4

votes

What do we think of this article by our good friend Dean Ornish?

Answered on September 12, 2014
Created September 23, 2012 at 4:37 PM

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/23/opinion/sunday/the-optimal-diet.html?ref=opinion

Medium avatar

(10611)

on September 07, 2013
at 01:28 AM

I don't mind seeing someone go after Atkins Diet with a wrecking bar, but you're right he does seem desperate and wearing it on his sleeve. The biggest problem with his optimo cigar diet is the same as Atkin's: they haven't stopped the fat epidemic.

E253f8ac1d139bf4d0bfb44debd1db21

on September 25, 2012
at 08:51 AM

Borofergie, quit acting like humans are exclusively carnivores.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117

(25477)

on September 25, 2012
at 02:03 AM

You keep believing that.

96440612cf0fcf366bf5ad8f776fca84

(19413)

on September 24, 2012
at 08:46 PM

Not much to elaborate on, Paleos eat higher fat, and lower carb diets than SAD eaters. Why? We've been taught to avoid animal fat, and embrace grains since the 1980s, even industrial oils are used sparingly by those who use them - some even use spray on oils and non-stick pans. I'd think this is quite obvious.

96440612cf0fcf366bf5ad8f776fca84

(19413)

on September 24, 2012
at 08:43 PM

After you digest either bread or cereal, all the carbs in that meal turn to glucose - not very different than if you were to eat a bowl of sugar.

Medium avatar

(10611)

on September 24, 2012
at 07:26 PM

NYT runs 'em all, including Taubes love poem to salted food. Anyone famous gets their shot in on the latest man-bites-diet story.

Medium avatar

(10611)

on September 24, 2012
at 07:17 PM

The article claims an increase in CRP from LC dieting vs HC. I'd say that misses the benefit of the dieting, and is thrown on mainly to kick dirt on LC. IF LC dieting increases inflammation at all, I'm guessing it's a transitory effect seen during the 4 week diet period.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117

(25477)

on September 24, 2012
at 05:41 PM

If you think that is correct you are in a lonely camp. Inflammation (HS CRP) ruins cellular signaling in the brain and is one of the first clinical signs we see in obesity.

Medium avatar

(10611)

on September 24, 2012
at 05:03 PM

The paper which is referenced for Ornish's CRP increase claim does indeed show a higher weight loss rate for LC: -7 lbs vs -5 lbs over 4 weeks. But who's interested in CRP? The weight loss and reduction in blood glucose is much more important and both diets accomplished that. The short term increase in inflammation can be reduced once the stressful weight loss period is over.

Medium avatar

(10611)

on September 24, 2012
at 04:47 PM

If you've lost weight and kept it off, join Brown's NWCR. By doing so you enter a vetted ongoing population study which is heavily weighted to successful low fat dieters. NWCR has no axes to grind in the macronutrient wars. They are only trying to document what works long term to stem obesity.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on September 24, 2012
at 03:28 PM

The main problem with whole grains is not the glycemic load. It's the allergens and the contribution to dental carries (subject to genotype).

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on September 24, 2012
at 03:26 PM

Non-processed carbs can be rich in important nutritional factors. Subject to a suitable enterotype, they could be significantly health enhancing.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on September 24, 2012
at 03:24 PM

Non-processed carbs are hardly toxic..

Medium avatar

(10611)

on September 24, 2012
at 12:16 PM

Oh quit badgering the witness borofergie. Carbs aren't cigarettes.

B0fe7b5a9a197cd293978150cbd9055f

(8938)

on September 24, 2012
at 12:11 PM

*"We eat higher fat and lower carb diets than the SAD eaters, and that's optimal."* care to elaborate on that :D? I don't see what is wrong with shooting down sugar and praising grains. They're totally different.

B0fe7b5a9a197cd293978150cbd9055f

(8938)

on September 24, 2012
at 12:08 PM

I'd volunteer too :D, but I think it's too easy to disregard all animal studies just because we're not mice. I think we have to work with the evidence we have, a nihilist point of view won't get us anywhere.

B3173217a49b5b0116078775a17eb21d

(11488)

on September 24, 2012
at 09:03 AM

but yes, I'd volunteer.

B3173217a49b5b0116078775a17eb21d

(11488)

on September 24, 2012
at 09:03 AM

Properly constructed ramdomised trials? The Swedish experiment didn't include anyone eating a low-carb diet - they simply extrapolated from people on "moderate carb diets". The rat experiment was on a low-carb, high-protein diet, not LCHF. Neither are relevant...

091423a30c0188fbff51e39397e7e056

(384)

on September 24, 2012
at 08:17 AM

What are the alternatives to studying the effects of things on animals and studying the effects of things on humans via observational studies? Are you volunteering to be locked in a cage and fed certain diets for science?

B3173217a49b5b0116078775a17eb21d

(11488)

on September 24, 2012
at 07:24 AM

Do you mean "do better" or "tolerate better"? Some people tolerate smoking 10 packs of cigarettes a day better than others, it doesn't mean that they are genetically primed to smoke lots of fags.

A2c38be4c54c91a15071f82f14cac0b3

(12682)

on September 24, 2012
at 06:26 AM

Ahh shiz, you right stabby. Wrong study. Thanks for pointing that out, I got confused because he linked to the study I thought he was talking about right before that. Either way, good points. I am a banana. I am also unmoved by his temperament.

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d

(17969)

on September 24, 2012
at 06:17 AM

Like he cited the one you speak of in previous paragraph but then linked to a different study in the next paragraph. Refuting himself with the previous paragraph which shows that Atkins and all that meat is compatible with low inflammation. So which is it Dean? Atkins is liek sooo inflammatory or there is no statistically significant difference between inflammatory markers and there's no telling whether or not the inflammation would plummet even further to the optimal range if the Atkins group had some turmeric and green tea and got to bed on time uniformly? You do not get to cherry-pick.

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d

(17969)

on September 24, 2012
at 06:15 AM

Like he cited the one you speak about but then when he made his next point about inflammation and linked to a different study in the next paragraph. Refuting himself with the previous paragraph which shows that Atkins and all that meat is compatible with low inflammation. So which is it Dean? Atkins is liek sooo inflammatory or there is no statistically significant difference between inflammatory markers and there's no telling whether or not the inflammation would plummet even further to the optimal range if the Atkins group had some turmeric and green tea and got to bed on time uniformly

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d

(17969)

on September 24, 2012
at 06:14 AM

Like he cited the one you speak about but then when he made his next point about inflammation and linked to a different study in the next paragraph. So which is it Dean? Atkins is like liek sooo inflammatory or there is no statistically significant difference between inflammatory markers and there's no telling whether or not the inflammation would plummet even further to the optimal range if the Atkins group had some turmeric and green tea and got to bed on time uniformly?

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d

(17969)

on September 24, 2012
at 06:09 AM

That's actually a different study, the one he cites does show what he claims. But the study you're talking about makes a good point, he is cherry-picking. Egregiously, unabashedly, maniacally, there are no words to express it, anybody who cherry-picks like that, ignoring dozens of studies that contradict it, is a snake. No more of this "oh dean ornish is such a nice guy and he's helping people", he is a propagator of misinformation and is pathological to the minds of the world. I am a raccoon, with a knife, I am unmoved by his temperament.

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d

(17969)

on September 24, 2012
at 05:59 AM

That is also a very low CRP, compatible with the lowest risk, ergo low carb was compatible with the lowest risk range for CRP. But who's to say if adding a few things in wouldn't put it even lower? All reason suggests it.

Medium avatar

(10611)

on September 24, 2012
at 02:30 AM

I'll throw him in the waste basket with every other hubristic diet book writer. I've solved my personal problem with obesity so I resent being told by any of these SOB's that I did it the wrong way. Based on my experience this guy is leading T2 diabetics astray by not telling them to cut ALL their high glycemic carbs way back.

61844af1187e745e09bb394cbd28cf23

(11058)

on September 23, 2012
at 07:10 PM

Why give him a break? It's better to call bullshit what it is and stop this guy from lying to the masses.

  • 2295d192a2ae0babae6dd8789200e42a

    asked by

    (20)
  • Views
    2.4K
  • Last Activity
    1259D AGO
Frontpage book

Get FREE instant access to our Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!

13 Answers

15
B0fe7b5a9a197cd293978150cbd9055f

(8938)

on September 23, 2012
at 05:03 PM

I love Ornish, he's such a calm person :). The problem with him is that, as soon as there is negative evidence for low-carb diets, he jumps on it. There are a lot of problems with low-carb diets, but there sure is a crapton of evidence against the food he promotes so I don't understand why he keeps focusing on criticizing low-carb and doing silly studies that really don't prove anything useful.

I don't think it's very useful to go into science here, since the studies he mentions require smoking cessation, stress management sessions, 10%-fat vegetarian diet (= way less PUFAs, likely way less tryptophan since it also has calorie restriction, ...).

Most of the article is centered around prestige, money, fame, ... considering he uses words like "optimal" (Dr. Kruse, anyone?) and says things like :

  • "In 35 years of medical research, conducted at the nonprofit Preventive Medicine Research Institute, which I founded"
  • "... studies done in collaboration with Dr. Elizabeth Blackburn, who shared the Nobel Prize in 2009 with Carol Greider and Jack Szostak for discovering telomerase"
  • "Outcomes from more than 37,000 men from the Harvard-sponsored Health Professionals Follow-Up Study and more than 83,000 women from the Nurses??? Health Study "

I'm not saying it's wrong to use big names and big numbers to underline your point, but in my opinion he's overdoing it (and not only in the article itself, I've noticed he always mentions big names and big numbers whenever he tries to prove something).

And after all that he has the guts to say "But never underestimate the power of telling people what they want to hear ??? like cheeseburgers and bacon are good for you.". Haha :D. Exactly. Don't underestimate the power of that. The optimal diet is by no means optimal, since it ignores context.

8
B3173217a49b5b0116078775a17eb21d

(11488)

on September 23, 2012
at 06:50 PM

He seems a bit desperate in his choice of scientific evidence to back up his prejudce:

  1. The New England Journal of Medicine study that he references is a rat experiment. Fair point, I'll be careful not to feed vermin a low-carb diet, in case it gives them a heart attack.
  2. British Medical Journal study of 43,396 Swedish women over 16 years, actually included no low-carbers and was based on a single, self-reported diet record that covered the past 6 months, and was used to characterize the women's diets over the next 16 years. Denise Minger rips the balls off it here.
  3. Epidimological red meat shit. Yada, yada, yada.

That's it. It's hardly a fucking smoking gun. If there was really evidence that low-carb diets are bad for you, you think that he, of all people, might be able to dig up. The fact that this is all that he can present, proves that there is none.

B3173217a49b5b0116078775a17eb21d

(11488)

on September 24, 2012
at 09:03 AM

but yes, I'd volunteer.

Medium avatar

(10611)

on September 24, 2012
at 04:47 PM

If you've lost weight and kept it off, join Brown's NWCR. By doing so you enter a vetted ongoing population study which is heavily weighted to successful low fat dieters. NWCR has no axes to grind in the macronutrient wars. They are only trying to document what works long term to stem obesity.

091423a30c0188fbff51e39397e7e056

(384)

on September 24, 2012
at 08:17 AM

What are the alternatives to studying the effects of things on animals and studying the effects of things on humans via observational studies? Are you volunteering to be locked in a cage and fed certain diets for science?

B0fe7b5a9a197cd293978150cbd9055f

(8938)

on September 24, 2012
at 12:08 PM

I'd volunteer too :D, but I think it's too easy to disregard all animal studies just because we're not mice. I think we have to work with the evidence we have, a nihilist point of view won't get us anywhere.

B3173217a49b5b0116078775a17eb21d

(11488)

on September 24, 2012
at 09:03 AM

Properly constructed ramdomised trials? The Swedish experiment didn't include anyone eating a low-carb diet - they simply extrapolated from people on "moderate carb diets". The rat experiment was on a low-carb, high-protein diet, not LCHF. Neither are relevant...

Medium avatar

(10611)

on September 07, 2013
at 01:28 AM

I don't mind seeing someone go after Atkins Diet with a wrecking bar, but you're right he does seem desperate and wearing it on his sleeve. The biggest problem with his optimo cigar diet is the same as Atkin's: they haven't stopped the fat epidemic.

7
77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on September 23, 2012
at 08:38 PM

I like Dean Ornish. Dude is totally wrong about almost everything but he DOES seem to really care and I don't think there is any malice behind his writings or actions. He really believes what he says. Though so does the schizophrenic who lives by our dumpsters, and I find his arguments about as credible.

5
96440612cf0fcf366bf5ad8f776fca84

(19413)

on September 23, 2012
at 06:38 PM

It's the usual conventional horse droppings. "whole grains, legumes, soy products" are not helpful, they are harmful.

Paleos don't eat high protein diets, almost no one does, if we did, we'd get rabbit starvation. We eat higher fat and lower carb diets than the SAD eaters, and that's optimal.

Funny how he mentions sugar is bad, yet insists on including whole grains, which, as we know are digested down to glucose and have the same kind of glycemic load as pure sugar.

So there you have it, on one hand he shoots down sugar, on the other he praises grains. D'oh!

The rest of the mortality stuff is the usual meaningless anti-meat bull.

B0fe7b5a9a197cd293978150cbd9055f

(8938)

on September 24, 2012
at 12:11 PM

*"We eat higher fat and lower carb diets than the SAD eaters, and that's optimal."* care to elaborate on that :D? I don't see what is wrong with shooting down sugar and praising grains. They're totally different.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on September 24, 2012
at 03:28 PM

The main problem with whole grains is not the glycemic load. It's the allergens and the contribution to dental carries (subject to genotype).

96440612cf0fcf366bf5ad8f776fca84

(19413)

on September 24, 2012
at 08:43 PM

After you digest either bread or cereal, all the carbs in that meal turn to glucose - not very different than if you were to eat a bowl of sugar.

96440612cf0fcf366bf5ad8f776fca84

(19413)

on September 24, 2012
at 08:46 PM

Not much to elaborate on, Paleos eat higher fat, and lower carb diets than SAD eaters. Why? We've been taught to avoid animal fat, and embrace grains since the 1980s, even industrial oils are used sparingly by those who use them - some even use spray on oils and non-stick pans. I'd think this is quite obvious.

5
D7cc4049bef85d1979efbd853dc07c8e

(4029)

on September 23, 2012
at 06:14 PM

I can't be bothered to pay any attention to anything the attention-seeking reputation-protecting man has to say any more. Much like my opinion of Dr. Oz, Ornish has a lot of repair he needs to do first before I can consider his voice worth listening too. -shrug-

What "I" think is that "I just don't care". :D

Medium avatar

(10611)

on September 24, 2012
at 02:30 AM

I'll throw him in the waste basket with every other hubristic diet book writer. I've solved my personal problem with obesity so I resent being told by any of these SOB's that I did it the wrong way. Based on my experience this guy is leading T2 diabetics astray by not telling them to cut ALL their high glycemic carbs way back.

4
Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117

(25477)

on September 24, 2012
at 01:09 PM

Lost in all this, in this article the low carb high fat diet still showed superior weight loss to Ornish's version of the high carb diet. I guess Dean forgot that part. It seems the author did not bother to go examine that either.

Medium avatar

(10611)

on September 24, 2012
at 05:03 PM

The paper which is referenced for Ornish's CRP increase claim does indeed show a higher weight loss rate for LC: -7 lbs vs -5 lbs over 4 weeks. But who's interested in CRP? The weight loss and reduction in blood glucose is much more important and both diets accomplished that. The short term increase in inflammation can be reduced once the stressful weight loss period is over.

Medium avatar

(10611)

on September 24, 2012
at 07:17 PM

The article claims an increase in CRP from LC dieting vs HC. I'd say that misses the benefit of the dieting, and is thrown on mainly to kick dirt on LC. IF LC dieting increases inflammation at all, I'm guessing it's a transitory effect seen during the 4 week diet period.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117

(25477)

on September 24, 2012
at 05:41 PM

If you think that is correct you are in a lonely camp. Inflammation (HS CRP) ruins cellular signaling in the brain and is one of the first clinical signs we see in obesity.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117

(25477)

on September 25, 2012
at 02:03 AM

You keep believing that.

3
518bce04b12cd77741237e1f61075194

(11577)

on September 24, 2012
at 01:06 PM

Good on him for at least bringing attention to the fact that lose weight =/= automatically health for life, gain weight =/= going to die and kill everyone else by being a burden on the healthcare system. And including "moderate exercise" and "stress-management techniques" as an important aspect of improving overall health is very smart- I'm sure it made a really huge difference for the study he links to. Obviously after that, there's a bit of discrepancy between what I think is a good idea, and what he does.

I also like how he describes "vegetarian black bean chili" and "whole wheat penne pasta with roasted vegetables" as what you would eat on his recommended diet, whereas for Atkins/paleo he says "cheeseburgers and bacon". I mean, he could have said "shepard's pie" or "steamed mussels" for the Atkins/paleo and immediately framed it differently than a supposed non-stop cheeseburger fest (?). I guess it's true that "you can never underestimate the power of telling people what they want to hear"- so he wants to exploit that too.

Medium avatar

(10611)

on September 24, 2012
at 07:26 PM

NYT runs 'em all, including Taubes love poem to salted food. Anyone famous gets their shot in on the latest man-bites-diet story.

3
A2c38be4c54c91a15071f82f14cac0b3

(12682)

on September 24, 2012
at 12:30 AM

One of his quotes about the recent randomized diet study was this:

"Patients on an Atkins diet in this study showed more than double the level of CRP (C-reactive protein), which is a measure of chronic inflammation"

Say what you will about his mice studies and epidemiology, but this claim is just wrong. The CRP values for the low fat and low carb diets were .78 and .87 respectively, both which had decreased by more than half from the start of the study. I have no idea where that claim about the low carb diet doubling CRP is coming from.

Edit:

Actually I am totally wrong, I thought he was commenting on a different study. Ignore me and just read Stabby's good comments on this answer.

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d

(17969)

on September 24, 2012
at 06:15 AM

Like he cited the one you speak about but then when he made his next point about inflammation and linked to a different study in the next paragraph. Refuting himself with the previous paragraph which shows that Atkins and all that meat is compatible with low inflammation. So which is it Dean? Atkins is liek sooo inflammatory or there is no statistically significant difference between inflammatory markers and there's no telling whether or not the inflammation would plummet even further to the optimal range if the Atkins group had some turmeric and green tea and got to bed on time uniformly

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d

(17969)

on September 24, 2012
at 05:59 AM

That is also a very low CRP, compatible with the lowest risk, ergo low carb was compatible with the lowest risk range for CRP. But who's to say if adding a few things in wouldn't put it even lower? All reason suggests it.

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d

(17969)

on September 24, 2012
at 06:09 AM

That's actually a different study, the one he cites does show what he claims. But the study you're talking about makes a good point, he is cherry-picking. Egregiously, unabashedly, maniacally, there are no words to express it, anybody who cherry-picks like that, ignoring dozens of studies that contradict it, is a snake. No more of this "oh dean ornish is such a nice guy and he's helping people", he is a propagator of misinformation and is pathological to the minds of the world. I am a raccoon, with a knife, I am unmoved by his temperament.

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d

(17969)

on September 24, 2012
at 06:17 AM

Like he cited the one you speak of in previous paragraph but then linked to a different study in the next paragraph. Refuting himself with the previous paragraph which shows that Atkins and all that meat is compatible with low inflammation. So which is it Dean? Atkins is liek sooo inflammatory or there is no statistically significant difference between inflammatory markers and there's no telling whether or not the inflammation would plummet even further to the optimal range if the Atkins group had some turmeric and green tea and got to bed on time uniformly? You do not get to cherry-pick.

A2c38be4c54c91a15071f82f14cac0b3

(12682)

on September 24, 2012
at 06:26 AM

Ahh shiz, you right stabby. Wrong study. Thanks for pointing that out, I got confused because he linked to the study I thought he was talking about right before that. Either way, good points. I am a banana. I am also unmoved by his temperament.

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d

(17969)

on September 24, 2012
at 06:14 AM

Like he cited the one you speak about but then when he made his next point about inflammation and linked to a different study in the next paragraph. So which is it Dean? Atkins is like liek sooo inflammatory or there is no statistically significant difference between inflammatory markers and there's no telling whether or not the inflammation would plummet even further to the optimal range if the Atkins group had some turmeric and green tea and got to bed on time uniformly?

2
77d22b8f5b0a0c74fba4169e728f30ea

on September 23, 2012
at 06:09 PM

First of all, I don't know what WE think, but I can tell you what I think. I think a little further analysis of Dr. Ornish's article is warranted. Thankfully, links to the studies that he cites are included in the article. If you read the abstracts, you will find that Dr. Ornish interprets things a little differently than those who conducted the studies.

Swedish women study: "CONCLUSIONS: Low carbohydrate-high protein diets, used on a regular basis and without consideration of the nature of carbohydrates or the source of proteins, are associated with increased risk of cardiovascular disease." I think people who follow a primal or paleo diet "consider the nature of carbohydrates or the source of proteins".

New England Journal of Science article: "We examined the cardiovascular effects of a low-carbohydrate, high-protein diet (LCHP) in the ApoE???/??? mouse model of atherosclerosis and in a model of ischemia-induced neovascularization. Mice on a LCHP were compared with mice maintained on either the standard chow diet (SC) or the Western diet (WD) which contains comparable fat and cholesterol to the LCHP." Mice??? I get it. Mice are useful for studies, but this leads us to the fundamental question - how are humans supposed to (or designed to) eat? Dr. Ornish wants us to eat like mice. (A joke... kind of.)

Give the guy a break. He's just trying to stay relevant in a world where we have increasingly more access to information that may dispute the claims that he has used to build his career and reputation.

61844af1187e745e09bb394cbd28cf23

(11058)

on September 23, 2012
at 07:10 PM

Why give him a break? It's better to call bullshit what it is and stop this guy from lying to the masses.

1
87ec5f01a60b315d4ce8ee62f654969e

(10)

on February 17, 2013
at 12:48 AM

The man lies, misreads data, and is in decline. He does everything he can do to get his opposition to agree at some level with him to find consensus then uses that against them misquoting what was said and then stabbing them in the back when discussing their diet styles.

I'd say he was slime but I don't want to give slime a bad name.

The great thing is he is going down, low fat is dying as the real science is coming out, finally. Even his idiot predecessor, Ansel Keys, eventually came to realise that he had been mistaken on cholesterol.

1
E253f8ac1d139bf4d0bfb44debd1db21

on September 24, 2012
at 04:56 AM

Ornish is right -- and wrong. It depends on the population sample being studied, probably has to do with genes. Some people just do better on high complex carbs.

There's no point attacking Ornish and his diet. Obviously he is commited to helping people.

Better to try to understand how "carbers" can be distinguished from non-carbers. Any ideas?

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on September 24, 2012
at 03:24 PM

Non-processed carbs are hardly toxic..

E253f8ac1d139bf4d0bfb44debd1db21

on September 25, 2012
at 08:51 AM

Borofergie, quit acting like humans are exclusively carnivores.

Medium avatar

(10611)

on September 24, 2012
at 12:16 PM

Oh quit badgering the witness borofergie. Carbs aren't cigarettes.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on September 24, 2012
at 03:26 PM

Non-processed carbs can be rich in important nutritional factors. Subject to a suitable enterotype, they could be significantly health enhancing.

B3173217a49b5b0116078775a17eb21d

(11488)

on September 24, 2012
at 07:24 AM

Do you mean "do better" or "tolerate better"? Some people tolerate smoking 10 packs of cigarettes a day better than others, it doesn't mean that they are genetically primed to smoke lots of fags.

0
D05f3050dc3d973b8b81a876202fa99a

(1533)

on September 23, 2012
at 06:16 PM

It's pretty ridiculous to call something optimal when you only test one or perhaps two variations amongst an infinite set of options. All his cited research shows is that when people strictly follow his diet and regiment they were better off than they were before. Pretty much everyone agrees not overeating and exercise are very good for you. His whole case is staked on questionnaires, and don't appear to adjust for omega-6/omega-3 ratios. Assuming a typical Western diet, perhaps low fat would be better than stacking more and more omega-6 fatty acids.

Answer Question


Get FREE instant access to our
Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!