Weston A. Price Foundation, Stupid Traditions

Imagine being told to feed your child meat broth and sea salt and limiting their intake of fruits and vegetables—crazy, right? Indeed, but those are just a few of the insane recommendations by The Weston A. Price Foundation.

According to Dr. Fuhrman, Weston Price is a relatively small non-profit that has been very effective in advocating a meat, butter, and raw milk-centered diet—foods that are NOT health and longevity-supporting.

Actually, we’ve debunked Weston Price and its cronies before. Remember these posts:

So, if Weston Price is a dead horse—why start beating it again? Because of this article in The Washington Post, in it Sally Fallon, founder of The Weston A. Price Foundation and co-author of Nourishing Traditions, attempts to convince people that foods like raw milk, butter, bone broth, and chicken liver pate are great for us.

Here’s a bit of reporter’s Jane Black’s article. You might recognize one of the names mentioned. Take a look:

In 1989, Fallon began to think about spreading the gospel of Price. She did not have any formal nutrition training, so she recruited Mary Enig, a Washington nutritionist whose controversial work promotes saturated fats, to co-write a cookbook. It had two goals: to explain Price's findings and to provide a range of recipes for traditional foods such as chicken liver pâté, sauerkraut and sourdough breads that deliver the requisite fat and nutrients for good health. (Some of the book's recommendations, such as the importance of bone broths, are inspired by the work of California doctor Francis Pottenger, a contemporary of Price's.)

The result was "Nourishing Traditions: The Cookbook That Challenges Politically Correct Nutrition and the Diet Dictocrats." The first edition, released in 1996, was riddled with typos and errors. But it sold…

…Some independent studies, such as the ones charted in Gary Taubes's recent book, "Good Calories, Bad Calories: Challenging the Conventional Wisdom on Diet, Weight Control and Disease," do support the premise that saturated fat isn't the enemy. But not everyone agrees with the foundation's claims. Joel Fuhrman, doctor and author of "Eat for Health," which advocates a nutrient-dense diet with limited animal products, calls it "unconscionable" to advocate a diet high in saturated fat, especially for children. He also alleges that the evidence Fallon and Enig use to support their claims is based on antiquated studies with poor observations.

"The worst people can say about us is that we use older studies," Fallon says. "Would you jump off a building because the law of gravity was discovered 300 years ago? This is good science."

Apparently time has stood still in Fallon’s world. You talk about blind evangelism! Despite the avalanche of research that negates her group’s views. She remains unwavering? That’s a dangerous way to think. Hey Fallon, its not 1939!

Try opening your eyes to new research or AT LEAST something within the past 20 years! Recently Dr. Fuhrman and T. Colin Campbell, PhD, author of The China Study, published this study on weight-loss using Dr. Fuhrman’s nutrient-dense vegetable-based diet style. It appears in Alternative-Therapies in Health and Medicine. Here’s a bit:

Weight loss was sustained in patients who returned for follow-up and was more substantial in those who reported good adherence to the recommendations...

...Favorable changes in lipid profile and blood pressure were noted. An HND diet has the potential to provide sustainable, significant, long-term weight loss and may provide substantial lowering of cardiac risk in patients who are motivated...

...An HND diet as demonstrated with this group may be the most health-favorable and effective way to lose weight for appropriately motivated patients.

No doubt this’ll leave Sally Fallon and Weston Price scratching their heads. After all, they’re probably still pondering the lunar landing, rubik's cube, and Tang.

I’ve said it before—and this is just my opinion—but people and organizations that advocate animal product-heavy diets are just looking to benefit from America’s love affair with rich, disease-causing foods. They know their recommendations are dangerous!

Lots of people have suffered and died prematurely from such advice, but this doesn't stop groups like Weston Price and Atkins from blatantly CASHING in on people’s emotional attachments to bacon, steak, and grease.

Shame on Weston Price, Sally Fallon, Atkins and others like them for polluting modern scientific research with their outdated unsupported nonsense—anyone who thinks giving their newborn a bottle of meat broth is a good idea, needs their head examined!

UPDATE: Here's a follow up from Dr. Fuhrman: Weston Price, Take Your Pseudo-Science Elsewhere.

Trackbacks (0) Links to blogs that reference this article Trackback URL
Comments (35) Read through and enter the discussion with the form at the end
Sharon Shaw - August 8, 2008 1:58 PM

Aww, c'mon, give these people a break. Their judgement is clouded by their arteries clogged with saturated fat..we are lucky that Dr. Fuhrman's teachings are Price-less....

Rhonda - August 8, 2008 2:42 PM

Thanks for writing this. I needed to hear this!

Scott - August 8, 2008 5:09 PM

This will get interesting.

Victoria - August 8, 2008 9:00 PM

If you disagree with someone's position, it's usually considered classier to state your case, not demean the person (or organization) with whom you're disagreeing.

Ms. Fallon is not the only person who disagrees with the lipid hypothesis. In fact, I seem to recall a number of researchers who question the strong bias of most published research on the connection between heart disease and other conditions.

Nor is she the only author suggesting that wholesome, traditional foods, including, but not limited to whole milk, eggs, fish, poultry and yes, meat, might be healthier for children than their more typical diets of processed foods (like skim milk, vegetable oils, and processed grains, foods many children are allergic to, and which provide little, if any, genuine nourishment).

And for the record, since I've actually had the pleasure of hearing Sally Fallon speak, she certainly does not suggest excluding fresh produce from the diet. Even a casual reading of the Weston A. Price Foundation's information would reveal this to be the case.

But rather than engage in a healthy debate (literally or metaphorically), or make any attempt to investigate the statements in the Post article, or even the tenets of the Foundation itself, the author of this slam chose to take cheap shots. And unfortunately, based on the earlier comments, he's preaching to the choir.

Shame on Mr. Pugliese!

David Brown - August 9, 2008 12:26 AM

And then there's the Kitava Study. http://paleodiet.com/lindeberg/

"Our most important findings so far published are that sudden cardiac death, stroke and exertion-related chest pain were non-existent or extremely rare in Kitavans. Infections, accidents, complications of pregnancy and senescence were the most common causes of death. All adults had low diastolic blood pressure (all below 90 mm Hg) and were very lean (weight decreased after age 30), while serum cholesterol was somewhat less favourable, probably due to a high intake of saturated fat from coconut."

What's peculiar about the above comment is that the author characterized high serum cholesterol as "bad" despite the fact that Kitavans apparently never develop clogged arteries from consuming saturated fat.

On the other hand, the low-carb crowd would view this diet with dismay as the estimated percentages of energy from protein, fat and carbohydrates are 10%, 21% and 69% respectively. http://high-fat-nutrition.blogspot.com/2007/06/living-on-isolated-island-of-kitava.html

All things considered, the important considerations are nutrient density and appropriateness of food choices. Some people ought to consume mostly nutrient dense vegetarian fare. Others require high quality animal products. Neither approach will prevent heart disease when coupled with excessive sugar consumption.

Gerry Pugliese - August 9, 2008 2:29 AM

Hey Victoria-

Wow, you advocates of nonsense really can't take it when someone fires back at you. You realize real scientists laugh at Weston Price and low-carb. Its a joke. Dr. Fuhrman and I are just very vocal about it.


Scott - August 9, 2008 2:34 PM

Gerry I think you do a great job here, but you so often speak in broad brushed terms. "You realize real scientist laugh and Weston Price and low carb" simply isn't true. What about the real scientists who support low carb and WAPF? They exists, and while they may not be as great in number as the opposition, they are certainly real scientists.

Correlation does not equal causation. I believe a lot of what is preached by BOTH sides (low carb and vegetarian/vegan) consist of political spin. No has proven that saturated fat causes ill health. Never. It is a correlative association in many studies, enough to be the industry standard, but has never been proven to CAUSE ill health. On the flip side, low carbers will say that all carbs that aren't leafy greens will send insulin spiking and cause diabetes, heart disease, etc. That too, is crap.

Gerry Pugliese - August 9, 2008 2:44 PM

Hey Scott-

With all due respect. "No [one] has proven that saturated fat causes ill health." Is a very silly and ill informed statement.

Advocates of low-carb or high-animal food diets need to be exposed for the liars they are.


Scott - August 9, 2008 3:24 PM

Gerry, are you prepared to offer peer reviewed studies that show saturated fat to be a causative factor in ill health? No correlative factor, causative.

Mind you, I am NOT a proponent of low carb, saturated fat, or anything the WAPF suggests is the panacea of health. I have no bias, I'm just interested in the science instead of emotion.

Gerry Pugliese - August 9, 2008 3:34 PM

Hey Scott-

I'm not a scientist or a doctor. So I'm not a research warrior, but read the news. The standard American or Western Diet is not only nutrient-deficient, but packed with those refined carbs WE all admit are crap, but its also loaded with saturated fat. The other enemy to human health and a huge reason why Americans are obese.

I mean come on. Dr. Atkins died from a heart attack!


Scott - August 9, 2008 3:42 PM

I understand all of that Gerry, you're preaching to the choir lol. I am 100% against Atkins and think he was a snake oil salesman of the highest order.

I just want to be clear that I'm not suggesting saturated fat doesn't contribute to ill health in conjunction with other factors, I'm asking for proof that saturated fat, while all other independent variables are isolated, causes ill health.

You do a great job here Gerry, keep it up.

Stephanie Rivers - August 9, 2008 4:22 PM

There are many things to learn from the diets of traditional people throughout the world. I think the most important thing we can learn is that no one diet is right for everyone.

No matter what your diet of choice may be, you can learn something valuable from the cookbook Nourishing Traditions. It has helped thousands of people. Even if you are a vegetarian, check it out. You may learn something valuable!

Sara - August 9, 2008 4:27 PM

Haven't we been through this a zillion times already. Scientific documentation is in Dr. Fuhrman's books. This is a blog not a scientific treatise, not to mention the info is covered in MANY previous posts. Also this is a nutritarian blog. Why would someone who disagrees with high nutrient eating so stronly choose to be here anyway? We are not obligated to fence with them. If Victoria wants to eat low carb she has every right to- Just don't come into other peoples forums and harass them.

Rhonda - August 9, 2008 4:29 PM

In the China Study, it was shown that rats or mice (one of those) who were given sat fat were more likely to get cancer. He showed it on a large scale culturally but only through correlation. There is no way to show it factually as you can't control all the extrenial variables. (For those who are scientists).

However, the Rave Diet Book and the Healthy at 100 Books that I just finished reading have plenty of case studies and correlations about sat fat.

Dr Furhmans' Book, Eat to Live is loaded with scientific studies. Have you read it?

HappyCat - August 9, 2008 8:27 PM

Atkins did not die of a heart attack. He slipped on ice and cracked his skull. Google is your friend: http://www.snopes.com/medical/doctor/atkins.asp

But I am no means a fan of his diet. Saturated fat has been proven to raise cholesterol and elevated cholesterol is linked to earlier mortality. (I hate when people say increased mortality, we're all going to die.)

Remember Adele Davis? Fallon sounds like her, and Davis died at 69 from bone cancer. She used to eat Creamed Brains, or Brains and Bacon. BARFFF.

Alistair - August 10, 2008 5:37 AM

A Long time ago, when the world was a lot simpler (1952 actually), two men decided they wanted to learn about atherosclerosis.

What Drs Henry D Moon & James F Rinehart did was take 250 bodies of people who died sudden deaths and examine their coronary arteies. What they did was cut up and examine the components of so called arterial plaque, from it's very earliest stage to it's worst stage. It's realy quite a simple study, one that can't be twisted by statistics and reported in a way that makes it hard for the layman to understand WTF it all means. We cut up atherosclerosis of all stages of development and see whats in it. Makes sense to me.

Now, the results of this study are published in the Circulation, the American Heart Asociations Journal.

What they say does not fit in with what the AHA preach today.

Said Drs Moon & Rinehart,

"The earliest sclerotic lesion is characterized by the apparently simultaneous appearance of proliferation of subendothelial fibroblasts, increased amounts of mucoid ground substance and fragmentation of the internal elastic membrane. No relationship between these changes and the occasional presence of fine droplets of lipid could be demonstrated. The moderately advanced and far advanced lesions differed from the early lesions in that lipid was always present."

Moon & Rinhart must have known that some people whould one day blindly believe what they read in newspapers rather than read the real information and work it out for themselves;
They must have known that some people would not be research warriors because they were not doctors or scientists, So they did put it a bit simpler,

"No direct or consistent relationship of lipid to the early lesions could be demonstrated. In arteries showing early sclerosis, lipid was frequently absent."

"The lack of correlation between lipid and early arteriosclerotic changes leads us to believe that the deposition of lipid is not the initiating factor in the development of coronary arteriosclerosis."

They described the order of appearence of substances in these atheroscleropic plaque. Lipids appeared at stage 6 out of 9
"A general survey of the material indicate that there were multiple pathologic processes occurring in coronary arteriosclerosis. These processes were:
(1) subendothelial fibroblastic proliferation of the intima;
(2) appearance of increased amounts of mucoid ground substance
in the intima and occasionally in the media;
(3) fragmentation and degeneration of elastic tissue;
(4) formation of collagen fibers in the intimal plaques;
(5) regeneration of elastic tissue;
(6) deposition of lipid and cholesterol;
(7) "hyaline degeneration" of fibrous connective tissue;
(8) deposition of calcium;
(9) intramural hemorrhage and thrombosis."

The beauty of this study is it's simplicity. It relies on a scientists most basic skill, the power of observation. What you see is what is get.

Scott you should not believe everything you read, either in a newspaper or on the internet.In fact, I'd sugest you don't believe what I have said, but go and have a look at the study yourself.


Alistair - August 10, 2008 5:56 AM

My apologies To Scott, I addressed him when I should have addressed Gerry Pugliese in my previous post. Sorry Scott.

Danna Seevers - August 10, 2008 11:41 AM

If what you say is true about Sally Fallon and the WAPF "cashing in" then why doesn't the WAPF accept any money from the beef industry or the big dairy companies?? Don't they have a lot to gain from the WAPF pro animal fat advice? I think the main thing you've all missed here is that the WAPF DOES NOT avdocate consuming beef from conventionally raised animals( ie., grain fed, confinement raised, feedlot beef) but instead from pastured animals raised on green grass that hasn't been poisened by chemicals. Big difference folks and the science IS there to prove that.

My experience with WAPF principles is that people who follow this way of eating (I personally know over 200 families who eat this way-not necessarily "members" of the foundation either) seem to have one thing in common. They are almost always highly educated. One or both spouses has an advanced degree of some type and no matter what their socio-economic status may be(in other words, these are not mindless processionary caterpillars!), they are taking charge of their own health care and pursuing ways to improve the life and health of their families. Sadly, something currently not offered by mainstream nutritional advice or medical practitioners. When things don't work, people don't stick with it, they move on to something new. The Weston A. Price Foundation may not have ALL the answers but once people "get" what it has to offer, they only build upon that knowledge....as opposed to failing and hopping along to another diet. I wish someone would fund a study and look at the now thousands of WAPF raised babies and compare them to mainstream raised babies.

I don't know the author of this article but based on the comments, he knows very little about the Weston A. Price Foundation and Sally Fallon.

Gerry Pugliese - August 10, 2008 11:45 AM

Hey Danna-

Wow, you buy the nonsense hook, line, and sinker. You believe all the grass-fed babble.

In a nutshell, the more animal products you eat, the sicker you'll get, the quicker you'll die.

Grass or no grass. You're silly. That comment made me laugh.


Scott - August 10, 2008 1:54 PM

Gerry -

How about countering Alistair's post? He present a real study. I know you aren't a scientist, but the entire point of this blog and your job here is to promoted Dr Fuhrman's agenda right? So how about answering science with science.

I know you don't have all day to chase down studies, but so far in this thread and many others on this blog it seems as though you call people "silly" and move on. How are you going to convince the public to eat for health when you offer no scientific basis for your positions? "May studies" and "scientist laugh at low carb" has a 0.0% value. List these studies, names these scientists.

I'm not trying to be rude Gerry, it's just that the WAPF/Atkins/Pro-fat people who post here and challenge you ALWAYS get the better of you and ultimately Dr. Fuhrman because of this blog's refusal to answer science with science.

Gerry Pugliese - August 10, 2008 2:14 PM

Hey Scott-

Quite frankly, you are wrong. Dr. Fuhrman or myself has never been bested on this blog. Please site an example where this has happened. Also, please note, that old posts, sometimes don't get responses because they are old posts and the topic has most likely already been addressed somewhere else. Anyone who READS blogs knows that. Clearly, you don't read ALL of the blog.

My strategy as the blogger is not to fight science with science. Its not my place. I don't have the background for that. Doing so would make me no better than the arm chair scientists that THINK they know what they are talking about when they comment here.

I have taken up the charge of speaking out. Fighting fire with fire if you will. Low-carb people try to bully. So I bully back--and they SO can't take it.

Please flip through DiseaseProof's diet myths category. You'll find a lot of info from Dr. Fuhrman debunking ALL the WAPF-type nonsense.

Add here is something to ponder. Would fighting science with science honestly do any good? Who's mind would it change? Its a shame, but its pointless.


Scott - August 10, 2008 2:59 PM


Understand this... Let's say someone happens upon this blog and this very topic and reads the comments. This person would see Alistair's post, which includes a scientific study showing the OPPOSITE of what your story says. Naturally, the reader would expect a rebuttal from you showing a study that backs up your claims, but none are presented.

You can't honestly expect a new reader to fish through this entire site looking for a rebuttal that you could have simply linked to. You would be fighting fire with fire if you presented facts instead of name calling and broad brushed assumptions.

And yes, you and Dr. Fuhrman most certainly have been bested, namely Dr. Fuhrman regarding coconut oil. He was flat wrong with his argument and the thread disappeared. Funny, that. You have been bested in this thread by not fighting back and resorting to "liars", "silly", and overall dismissive replies to those who formulated good points.

Again, I'm not trying to be rude. I feel that Dr. Fuhrman does indeed have the science and knowledge to knock down the pro-fat crowd, but for some reason they always come out making this blog look weak. (IE: Chris Masterjohn's work against this blog).

I'm on your/Dr.Fuhrman's/this blog's side on this issue. However, I think this blog can do much more swinging and less ducking.

Gerry Pugliese - August 10, 2008 3:07 PM

Hey Scott-

Your concern is valid and yeah, in a perfect world it would be great to rebut every whacky comment, but DiseaseProof has nearly 4,000 posts. So, you got to stop somewhere.

That's the reason I just let comments go after awhile. The only other option is turn comments off after awhile or not publish dissenting views after awhile, but then you get hammered for being bias.

Someday I will figure out a solution. :)


David Brown - August 10, 2008 5:03 PM


I think the solution lies in recognizing that, where food is concerned, there are three important considerations. First, nutrient intake must be adequate. Dr. Fuhrman and his opponents agree on this point.

Second, food choices must be appropriate. You don't want to feed a vegetarian metabolism too much animal protein and vice versa. And you don't want to feed a person with a naturally slow metabolism too much carbohydrate or too little fat.

Third, foods overly rich in certain fats and sugars such as omega-6 vegetable oils and fructose (sucrose is half fructose) should be either avoided or strictly limited. Again, Dr. Fuhrman and his opponents agree on this.

The major bone of contention, then, is saturated fat. Dr. Fuhrman insists that saturated fat contributes to clogged arteries. Well, that can be true under certain circumstances having to do with the protein and micro nutrient density of the food ingested, the genetically determined biochemical configuration of the individual, and the amount of "empty" (generally sugar) calories included in the diet. To illustrate my point, here is an excerpt from pages 81-82 of "Nutrition Against Disease" by Roger J. Williams PhD:

"No discussion of heart disease would be complete without mention of the question of saturated fats. It has come to be almost an orthodox position that if one wishes to protect oneself against heart disease, one should avoid eating saturated (animal) fats. While this idea may not be entirely in error, it is misleading in its emphasis. The evidence shows that high fat consumption, when accompanied by plenty of the essential nutrients which all the cells need, does not cause atherosclerosis or heart disease.

Rats have been used extensively to study the effects of diet on atherosclerosis. Under ordinary dietary conditions the inclusion of saturated fats in their diet will consistently promote the deposition of cholesterol in their arteries.(50) For 285 days rats were fed a diet containing 61.6 percent animal fat, but highly superior with respect to protein, mineral, and vitamin content, without producing any pathological changes in the aorta or in the heart.(51) The animals did, to be sure, become obese, as much as three to four times their normal weight. Animals fed vegetable fats at the same level fared essentially no better and no worse. These findings were based upon extensive long-term experiments at Yale, using a total of 600 rats, which were observed for as long as two years. There were no findings suggestive that either high animal fat diets or high vegetable fat diets were conducive under these conditions to atherosclerosis."


50. Thomas, W.A., and Hartroft, W.S. "Myocardial infarction in rats fed diets containing high fat, cholesterol, thiouracil, and sodium cholate." Circulation, 19:65, 1959; Taylor, C. B., et al. "Fatal myocardial infarction in rhesus monkeys with diet-induced hyper-cholesterolemia." Circulation, 20;975, 1959.

In the above experiments, the investigators found that prolonged feeding of butter or lard to rats resulted in hyperlipemia and finally coronary thrombosis and myocardial infarction with lesions similar to those found in human beings. The diets of these animals were regarded as otherwise "normal" in respect to their intake of supplementary vitamins, minerals, and amino acids. Other data, however (see reference note 52 below) demonstrate that when fat and cholesterol (or animal protein) are increased in the diet, certain nutrients (particularly pyridoxine) must be increased above "average" or "normal" requirements.

51. Barboriak, J.J., et al. "Influence of high-fat diets on growth and development of obesity in the albino rat." J. Nutr., 64: 241, 1958.

As far as lifespan is concerned, Gerry, you shouldn't be so quick to finger animal foods as a factor contributing to an early demise. In the July 3, 2008 issue of our local paper was an article entitled "At age 106, Bigfork angler enjoys day of lake fishing." The closing paragraphs:

As she fished from the dock slowly retrieving a lure and hoping for a strike, she passed along her secret for a long life.

"I eat bacon every morning," she said. "Crisp bacon."

Scott - August 10, 2008 7:55 PM

Nice post David.

The Okinawans are often used as examples of health and longevity, but the fact that animal fat (namely pork and fish) constitute a daily percentage of their diet is often left out. What Dr. Fuhrman has said is that a diet lacking fruit/veggies/beans/nuts and seeds is inferior, and that a diet simply without animal products AND inadequate intake of the above foods is not protective.

Alistair - August 11, 2008 5:56 AM

There is an early episode of the Simpsons where Homer joins the debating team at school. Anyone who watches the show would know that Homer is also unlikely to ever articulate a logical argument with sound references, but at least his rebuttle made me laugh.

Although there some amusing statements made here.
"My strategy as the blogger is not to fight science with science"

(Well, what do you fight science with then? Heresay?)
But then,in the very next paragraph,
"I have taken up the charge of speaking out. Fighting fire with fire if you will."

Would not fighting fire with fire = fighting science with science?

The post that started this Blog ends with;
"Shame on Weston Price, Sally Fallon, Atkins and others like them for polluting modern scientific research with their outdated unsupported nonsense, anyone who thinks giving their newborn a bottle of meat broth is a good idea, needs their head examined!"

Mayby it's just me, but I find it strange that someone could accuse others of "polluting modern scientific research" Yet claim that they won't fight science with science or that they are not a Research Warrior.
Personally I don't care if the person is a scientist or someone who left school at the age of 16. If they can be bothered to research and learn with an open mind, then I will listen to what they have to say. If it makes some sort of sense yet counters what I believe, I will investigate further. Sometimes this results in me changing my view. I too used to believe the low fat nonsense, but via the process decribed above, I now take the stand that I do.

A persons health is the single most important thing to them, and I find it scary that someone can refuse to debate science with science and continue down the path of personal insults and belittlement, while claiming to "take a stand" regarding this subject.

In the world of science, A theory must be able to stand up to vigorous scrutiny. If one properly designed study contaradicts the theory, then that theory must be revised or tossed out all together.

"Science is nothing more than a method of inquiry. The method says an assertion is valid and merits universal acceptance only if it can be independently verified. The impersonal rigor of the method means it is utterly apolitical. A truth in science is verifiable whether you are black or white, male or female, old or young. It's verifiable whether you like the results of a study, or you don't."
Michael Chrichton - (American author, film producer and director, medical doctor; 1942 - )

While there are some studies that show an association between sat fat intake and health problems (Ditto for cholesterol), there are also many that don't (again Ditto for Cholsetol).

If you want to make an informed decision, then your first point of call should be a dictionary. Look up 'association', then look up 'cause'. You will see they are not the same thing.

What drew me to this blog was the vile, unsubstanciated attack on Sally Fallon and The Weston A Price Foundation. Its realy no surprise to see insults and vaugue unspecific statements being used in an attempt to counter those that try to defend Sally and the Foundation, rather than logic or science. Yet at the very top of the page is the quote;
"The beginning of a genuine scientifically based health revolution"

I provide a scientifically sound study that goes against what is being preached here, yet when asked to counter all we get is
"in a perfect world it would be great to rebut every whacky comment".

Well,I have even more such wacky comments on my site;

If you find that I'm wrong anywhere specifically, then feel free to point out where and why.

The sad part about all this is it seems that we are all of the belief that a wholesome nutrient dense diet is the foundation of good health. It's just that there are a couple of points about what this constitutes that differ. The old bugbear of tribilism raises it's ugly head and while such mindless attacks continue those that profit from the sickness spreading through out society sit back and continue to watch the dollars roll in at the expense of peoples health.

Gerry Pugliese - August 11, 2008 8:39 AM

Hey Alistar-

You realize you're grasping at straws--right?

Also, your reading comprehension skills are embarrassingly bad:

1. "Unsubstanciated attack on Sally Fallon and The Weston A Price Foundation." Have you read the post? Did you read the other posts cited in this posts?

2. "The beginning of a genuine scientifically based health revolution." Did you notice the author of this posts? Its me, not Dr. Fuhrman--the scientist/doctor.

Should I go on?

You seem to have created a bizarre scenario in your head.


Pam - August 11, 2008 3:14 PM

Was born and raised a "healthy" vegetarian...plenty of fruits, vegetables, soy, whole grains, no junk food, never stepped foot in McDonalds, but by my late 20's my health was a complete shambles. Thankfully I decided to start ignoring you lot and read Weston Price. I added fat, lots of fat, tons of saturated fat, eggs, organ meats, bone broth. Guess what? Health and vitality returned, blood tests for HDL/LDL and triglycerides fantastic, blood pressure back to normal, blood sugar back under control, painful menstrual cramps suffered my whole bleeding life GONE, fantastic body that causes auto wrecks back, cellulite gone, energy to ride my bike 20 miles/day to work. The proof is in the pudding folks. I feel sorry for you lot. I wouldn't trade how I look/feel now for that stupid, vegan, low-fat bull of my past for anything.

P.S. Gary Taubes wipes the floor with you on the science.

Blair McMorran - August 11, 2008 11:12 PM

Same here Pam. My sons were diagnosed with asthma - disappeared on WAPF diet. I lost 35 pounds (over 3 years) on WAPF diet. My husband had gout and beginning signs of arthritis - disappeared on WAPF diet. Works for me...

Don't want to argue about one size fits all, everyone has to find their own path, but I'm so much happier and healthier eating whole unprocessed foods!

I want to point out that our meat is grassfed - huge difference between your factory feedlot kind of beef and my kind of (e.coli - free), grass and sunshine fed beef. My eggs are from pastured poultry. My milk is from a small grain-free, grassfed dairy It is all local - and sustainable. These farms feed their animals biologically appropriate food, humane living conditions, and passionate dedication to their customers. Do yours?


alistair - August 12, 2008 8:44 AM

I actualy started to reply to you post saying that I did read the post and the other posts cited, that is why I used the term unsubstanciated. But upon re-reading your posts in this thread it's apparent that I must admit defeat to an obviously superior intelect.

There is no way I could hope to compete with the rational,logical and knowledgable arguments being put forward in such a civil manner here. I must slink off with my tail between my legs and inform others of my tribe that even our combined knowledge will never be any match for what we are up against on this blog.

I thank you for your enlightenment and patience in dealing with those of us who, despite actualy doing our own research in an attempt to develop an informed opinion, obviously have no idea what we are talking about.

You have also made me aware that my High School motto, Strive For The Light Of Knowledge, is truly a pointless ideal. For this I will be eternally grateful.

Gerry Pugliese - August 12, 2008 8:54 AM

Hey Alistair-

Now you're talking! ;)


Joe - August 12, 2008 10:57 AM

I just wanted to chime in here.

Thanks Gerry for helping to take some of the air out of the WAPF's tires. The fact that so few came out to fight this battle, leads me to believe that there aren't many left of them. And the vigor with which they fight leads me to believe that those that are left are feeling very threatened.

BTW Pam, you might want to read up on where your posting. Dr Fuhrman does not advocate low-fat veganism. I've also never met a single person who claimed that meat made their health problems better, that were eating healthy diets as vegans/vegetarians. You may be the one exception, but I doubt it.

Darleen - August 15, 2008 12:10 PM

Ah, Gerry gets all his scientific know=how from the news. That explains it.

"journalists" who report gossip as if it were gospel. Now there's a source of information I truly trust. LOL.

Joe - August 16, 2008 1:32 AM

I could say the same about your people, Darleen...

(most recent Atkins study for example)

Matt Stone - December 26, 2008 2:48 AM


Excellent article. It's just a shame when people like Sally Fallon come up with some tangent and then try to cash in big on donations. Man, those non-profit organizations! They must be stopped! I mean, read the news! Saturated fat raises the almighty bajeezus out of HDL cholesterol! I totally trust the news. There are no ties to any kind of financial interests there, or advertisers that have a claim in the fat-kills hypothesis or selling food with cheap commodities that conveniently happen to be low in saturated fat. Our media is far superior to Atkins, who ate a diet exactly like Fallon recommends - snack bars with soy protein isolate and splenda - something Fallon strongly advocates in Nourishing Traditions II: How Our Ancestors isolated soy protein with Hexane and then Stone-Pressed the Splenda from Sugarcane.

I have successfully proven Fallon completely wrong by the way, by having great success eating an all-plant diet for 30 days, inspired by Michael Pollan, at my blog. I lost weight effortlessly, overcame toothache, watched my skin and digestion miraculously clear, noticed the disappearance of aches and pains and more!

Now if we could just override our young children's pesky instincts to vomit upon looking at anything green we can save the world! Fuhrman rulz!

Post A Comment / Question Use this form to add a comment to this entry.

Remember personal info?
Send To A Friend Use this form to send this entry to a friend via email.