不难，难的是咱们也得吃猴儿食。Again，咱可以吃猴子的饭，可咱能像猴子那么上窜下跳吗？
Masterjohn provided the first evidence that the vegan emperor has no clothes, but now former vegan Denise Minger, in her Raw Food SOS blog, has completely discredited Campbell for his fraudulent interpretation of the data. A telling question after she applied real statistical analysis to the same data that Campbell "analyzed":
"Why does Campbell indict animal foods in cardiovascular disease (correlation of +1 for animal protein and -11 for fish protein), yet fail to mention that wheat flour has a correlation of +67 with heart attacks and coronary heart disease, and plant protein correlates at +25 with these conditions?
Speaking of wheat, why doesn't Campbell also note the astronomical correlations wheat flour has with various diseases: +46 with cervix cancer, +54 with hypertensive heart disease, +47 with stroke, +41 with diseases of the blood and blood-forming organs, and the aforementioned +67 with myocardial infarction and coronary heart disease?"
This book is scientific garbage and it's harming people's health.
If Dr Campbell promotes moral or environmental reasons for going vegan, I'd congratulate him. But he is promoting it as the ultimate diet for humans.
Unfortunately, his advice that we should go vegan is not backed by his own study.
After reading this book, I went to find the actual study (the monograph "Diet, Life-style and Mortality in China") and there were many holes in his hypothesis. There was no correlation between animal protein and disease! I also found conflicting evidence in science journals. He ignored contrary results and left out data that did not support his view.
What I find disturbing is, this book is for the general public and will affect the dietary choices of many people. Most people don't have the time to research these facts for themselves so he takes advantage of that (but if you do, PLEASE go check the information for yourselves before making a decision on removing meat entirely for health reasons). Critical thinking is important.
Anyway, here are the problems with the information in this book: - This study was an observational study. Problems with studies like these, it doesn't prove causality. Even with that, the results showed no correlation. In fact, it revealed that wheat had a stronger correlation than animal protein intake - which of couse, he left out of the book.
- Casein in milk, he demonstrated, causes cancer. But he also left out feeding SUGAR along with the protein. Sugar has been shown to promote tumor growth. He also didn't mention that casein is not consumed isolated in nature (human breast milk has casein too, should we ban that too?)
- He cited an Indian study that showed rats taking 20% casein with the toxin aflatoxin will develop cancer whereas rats taking 5% casein did not. He just forgot to mention that the rats on the low casein diet died after 6 months. While the 20% casein rats lived for 2 years.
- Protein from plants can also be "complete proteins" if you eat a wide variety of plant foods, based on Campbell's conclusions that complete protein like animal proteins can cause cancer, that must apply to plant proteins as well.
- He says "..there is a mountain of scientific evidence to show that the healthiest diet you can possibly consume is a high-carbohydrate diet". Actually, clinical studies show the opposite - that high carb diets (particularly refined carbs) are bad for diabetics, those who are obese, those with metabolic syndrome and some even show that it's bad for people with heart disease.
- He links total cholesterol with cancer mortality rates. Researchers still have trouble proving high cholesterol is associated with heart disease let alone cancer! (high triglycerides, with high VLDL and low HDL are better indicators than cholesterol. In fact, 50% of people who develop heart disease have mid to LOW cholesterol levels).
- He says overall, the more meat the Chinese consume, the higher the cancer rates. But unfortunately, he left out the county of Tuoli (as demonstrated by Denise Minger) a county with high consumption of meat AND dairy enjoyed ironically low incidences of cancer. The Masai, the Eskimos and even the French with their diets of high fat or dairy and animal protein have good health (low rates of heart disease, low cancer rates, low obesity).
- He believes that the lower rates of cancer among the Chinese compared to Americans must be due to their diet of low animal protein. It is well known that calorie restriction in animals and even in humans can improve health and longevity. This was shown during the world wars when food was rationed, rates of cancer and other diesases fell! The China study was done in the mid 1970's to 1980s - the tailend of the mass starvation of the Chinese before the Mao government loosened its grip on capitalism in the late 80s. For decades prior to the China Study, many counties had little food to eat. Ask any Chinese baby boomer from China and they can tell you how poor they were as children. I've heard stories of people eating roots and bark from trees out of desperation. Meat was highly valued and hard to come by. So the whole notion that the Chinese CHOSE to be vegans is insulting.
- Campbell makes it out as though we should all eat like the Chinese, for disease-free long life. Go find the statistics for longevity of the Chinese and you'll find the average life expectancy of the Chinese is lower than Americans. Yes, you heard right. You can check this yourself online. In fact, the countries with the highest life expectancy are the ones who consume the highest intake of fat and meat. It is a myth that the Japanese centenarians in Okinawa eat a low fat diet. They eat plenty of fish and seafood and their dishes are greasy.
There are more inconsistencies with the information. But you get the point. Before anyone accuses me of being a Campbell basher, think about this: he is SELLING a book, he has his reputation to defend, I don't sell anything, I'm not associated with the meat industry (I dislike them in fact), I bought this book (verified by Amazon) and giving an honest review without vegan-rose-colored-glasses on. I read it with an open mind and came out disappointed and mildly disgusted. Why? Because his suggestions may cause harm to his readers.
I'm not suggesting we go and eat as much factory farmed meat as we want. But free range, organic grass fed meat is healthy - high in omega3, low in omega6, low e.coli count, higher vitamin A and vitamin D in organs.
My review is not an attack on Dr Campbell as a person. I have not made any personal remarks about him. Nor am I attacking veganism or vegetarianism. I think they're morally valid ways to eat that work for some people. What I am attacking is the information, the content and what adverse affects it could have on people's health.
If you're hell bent on giving veganism a go, please take out sugar, refined wheat and Western tofu products from your diet.
I highly recommend this book - read it, check the facts and judge it for yourself.
