tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3748553995505192697.post7961625227451618338..comments2023-06-15T02:23:53.810-07:00Comments on Feasting on Fitness: The Study Everyone Talks About Part 1: Correlation is NOT CausationKristy A.http://www.blogger.com/profile/11214418778607114591noreply@blogger.comBlogger20125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3748553995505192697.post-73015735119392584672011-10-20T06:29:52.712-07:002011-10-20T06:29:52.712-07:00It's hard to add to all the great posts, but h...It's hard to add to all the great posts, but here goes: excavations of northern raw fat and raw meat eating people's skulls showed that they had very impressive healthy teeth. Not so of the very same people today who have added significant amounts of bread, hydrogenated fat, sugar...you get the point.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3748553995505192697.post-2437527743234292932011-10-14T14:48:26.511-07:002011-10-14T14:48:26.511-07:00Hi Anonymous,
Thank you for reading my blog. I gu...Hi Anonymous,<br />Thank you for reading my blog. I guess we agree to disagree because I don't think that Campbell made solid conclusions based on the data. With nutrition research, there seems to be a study to support any diet and any side of an argument. I suggest you go with your gut: if you feel good eating what you eat, awesome, if you don't, try changing it up and trying something new. I feel great on my paleo-style approach. I know when I eat too much carbohydrate, refined ones, or grain-based ones, I get sick. From my own personal experience, that is the data I need to keep on track. Hope you are happy and healthy too!<br />Best wishes,<br />KristyKristy A.https://www.blogger.com/profile/11214418778607114591noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3748553995505192697.post-1578508002466544472011-10-14T14:19:00.087-07:002011-10-14T14:19:00.087-07:00I have yet to see quality, scientific evidence aga...I have yet to see quality, scientific evidence against the China Study. This article doesn't attack a single SPECIFIC conclusion (there's far more than just one study) that Dr. Campbell makes. Rather, it says "correlation is not causation, I've seen vegan people and they look unhealthy," and moves on. Dismissing a 300+ page book based on Campbell's entire academic career. <br /><br />And like Anonymous said, those of you who are claiming he went out and did this research with the intent of proving "plants good, animals bad," you haven't even read the introduction to the book. You seriously think that at a time when EVERYONE else in academia, including Campbell's own research advisors, were promoting high-protein diets that it was somehow professionally beneficial for him to begin writing papers contradicting that? Give me a break. He had to get all of this research, contradicting almost all other research in that field (at the time), peer-reviewed by people who disagreed with him. Hundreds of papers. It seems rather ridiculous you guys think you can just write some little snippet on "correlation vs. causation" and dismiss it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3748553995505192697.post-40012854349416328592011-06-06T08:53:22.649-07:002011-06-06T08:53:22.649-07:00Anonymous, I not only read it, I practiced it for ...Anonymous, I not only read it, I practiced it for 3 months. I was never so sick or felt so bad in my entire life. My doctor told me to "GET OFF THE STRICT VEGETARIAN DIET NOW!!"HealthNut2https://www.blogger.com/profile/04301143523637577781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3748553995505192697.post-24863211066369736512011-02-11T08:19:08.080-08:002011-02-11T08:19:08.080-08:00I'm not surprised that the many people comment...I'm not surprised that the many people commenting against the China Study, didn't actually READ it. If you had you would have learned that Campbell was initially seeking to prove that animal protein is necessary for optimum health. When he realized that the healthiest people ate a plant-based diet, his research took a drastic turn. He was raised on a dairy farm and didn't become a vegan until AFTER his findings. There are lots of athletes who eat a whole food plant-based diet...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3748553995505192697.post-22088061561241474682010-05-12T08:47:57.369-07:002010-05-12T08:47:57.369-07:00Hi Anonymous,
Did you even read my articles? Thi...Hi Anonymous, <br />Did you even read my articles? This is a literature review--intended to present the arguments against The China Study. The point is to gather information and present it as concisely as possible. So I think you missed that. <br /><br />I agree with you that group characteristics, even stereotypes, aren't always definitive for the individual--which is somewhat funny given that is one of the pitfalls of The China Study: using pooled data to make individual dietary recommendations. I LOLed. <br /><br />I disagree with your argument that there are always too many variables to test so let's just say "screw it" and allow correlations to lead us to causations. And Mandy, many researchers do in fact try to study nutrition in a scientific manner with success. I find value in the controlled, randomized, placebo-utilizing trials. Nutrition research is challenging, but I think it is worth the pursuit even if we are never 100% sure of anything. And, like Jamie commented above, if time and time again testing AGAINST one's preferred diet came up in SUPPORT of it, then that is pretty good data for that diet, as opposed to trying to find preconceived proof by finagling and misrepresenting data to get the desired outcome. This is too often the case. There is value in epidemiological studies and meta-analysis, but one has to TEST the hypotheses they generate to realize that value and determine causation.<br /><br />Thank you for your feedback, Miles (I cited that debate in my second installment in the series--great reference!), Adam (here, here!), Jamie (thank you for adding a great suggestion for researchers to strive to DISPROVE what they personally/professionally seek to prove), Mandy (for a valid question), and Anonymous (for adding a nibble for thought). I appreciate your contribution to this discussion, each of you!Kristy A.https://www.blogger.com/profile/11214418778607114591noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3748553995505192697.post-14053677948486263242010-05-10T23:03:33.164-07:002010-05-10T23:03:33.164-07:00You guys crack me up for your sheer LACK of indepe...You guys crack me up for your sheer LACK of independent, unique, original, or introspective thought or debate... You talk about qualitative factors of vegetarians/vegans, such as the stereotypical assumption that they are starch-aholoics and eat tons of grains... same as you double standard the argument of vegetarians/vegans wrongfully assuming all meat is bad, but then they don't qualify conventional crap meat vs. organic/pasture/grass fed...<br /><br />BTW, even in double-blind, placebo controlled, peer reviewed clinical studies looking to test certain nutritional/dietary/supplemental/drug hypotheses, there are ALWAYS too many outside variables unaccounted for that will ALWAYS invalidate and skew the outcome to a moderate to large extent... therefore, quantitative EPIDEMIOLOGICAL STUDIES OF LARGE SCALE, BREADTH, CROSS REFERENCE, PARAMETERS, ETC (such as China Study, Framington's various studies, etc etc), DO IN MANY CASES PROVE TO A LARGE DEGREE THAT ---_YES-----, <br />CORRELATION OFTEN TIMES --_DOES---- EQUAL CAUSATION!!!....<br /><br />If I drop the hammer on my toe 10 times and my toe aches and is sore for days or weeks afterward 10 times out of 10, it doesn't take a fancy study to realize and acknowledge, to everyone's chagrin, THAT YET CORRELATION DOES EQUAL CAUSALITY!!!<br /><br />Use a bit of higher level thinking people... stop parroting your mentor and talking heads' talking points ad infinitum! PLEASE!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3748553995505192697.post-33543750974844219252010-05-10T11:56:39.379-07:002010-05-10T11:56:39.379-07:00is it just me, or is crux of your argument that t...is it just me, or is crux of your argument that there is no possible way to use science to study nutrition?mandyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09997543335610322226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3748553995505192697.post-41991754945413007972010-05-09T18:28:34.838-07:002010-05-09T18:28:34.838-07:00Outstanding summary Kristy - awesome job.
One thi...Outstanding summary Kristy - awesome job.<br /><br />One thing I have read regarding research is that the hallmark of a great scientist is that they will dedicate their life to proving they are wrong. For example, if I believe that red cars are always faster, I would dedicate my time to trying to show they are not... to trying to prove the null hypothesis.<br /><br />As someone has already mentioned, Campbell is a vegetarian. And one must smell a large rodent when a vegetarian produces 'evidence' that following a vegetarian diet is optimal. It would seem that Campbell has constructed a study to prove his own bias. When in actual fact, he should have spent his time trying to prove the opposite. Had he, despite his efforts to prove that eating meat was optimal to human health, found that vegetarianism/veganism was a superior way to eat, then he would have had more credibility me thinks!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3748553995505192697.post-40307512722852474802010-05-09T09:09:52.613-07:002010-05-09T09:09:52.613-07:00I remember a study that was presented at my univer...I remember a study that was presented at my university when I was a first-year graduate student. The study had something like 25,000 subjects. The presenter was enthusiastic about his results... right up until an older graduate student who was also attending the presentation challenged them on exactly this point. Later on, the older graduate student said to me "With the amount of data he had, my big toe would be statistically significant. It doesn't mean anything in the real world, though." <br /><br />Epidemiological studies are not useful for talking about causation. That's the meat of it, and we need to make that message viral so people will actually Get It. But that's a pipe dream on my part, I suppose.Adam G.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3748553995505192697.post-80555898116244801092010-04-21T10:22:45.939-07:002010-04-21T10:22:45.939-07:00Here's a debate between Campbell and Cordain h...Here's a debate between Campbell and Cordain http://bit.ly/9r7KwC . A very poor showing by Campbell, with almost no references to any studies in his statement paper and rebuttal. His 1st sentence of his rebuttal says it all, "My critique of Professor Loren Cordain’s proposition <br />almost entirely depends on my philosophy of nutrition." Cordain's 160ish paper references don't fit Campbell's mental model, so they *must* be wrong.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3748553995505192697.post-48725716484961269562010-04-21T10:07:17.795-07:002010-04-21T10:07:17.795-07:00Thank you, Kat, for contributing another book to m...Thank you, Kat, for contributing another book to my list of "Must Reads"! I appreciate your feedback, and that it is coming from the unique experience of having been a vegan. Thanks!<br /><br />Anonymous, thank you for your feedback! I totally understand your point of view with the statistics. I was trying to express that Campbell uses word choice to make his argument more convincing by evolving the correlations into patterns and then cause-effect relationships. I understand that epidemiological studies and even meta-analyses ARE useful, but not at drawing cause-effect relationships or dietary prescriptions without further testing. Thank you for emphasizing the caution I had intended to express in my post.Kristy A.https://www.blogger.com/profile/11214418778607114591noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3748553995505192697.post-4647500730990346182010-04-21T09:45:09.098-07:002010-04-21T09:45:09.098-07:00I know I'm a bit late to this discussion, but ...I know I'm a bit late to this discussion, but I'll just add two points (wearing my professional statistician hat) - There are legitimate issues about food quality in China, it doesn't seem unreasonable to assume that those eating more meat have higher exposure to toxins than those eating only vegetables/grains (ok, so this isn't a statistician observation, but the whole toxins concentrate up the food chain thing... which I think is still valid). The point I'm making is that the results may be valid (ie plant eaters had less cancer) but the division incorrect. This leads to a comment about your treatment of correlations. <br /><br />I have a small objection to the wording you used "Correlations are now "patterns." Are they trying to make correlations sound more concrete? Patterns are usually obvious and if obvious, does that mean they are real?". Looking at correlations in large data sets, with many explanatory variables, as patterns is actually a very useful and practical way of visualizing relationships between variables. This doesn't mean the relationships are not spurious and *great* care must be taken in the interpretation of such patterns, which obviously wasn't done. Additionally, despite our wishes, patterns are not easy to spot in messy, high dimensional data such as this. They just aren't. That is a reality of trying to analyze large, comprehensive studies, patterns are bloody hard to find - even if they actually exist! Finally, epidemiological studies do have value, it's just that great care must be taken in the interpretation of results, and that is not often the case. <br /><br />As a caveat, I haven't read the book, nor do I plan to, it seems quite clear that the book is an utter waste of time and the study itself was, misguided, with far reaching conclusions made that just can't be justified. I generally agree with your comments, it's just that it feels a bit like you are throwing all epidemiological studies, correlations and patterns out as well, despite the fact that they all have real value. We just have to be careful! (very, very careful...)<br /><br />As an aside to this entire comment, I enjoy your blog.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3748553995505192697.post-56000623385809096302010-04-21T05:30:59.275-07:002010-04-21T05:30:59.275-07:00Thanks for the great post. I read The China Study ...Thanks for the great post. I read The China Study back in my vegan days and couldn't help but wonder how all those people survived this long eating a vegan diet. It was a nagging question of common sense. Suddenly this guy comes along and says that animal products cause cancer? Too many questions.....I wasn't vegan for long.<br /><br />Could you consider taking a look at "Skinny Bitch"?Another book out there telling people how bad it is to eat meat (I don't recall differentiating between grass fed vs. grain fed beef. )Kathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01485328170226235759noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3748553995505192697.post-89089144798294443182010-04-20T11:16:39.799-07:002010-04-20T11:16:39.799-07:00David, I agree with the overuse of superlatives be...David, I agree with the overuse of superlatives being a thinly veiled disguise of unfounded conclusions. You don't have to overemphasize when the facts are plainly visible. Great choices for future reading; I will put them on my list! Thank you!<br /><br />Paul, thank you for the feedback! I love that Taubes article too. The more I read from him, the more I respect that man. And you are right, the best argument is N=1: Does it work for you? For Lierre Smith author of The Vegetarian Myth, the answer became unavoidable as her health severely deteriorated on a vegan diet. Her experience is not an isolated case. Just like you, I am healthiest by how I feel, perform at the gym, and by my blood work now on a paleo-style approach than on a low-fat, high carb diet, vegetarian trial as a teen, or zoning without paleo foods. That is all the fact I need to continue to eat paleo-style and try to refine my choices to be more local, seasonal, unprocessed, wild-caught, pasture-raised, etc.Kristy A.https://www.blogger.com/profile/11214418778607114591noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3748553995505192697.post-62076787734290831642010-04-18T20:10:03.821-07:002010-04-18T20:10:03.821-07:00David, that's in interesting list.
Don, I a...David, that's in interesting list. <br /><br />Don, I agree w Kristy - the argument that vegan/vegetarian eating is somehow merciful to animals or to the environment has been dismantled by Ms. Kieth; the Vegetarian Myth is a 'can't put it down' masterpiece ... until she shifts into politics at the end. That part is still informative, but not gripping.<br /><br />What a post, Kristy, thank you. Love the Taubes link. In the end, we get to test ourselves. Measure the inputs and outputs and you can get an imperfect but powerful testament to what works for you. Very low fat got me 15 pounds fatter, with massive blood sugar crashes, even though I was working out many hours/week doing cardio, resistance work and martial arts. It also got me motivated to take a lot of ibuprofen due to high inflammation, poor sleep quality and virtually nothing I liked. Meat vegetables nuts and seeds, with LOTS of fat, has me feeling well, looking fair to middlin' for a 46 year old, sleeping well, and drawing rave reviews on my flight physicals - low TG, good HDL, low fasting glucose. I'm sold. And if per chance living like this kills me, it's a fair trade.Apolloswabbiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10048632865194585592noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3748553995505192697.post-35851553962040689412010-04-17T09:04:45.822-07:002010-04-17T09:04:45.822-07:00I'm currently on page 148 of The China Study. ...I'm currently on page 148 of The China Study. I find the author's style of writing easy to comprehend but very irritating. My complaint? Excessive use of superlative. Here are a few examples (chosen at random) from pages 106 and 107:<br />...incredible complexities and subtleties...impressive and informative web of information...this mammoth study fit perfectly...At the end of the day, the strength and consistency if the majority if the evidence is enough to draw valid conclusions ...incredible benefits...evidence is so overwhelming that...mountain of supporting research...convinced me to turn my own dietary lifestyle around.<br /><br />I've read enough nutrition literature over the years to recognize that the hallmark of a weak argument is the hard sell approach, an unwarranted sense of confidence in one's conclusions bolstered by repetition and excessive use of superlative. I find this sort of thing extremely tedious. Want to read some good authors? Try "Nutrition Against Disease" by Roger J.Williams, PhD, "Nutrition and your Mind" by George Watson, PhD, and "Sweet and Dangerous" by John Yudkin, MD.David Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16372232359108968083noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3748553995505192697.post-47833743549437118952010-04-16T22:52:37.866-07:002010-04-16T22:52:37.866-07:00Thanks Helen! Glad I could help! I know the topi...Thanks Helen! Glad I could help! I know the topic is daunting, but I am trying to cover all the bases and gather together reputable resources. Mostly, I need the answers myself for my response to that inevitable question!<br /><br />Don, what a well-thought out comment! I agree with your evolutionary history, but I think we would have killed and eaten animals long before we had tools. Chimps hunt and I think our hands would have sufficed to grab what we could when the opportunity presented itself. Tools definitely allowed us to exploit that meat-eating niche, though! <br /><br />The argument against animal exploitation is emotionally charged, but I believe it was respectfully, thoughtfully, and carefully presented by Lierre Keith in The Vegetarian Myth. Really, we can't live in a bubble--our lives depend upon animals. It is up to us to acknowledge all creatures, big and small, that contribute to our lives and to treat them respectfully, even as our food. And like you said, if someone wishes to refrain from eating this creature or that, it's that person's choice, but it is not the optimum diet for the human body to leave out meat.Kristy A.https://www.blogger.com/profile/11214418778607114591noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3748553995505192697.post-70189546911192869432010-04-16T21:12:17.781-07:002010-04-16T21:12:17.781-07:00Colin Campbell is a vegetarian. He designed the st...Colin Campbell is a vegetarian. He designed the study to prove that vegetarian is best. When you know the results you want to get, you can select the participants and design it to get those results. The study is worthless, but the book on it is unfortunately selling well.<br /><br />Humans have never been vegan. Until we developed tools 2.5 million years ago (allowing us to kill and eat animals) we ate insects. The high protein and nutrition that they provide would have been needed for us to have developed into such brainy creatures. Now one could argue that 2.5 million years isn’t a long enough time for our bodies to have adapted to meat eating. But if you take that position you had better completely avoid Neolithic foods, even more so than the paleo eater avoids them.<br /><br />Now, of course, veganism is really a choice to not exploit animals. You shouldn’t argue with someone’s ethics choice. But a vegan cannot argue that his diet is the optimum diet for the human body.<br /><br />More on paleo eating is here: http://paleodiet.com/definition.htmDon Wisshttp://paleodiet.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3748553995505192697.post-30162484209638722432010-04-16T20:44:04.416-07:002010-04-16T20:44:04.416-07:00Thanks for this Kirsty! Very timely... I spotted &...Thanks for this Kirsty! Very timely... I spotted 'The China Study' in the library today and nearly picked it up, but decided not to: I decided my understanding of the scientific method is not good enough to make an objective analysis of the information within. <br /><br />Some days I wish I had another lifetime to study statistics, epidemiology and sociology. I was thinking about studying nutrition, but it would be an exercise in frustration with the whole field so entrenched in flawed science.<br /><br />I'm thoroughly convinced by the arguments of Taubes et al in favor of a low-carb diet.Helen in Oznoreply@blogger.com