Doctor's Note

I shared some of my other Freedom of Information Act finds in my last egg video, Eggs vs. Cigarettes in Atherosclerosis.

I've also explored the presence of carcinogenic chemicals in eggs (Heterocyclic Amines in Eggs, Cheese, and Creatine?), carcinogenic viruses (Carcinogenic Retrovirus Found in Eggs), industrial pollutants (Food Sources of Perfluorochemicals and Food Sources of PCB Chemical Pollutants), the eggborne annual epidemic of Salmonella (Total Recall), arachidonic acid (Chicken, Eggs, and Inflammation), misleading claims about eyesight nutrients (Egg Industry Blind Spot), and, of course, cholesterol (Egg Cholesterol in the Diet and What Women Should Eat to Live Longer). To my surprise, though, eggs are actually not the most concentrated dietary source of cholesterol. See Avoiding Cholesterol Is a No Brainer.

For more context, check out my associated blog post: Egg Industry Caught Making False Claims.

If you haven't yet, you can subscribe to my videos for free by clicking here.

  • b00mer

    No Senior Directly, you’re not being overly sensitive. Actually that’s a perfect paraphrasing of the guidelines. Maybe you could break it down like that in your next advertisement.

  • diane reimers

    I’m confused. You are commenting on the egg “lobby” and misleading information. What are YOUR facts about eggs?

    • TaxpayerX

      If you make the effort to use the index or search function of this website you’ll find plenty of additional information about eggs.

    • joeboosauce

      What are you? A moron? Oh, you are showing us your observation and research skills… All the info on the problems with eggs are RIGHT UNDER THE VIDEO! Worse than an ignorant person is an ignorant who thinks they know it all.

      • mojo191

        It does seem that your post is best directed to yourself and your asinine presumptuousness.

        • JacquieRN

          Hi joeboosauce and mojo191.

          Per Dr. Greger: “We welcome vigorous debate of the science, but to make NutritionFacts.org a place where people feel comfortable posting without
          feeling attacked, we have no tolerance for ad hominem attacks or comments that are racist/misogynist/homophobic/vulgar or otherwise inappropriate. I’ve gotten more sensitive to this after a physician who graciously donated his time to
          answer people’s questions stopped contributing because of the acrid atmosphere. So please, for everyone’s benefit, help me foster a community of mutual respect.” (effective Feb 2104)

          FYI: Since these comments were posted 9 months ago, we have had a change in the of the comment section programming, I cannot currently delete these old posts or I would.

          • Phaedra

            If you are enforcing Dr. Gregers own policy, why wouldn’t he have deleted this comment himself when it was first posted? Obviously he read it, because he commented on it. Back then, he allowed the PB advocates to call others morons and juvenile, but today, if someone disparages a pb expert (McDougall) even one that isn’t part if this debate, he is threatened with deletion and barring?

          • JacquieRN

            Per my post at the first quote you sent: Dr. Greger needed to change his stance from simply ignoring to deleting – I dated so you would know it was as of Feb 2014. This is across the board no matter who the commenter is or who they are disparaging. I will just add Phaedra, you can’t see the totality of all the statements and if necessary deleted comments on this site.

          • HemoDynamic, M.D.

            Just as with anything in life things change, just like the policies and procedures in any job. And because of disparaging comments we have lost valuable volunteers who don’t have the time (nor want) to deal with rude and disparaging remarks.
            Thus, there is less tolerance for these types of comments on this website.

          • Phaedra

            I suspect that you’ve lost valuable posters because of a rude moderator too. I do hope that same tolerance level is applied to the NF Team as well.

          • steve

            what about egg whites ?

      • Dr. D

        Why are we attacking someone for asking a question? Let’s not insult someone because we’re reading into the tone of an all caps “YOUR”. What kind of environment (real or online) resists questions and/or potentially differing points of view? Pushing visitors away from the gems on this site (which is already happening) we’ll create a small, intellectually homogenous community – which smacks of “isms” more than healthy scientific skepticism. Play nice, even if we all don’t see eye to eye.

        • Debra Libby

          Thank you for putting these people straight!! I never saw such disrespectful juvenile
          comments on such an issue!!What is wrong with these people?

      • Thubten Sonam

        Insulting people isn’t helping anybody.

    • Dan Lundeen

      Contempt of court! It’s been settled for decades. The burden of proof is on the party challenging the litigated facts; the party with the established facts doesn’t need to re-prove them every time someone crawls out from under another rock.

    • Jerry Howe

      Diane Reimers:

      Maybe you should continue to eat eggs. Some people need to learn the hard way.

      • Lisa Stetler Insana

        I eat organic eggs. Every day. For years. My cholesterol went down when I ditched wheat and started eating eggs for breakfast.

    • beccadoggie10

      If you go to his videos, and look up the lists of sources, you’ll find lots of studies on eggs, fish, meat, oils, and other unhealthy foods, as well as healthy berries and good for you foods.
      This web site has greatly helped me change the way I eat.

  • CalvinLeman1

    Typical reductionist thinking when holistic thinking is needed. You can read T. Colin Campbell’s latest book Whole:… to understand this reductionist thinking that will never find what is going on with nutrition. Besides Campbell, Greger is close to holistic thinking too, using reductionist data and then looking at it all holistically.

    • Debra Libby

      Thank You!!

  • Mark

    Wow man! I absolutely thought eggs are actually good for you, especially free range omega 3′s, and I had some of those every day, at least 4!

    Well thank you so much for clearing up the fact from fiction Dr. Greger.

    Mark

    • sally

      I had migrated back to eating eggs as well. Usually just one. Although we don’t need as much protein as previously thought. I have found that I feel weak at times since quitting meat and need something with protein. The choice is either an egg or processed tofu/meat substitute. I wish I had time to always have fresh veggie burgers or some other healthier choices on hand. I will start reevaluating again.
      What is fairly quick, wholesome and hearty and meatless that will give a person a boost when needed? Please don’t say nuts, thats not an entrée.

      • Caber1

        Sally you need to read some books by Mcdougall, Campbell and Esselstein;father and son(sorry if I misspelled any names) and you will find more than enough meatless, plant based ideas and you will also find that protein is found in almost everything and in some cases much much more than meat and if you are feeling weak I have a suspicion that it is more to do with a lack of adequate ingestion of foods.

        And ALWAYS remember if it is plant based there is never any need for moderation. Eat until your body tells you that you have had enough.

        • Paleo Huntress

          “[P]rotein is found in almost everything and in some cases much much more than meat…”

          There is no vegetable source of protein that provides more protein than meat. And even for those that come close, the protein isn’t nearly as bioavailable. Vegans can certainly get enough protein from plant foods, but let’s skip the mythology and keep it real.

          • BPCveg

            Position of the American dieticians on protein for vegetarians and vegans:

            “Plant protein can meet protein requirements when a variety of plant foods is consumed and energy needs are met. Research indicates that an assortment of plant foods eaten over the course of a day can provide all essential amino acids and ensure adequate nitrogen retention and use in healthy adults; thus, complementary proteins do not need to be consumed at the same meal (8). A meta-analysis of nitrogen balance studies found no significant difference in protein needs due to the source of dietary protein (9). Based on the protein digestibility-corrected amino acid score, which is the standard method for determining protein quality, other studies have found that although isolated soy protein can meet protein needs as effectively as animal protein, wheat protein eaten alone, for example, may result in a reduced efficiency of nitrogen utilization (10).

            Thus, estimates of protein requirements of vegans may vary, depending to some degree on dietary choices. Food and nutrition professionals should be aware that protein needs might be somewhat higher than the Recommended Dietary Allowance
            in those vegetarians whose dietary protein sources are mainly those that are less well digested, such as some cereals and legumes (11).
            Cereals tend to be low in lysine, an essential amino acid (8). This may be relevant when evaluating diets of individuals who do not consume animal protein sources and when diets are relatively low in protein. Dietary adjustments
            such as the use of more beans and soy products in place of other protein sources that are lower in lysine or an increase in dietary protein from all sources can ensure an adequate intake of lysine.
            Although some vegan women have protein intakes that are marginal, typical protein intakes of lacto-ovovegetarians and of vegans appear to meet and exceed requirements (12). Athletes can also meet their protein needs on plant-based diets (13).”

            Source: http://www.eatright.org/About/Content.aspx?id=8357

          • http://jolkapolkaskitchen.blogspot.com/ WholeFoodChomper

            @BPCveg:disqus, keepin’ it real! :-)

          • Paleo Huntress

            LMAO… So, which part of my comment was that supposed to refute? The part where I wrote that there are plenty of sufficient vegan protein sources? The part where I wrote that meat ALWAYS contains more protein than plants? Or do you simply like the role of echo chamber using hundreds more words than are needed… Yeah, that’s keepin’ it real alright. Some folks have trouble with language comprehension, that’s certainly real. ;~}

          • Mike Quinoa

            “The part where I wrote that meat ALWAYS contains more protein than plants?”
            Depends on how you measure it.

            Broccoli has 11.1 grams of protein per 100 calories while steak has 6.4 grams of protein per 100 calories.

            http://blog.timesunion.com/healthylife/the-food-with-the-most-protein-is/7185/

          • Paleo Huntress

            “Steak”?

            Would this nebulous term be something like the nebulous “vegan” term that you objected to? I guess it’s OK to use nebulous terms when they suit you.

            So which steak exactly? Strip? Sirloin? Filet? Round eye?

            100 calories of an eye of the round steak contains 18 grams of protein and that’s in less than 3 oz. The steak is about 6/10 water.

            The broccoli is about 9/10 water.

            For the same amount of protein from broccoli, you’ll need to eat almost TEN ounces.

            100 calories of chicken breast contains 20 grams.

            100 calories of pork loin contains 19 grams.

            And hey, it’s not technically meat, but close enough in the eyes of most vegans–

            100 calories of egg white contains almost 23 grams.

            Now if you want to debate fiber/bulk and water, feel free– but for the folks who really NEED the extra protein, the consideration of a few ounces of animal food versus a couple of POUNDS of plant food is a valid one.

            Plant amino acids are also less bioavailable due to the natural protease inhibitors contained in plant foods. So it isn’t about how much they contain as much as it is about how much you don’t feed to the toilet.

            Meat has a higher protein content by volume ALWAYS, and most of the time, by calorie too. Meat is a denser source of protein. Period.

            Perhaps you could just take that at face value.

          • Mike Quinoa

            According to data using Nutritionist Pro Nutritional Analysis Software, Version 4.7, 100 calories of broccoli contains 11.1 grams of protein.
            One hundred calories of Beef Short Loin, Porterhouse Steak, separable lean & fat, 1/8″ fat, broiled contains 8 grams of protein, and with 1/4″
            fat, 6.5 grams.

            We are talking whole foods as eaten here, so unless you scrape away every last vestige of fat from the meat with a scalpel, in this instance, broccoli does indeed have more protein.

            Your generalized statement, “Meat ALWAYS contains more protein than plants” is incorrect.

          • Paleo Huntress

            A scalpel? Be real. Meat is meat, not meat and fat. If the fat is marbled into the flesh, that’s one thing. If it’s sitting at the border, that’s another altogether.

            Beef, short loin, porterhouse steak, separable lean and fat, trimmed to 0″ fat, all grades, cooked, broiled

            10 grams of protein in 100 calories. But let’s look at that 100 calories. It takes less than 2oz to get it. So let’s say 2 oz covers the same amount of protein contained in the broccoli (contained, not bioavailable)- that’s still means I have to eat 4 TIMES as much broccoli to get the same protein. And this means… saying it again–> the meat contains more protein. Even in your own example.

            So let’s imagine you’re Real World Vegan and your intake is about 200 grams/day for your mass gain. That would entail eating more than ELEVEN POUNDS of broccoli. But that’s still less than 1300 calories and you need to get to 3000 for your mass gain. So after that 11 pounds of broccoli, you’re still going to have to stuff in 1700 MORE calories.

          • Mike Quinoa

            “And this means… saying it again–> the meat contains more protein.”

            Well, you had better take it up with the makers of the Nutritionist Pro Nutritional Analysis Software. They say that for the particular measurement benchmark of 100 calories, broccoli has more protein than steak.

          • Paleo Huntress

            I wonder which one of them can eat 11 pounds of broccoli. We should ask them. =D

          • Real World Vegan

            youre spot on huntress, i cant get enough protein in without purified protein powders. i was too stuffed to work out and i was on the commode at least 6 times a day.

          • BPCveg

            Maybe you and Paleo Huntress should hook up. You could make a website devoted to proving the health benefits of eating meat and publish the first ever study showing that a paleo diet provides health benefits.

          • Real World Vegan

            dude, who pissed in your green smoothie this morning?

          • BPCveg

            You are no friend of mine. Once you have finished with your verbal dump on this page, please clean up your mess. Your mom doesn’t work here.

          • Real World Vegan

            i dont know why youd mention friendship dude, we dont even know each other. count yourself lucky that my mom doesnt work here cuz the boy who makes a habit of insulting others and then deleting the insults from the public forum so they cant be made to cop to them would be taken over her knee for correction. better to be a man and just own it, tho that would make it harder to bash someone else for it.

          • Thea

            re: “…for the folks who really NEED the extra protein,…”

            I don’t know of anyone in the developed world who is getting enough calories, who needs (let alone NEEDS) any extra protein. The possible exception might be fruitarians and anyone who runs over 50 miles a day all the time. Most people who think they need X amount of protein are simply confused about what their bodies need.

          • Real World Vegan

            i dont know you thea, but i interpreted that as really condescending. i cant imagine that you know most people so perhaps it is you who is confused about knowing what everyone else needs. its possible isnt it?

          • Thea

            Real World Vegan: I’m sorry for the confusion about my post.

            I have never claimed that I know most people. What I do know well enough is the nutritional science and the nutritional recommendations of leading American and world authorities. What these sources say about human protein needs do indeed apply to most (the vast majority of?) people. This is not conceit or assumptions. This is what humans know right now about the protein needs of humans. To disregard such information – now *that* would be conceited.

            To help you understand further: Brenda Davis, a famous and well-respected registered dietician, wrote: “The RDA for protein is 25% higher than biological requirements” and “It is set to surpass the needs of 97.5% of the population”

            Take Brenda’s information along with: I believe that the vast majority of Americans far exceed the RDA. Thus, the idea that people need more protein is not supported by the evidence. (Put another way: Some people may *think* they need more protein for a variety of social and political reasons. But it’s not because 97.5% or more truly need it.)

            You get the gist. Protein is simply not something most people are hurting for – certainly not when they are getting enough calories and a varied diet (ie, not just all fruit).

            I hope that helps you understand what I originally wrote.

          • Real World Vegan

            how do you -know- it thea? because some gurus said so? how do they know it? i think thats pretty important to know. im familiar with Brenda Davis, she is a vegan dietician. that right there says she has a bias. you quote the claim but not any evidence for it. the question is tho, why is she a leading expert? has she done any of the research herself? i haven’t seen any papers authored by her and i dont know why she is any more expert than an omni dietician.

            in 2010 a review of previous protein requirement studies was done using a more reliable model than the older nitrogen balance method [indicator amino acid oxidation technique]. they found that current protein recommendations were about 50% too low. and no, the funding wasn’t the meat, dairy or egg industry, it was The Research Institute at The Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto. and they weren’t testing sick children, they were looking at healthy male adults.

            using this data, a 200 lb non-athlete male should consume between 84 and 108 grams of bioavailable protein each day. thats 12-14 cups of quinoa or 16-20 cups of cooked spinach. i mean holy crap thats a sh*t-ton of food!

            why do you think Ms Davis is more reliable than the data itself?

            Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2010 Jan;13(1):52-7

          • Thea

            Real World Vegan: Brenda Davis is not a guru. She is a Registered Dietician. In addition to her original education to get her degree, she has continued to do extensive research, written extremely well-researched books with all the study citations, and participated in original research in the Marshal Islands showing how to prevent and reverse diabetes. (FYI: It’s done with a truly low-fat whole plant food based diet.)

            Is Brenda Davis biased? Well, ask yourself, is someone who advocates for a meat diet biased? What if both believe that the research supports their position? Brenda would only be biased if she started out with the desire to prove a position. After reading her books and hearing her speak, I highly, highly doubt that.

            But if you don’t like Brenda as a source, how about the World Health Organization, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, and United Nations University.I didn’t count, but it looks like a good dozen experts participated in their (almost 300 page!!) paper on protein. They wrote:

            “The protein requirement is derived as an average (or median) value for the population,
            with its variance. For an individual, a safe individual intake has been defined as the 97.5th percentile of the distribution of individual
            requirements, nominally the average + 1.96SD. Thus any individual receiving such an intake will have a very low (<2.5%) risk of deficiency (intake < requirement)."

            They also wrote:
            "As indicated above, in developed countries most people consume substantially more protein than the safe level…"

            I don't know anything about the study you cited. What I do know is that science is always about the body of evidence, not a single study. As you know, you can find any single study to support any position you want. I'd take Brenda Davis's exhaustive research, looking at the big picture, over your single study any day. Also, the idea that people need more protein than had previously been recommended makes no sense given what we know about which individuals have the best health.

            Which brings me back to my original comment: Most people are not hurting for protein. There is no NEED for most people to focus on protein like it is hard to get enough of. They have plenty whether they know it or not – unless they are eating an unbalanced diet (say mostly fruit and some other single veggie) or are not getting enough calories or are unusual in some other way (fitting into that less than 2.5 percent of the population).

            I understand that you don't agree. That's fine. What I hoped to clarify for you is that my original comment had been based on basic accepted science, basic math and basic logic (whether you agree with it or not). Which means that I have fully answered your comment of, "…i cant imagine that you know most people so maybe it is you who is confused…"

            Good luck to you.

          • RainbowsAndSunshine

            Stated beautifully!

          • Real World Vegan

            thea, a guru can be almost anything professionally. look up guru in the dictionary and youll find her picture there. [lol just kidding] but seriously, look up guru and youll see shes the epitome of a guru and she has a major investment in being right. she also has a serious financial motive as she profits from book sales and speaking engagements. she is a guru, no more or less valid than any other. show me the actual data, i dont care about gurus.

            having said that, i respect a persons right to choose a guru. if youve read the data that backs her claims and you find it sound you are more than welcome to follow her. however, in a debate with others, you’ll still need the backing data to make your points.

            a final point, the quote you copied and pasted is from a document that was last revised in 2006 and the data i shared with you regarding minimum protein requirements and the methods used for determining them is quite recent. the group paper has not been updated to reflect these new findings.

          • Thea

            Real World Vegan: I also wanted to add one potentially unrelated thought for you.

            Do you get the Meatout Monday e-mails? In the latest issue, they did a mini-article on vegan body builders. The vegan body builders “Dominated Texas Competition” The article also points to a website for vegan body builders. You may already be aware of that group (or may even be on the team yourself). I just thought I would point it out in case you are not aware.

            http://www.meatoutmondays.org/current.htm

          • Real World Vegan

            thank you, thea.

          • GoingVeganUK

            Why do people bother to argue with this huntress who argues so aggressively?

          • Annoyed by Paleofraud

            Really it only makes the forum harder to read by those seeking real info, which is exactly what the puppets seek to do.

          • LieDetector

            This is bull. 100 grams of steak has just over 11g and 100 grams of broccoli has just over 8g. And not all protein is created equally. A 4 ounce steak has 30g of protein and fulfills almost all of your daily amino acid requirements. To get 30g of protein from broccoli would require eating over 10 cups and you’re not getting any essential amino acids. Your source for measuring protein comes from a well known bull%^& book by Dr. Furhman, who used nutritional info from 1986.

          • Toxins

            The focus on consuming enough protein is unfounded in this developed nation. If you consume enough calories, you are getting enough protein. Perhaps in the 3rd world country where food is scarce, then getting enough calories (i.e. protein) would be an issue.

            “Plant protein can meet protein requirements when a variety of plant foods is consumed and energy needs are met. Research indicates that an assortment of plant foods eaten over the course of a day can provide all essential amino acids and ensure adequate nitrogen retention and use in healthy adults; thus, complementary proteins do not need to be consumed at the same meal ”

            http://www.vrg.org/nutrition/2009_ADA_position_paper.pdf

            As Jeff Novick puts it..

            Many say that plants foods are incomplete

            If “incomplete” means not containing all the essential amino acids then…. (the incomplete protein theory)

            1) All plant foods are complete as they contain all the essential amino acids.

            2) the only food that is not a complete protein is an animal food, gelatin.

            If “incomplete” means lacking in sufficient quantity of one or more amino acids…(the limiting amino acid theory)

            1) Getting all the amino acids in at once at the same meal, or even in the same day, as some may suggest, is not necessary due to the amino acid pool, which is a circulating level of amino acids in the blood, that the body can draw from if needed. As long as one follows a whole foods plant based diet, the amino acid pool will maintain a sufficient stock of any potentially needed (or limiting) amino acids.

            2) However, as long as one consumes enough calories, eats a variety of food, and limits junk foods and refined foods, and is not an all fruit diet, then they will get in enough protein and enough amino acids in sufficient quantity. There will be no limiting amino acids

            3) there is some evidence that the amino acids that are slightly lower (but adequate) in plant foods, may actually be a benefit to health and longevity and not a concern. This evidence stems from the fact that eating foods that resemble the protein structure of humans causes the liver to release excess amounts of the growth hormone, IGF-1, which accelerates aging and promotes tumor growth.

          • Annoyed by Paleofraud

            What Toxins said – great post! – in a world of chronic diseases caused by eating too much animal protein, the comparison of animal and plant protein is apples and oranges. Animal flesh is inflammatory and devoid of fiber and phytonutrients, and comes chock full of things that are bad for you. It’s totally dishonest to say regularly eating any meat is good for you – perhaps that one time you are starving for a couple weeks or more and there’s absolutely nothing else to eat. In view of the overwhelming evidence you are fooling yourself to think otherwise.

          • Paleo Huntress

            Still building your entire identity built around me? I’m flattered!

          • Toxins

            Don’t flatter yourself paleo huntress, most that know your history here do not hold you in high regard. You have put that upon yourself with your multi-user personalities which is distressing to think someone would go that far to make their case. Clearly you do not have confidence in your own viewpoints, as you would not need to make multiple accounts or aggressively handle yourself with other users if you had a sound argument.

          • Paleo Huntress

            For anyone who wonders if Toxin’s accusation is true, Disqus has written consent to disclose the number of accounts that originate from my home IP address. I can’t imagine that anyone cares, but if you do, free to email and ask them.

            I’d imagine that what would be significantly MORE distressing is that even Dr. Greger’s privacy policy states,

            “NutritionFacts.org may disclose your personal information only when we have your express consent to share the information for a specified purpose.

            And yet a representative of Nutritionfacts broke that policy, and worse even, is that there was no consequence for the moderator that did so. Obviously Dr. Greger isn’t the honest or honorable individual that his followers believe him to be.

            Toxins, the only reason you continue to make this claim is because you can’t back-pedal out of revealing someone’s personal email address in this forum while in your role as moderator. If I were to reveal your identity to Disqus, they tell me that your user account would be deleted for “violation Disqus TOUs”. This wouldn’t prevent you from posting further, you could come back under a new ID, but you would lose your encyclopedic copy and pasted, posting history too, and that would be a shame considering you don’t write much of your own stuff. =(

            And let’s be real, Annoyed by Paleofraud uses my name in his user ID… I’m not flattering myself, he’s flattering me! Hell, he named himself after me.

          • Paleo Huntress

            Interesting… the comment I posted about you breaking the site’s TOUs is strangely absent this morning, Toxins… No big, this time I’ll post from my email and the sent message will serve as proof that it was posted.
            Disqus has my consent to reveal the number of accounts that exist that are connected to my IP address (1) to anyone from this discussion that requests the information. I don’t know why anyone would care, but if it really matters to you, feel free.
            What people should REALLY be concerned with is the NF moderator that ignores Dr. Greger’s privacy policy whenever he feels like it- publishing personal information about NF members, including their personal email address, online. The policy reads,

            “NutritionFacts.org may disclose your personal information only when we have your express consent to share the information for a specified purpose.

            What’s even more disturbing is that there were no consequences for this moderator, bringing Dr. Greger’s professional honesty and integrity into question in that he doesn’t enforce his own policies.
            Tech support at Disqus tells me that if the person who was violated files an official complaint, that the user account of the moderator responsible (Toxins) will be deleted along with his encyclopedic copied and pasted postings.
            Toxins has since edited the comment to remove part of the email address, but the original was sent to anyone who enabled email notifications of new comments, and those messages can’t be edited.

          • Paleo Huntress

            Interesting… the second comment I posted about you breaking the site’s TOUs is absent now too, Toxins… Considering Dr. Greger says he doesn’t delete ANYTHING unless it’s  people have been abusive (name-calling, racist, etc…)”, that does make one wonder.

            (Third time posting)

            Disqus has my consent to reveal the number of accounts that exist that are connected to my IP address (1) to anyone from this discussion that requests the information. I don’t know why anyone would care, but if it really matters to you, feel free.

            What people should REALLY be concerned with is the NF moderator that ignores Dr. Greger’s privacy policy whenever he feels like it- publishing personal information about NF members, including their personal email address, online. The policy reads,

            “NutritionFacts.org may disclose your personal information only when we have your express consent to share the information for a specified purpose.

            What’s even more disturbing is that there were no consequences for this moderator, bringing Dr. Greger’s professional honesty and integrity into question in that he doesn’t enforce his own policies.

            Tech support at Disqus tells me that if the person who was violated files an official complaint, that the user account of the moderator responsible (Toxins) will be deleted. (along with his encyclopedic copied and pasted postings).

            Toxins has since edited the comment to remove part of the email address, but the original was sent to anyone who enabled email notifications of new comments, and those messages can’t be edited.

          • Paleo Huntress

            1) All plant foods are complete as they contain all the essential amino acids.
            2) the only food that is not a complete protein is an animal food, gelatin.

            Gelatin isn’t a whole food, it is an extract from animal food, much like gluten is an extract from wheat… and this is from your “expert”? Sheesh. No integrity, Toxins, from you or Jeff Novick.
            Regarding the “complete protein” argument, it trusts that the person reading it understand that a trace is not the same as an affective level. We move air though the eustachian tubes in our ears too, so that “proves” we can actually breathe through our ears… but let’s see anyone cut off air flow through their nose and mouth and not die from lack of oxygen.
            Most plant foods do not have the correct balance of amino acids to be considered “complete”. That isn’t very relevant in a diet where different plant foods are eaten and can fill in the deficits… but it’s still true.

          • Mike Quinoa

            The comparison was made with 100 calories, not 100 grams, of food. Using that benchmark, broccoli does indeed contain more protein than steak. Where does a grass-fed cow get her protein?

            My source was the Nutritionist Pro Nutritional Analysis Software, not Dr. Fuhrman.

          • Paleo Huntress

            The issue of course is that you refuse to make the comparison honestly, you want to include a quarter inch ribbon of fat in your calorie count that most people trim away. It is akin to trying to include the netshell in a fiber comparison. And as I pointed out months ago, a significant amount of the protein in the broccoli won’t be assimilated, so even if it contained as much gross protein (and it doesnt) it doesn’t net nearly as usable protein as a steak.
            Why can’t you just make a straight up comparison?

          • Mike Quinoa

            My statement from the very beginning (and now) was that 100 calories of broccoli has more protein than 100 calories of steak. I said or inferred nothing else. That’s about as straight up as you can get—nothing disingenuous whatsoever.
            If you don’t agree, please post a reputable link that shows this is not so.

            I would hope that Nutritionist Pro Nutritional Analysis Software researchers obtain their data from commonly-purchased, whole, “as eaten” foods.
            Meat naturally contains fat within the muscle tissue itself, apart from the extraneous visible fat. Broccoli contains a lot of water and fibre. These are real foods, and protein is only one constituent element.

          • Toxins

            You are arguing with a brick wall when it comes to paleo huntress. I would not get too frustrated with this individual. She is only here to be disruptive.

          • Mike Quinoa

            Thanks Toxins—like your posts. I’m not talking about PH here, but I’ve found that people with contrary views to mine usually inspire me to do my homework, thus broadening my knowledge base. I know a lot of these discussions end up in stand-offs anyway, but most of them just more strongly re-affirm my belief in a whole foods, plant-based diet.

          • Paleo Huntress

            FWIW, I’m not the least bit interested in your position on diet. I don’t mean that with insult, rather I’m just making a point that I have no expectation that anyone as fully entrenched in WFPB will look for something else until their health fails. When that person starts seeking answers, they’ll visit blogs like this one and instead of encountering only the rigid “you failed the diet, it didn’t fail you” dogma found in this and other vegan communities, they’ll find others who were also harmed by the wrong diet and they’ll find other options for healing. Plus, those on the fence won’t be quite so easily swayed by the cherry-picking. It’s good to have both sides represented since we clearly cannot count on Dr. Greger to share all of the relevant data.
            I think you’re a good guy with good intentions, but whether or not you are convinced is moot to me. Your arguments give me repeated openings to share very relevant data to the contrary. I’m grateful for that.

          • Paleo Huntress

            Oh I know, but your statement was false. The fact that you continue to defend an apples to oranges comparison is what is disingenuous.

          • Mike Quinoa

            Paleo Huntress,

            If my statement is false, please prove it false.

            Checking the relative protein content of different foods is disingenuous??? Don’t think so.

            Will my health fail on a vegan diet?

            Vegan diets can be very unhealthful, but if done right can be very healthful. Just ask Dr. Ellsworth Wareham who is 98 years old. He retired voluntarily from his position as a cardiothoracic surgeon at the age of 95 years.

            He went vegan in his fifties.

            “As a middle-aged man, Wareham spent a lot of time in the operating room cutting into one patient after another who had heart problems. There, he noticed something: patients who were vegetarian mostly had much cleaner and smoother arteries than those who ate meat. The arteries of meat-eaters tended to be full of calcium and plaque. So he made a choice. He decided to become a vegan.”

          • Paleo Huntress

            If my statement is false, please prove it false.

            I did… repeatedly. Meat has more protein than ALL plant foods both by volume and by calorie.

            Vegan diets can be very unhealthful, but if done right can be very healthful.

            The same applies to omni diets. If done right, they can be very healthful. As has been pointed out time and time again, first world vegetarian observations suffer from user/confirmation bias. If people think going veggie will make them healthier, than they go veggie ALONG WITH a slew of other changes proven to improve health. Then after removing vegetable oils, refined flours and sugars, quitting smoking and drinking and starting a fitness and relaxation program, they turn around and claim, “It was all about the meat”. LMAO  If removing meat from the diet improved health, we’d see improvements in religious vegetarians too. We don’t. We see worse health, not better.

            Just ask Dr. Ellsworth Wareham who is 98 years old.

            Blah blah blah… N=1 Just ask Ross Horne.

          • Mike Quinoa

            “Meat has more protein than ALL plant foods both by volume and by calorie.”

            According to Bowes & Church’s Food Values of Portions Commonly Used, 100 calories of broiled short loin porterhouse steak (separable lean and fat) has 8.39 grams of protein, while 100 calories of raw broccoli has 10.83 grams of protein (spinach has even more at 13.34 grams of protein per 100 calories).

            “If removing meat from the diet improved health, we’d see improvements in religious vegetarians too. We don’t. We see worse health, not better.”

            Really? Then how do you explain the fact that Seventh Day Adventist vegetarians have greater longevity than do average Americans?

            Dr. Ellsworth Wareham was doing heart surgery until he was 95 years old. He got to see firsthand into the arteries of the nation, and that’s why he went vegan in his fifties.

          • Paleo Huntress

            Seriously? You mean the group that doesn’t smoke, drink, use drugs or have promiscuous sex? Oh come on Mike, are you just literally unable to make an honest comparison? They are Americans and subject to the same user/confirmation bias as any other American. Still though, take a look at their data, the vegetarians eating dairy and eggs are healthier than the vegans.
            And those who eat meat are less devout, and as such, they smoke, drink, use drugs and have promiscuous sex more than the more devout vegans.
            In cultures where people are under no illusions that removing meat will make them healthier, those that do so simply because they are called to by their faith, are less healthy than their omni neighbors. If simply removing meat improved health, it wouldn’t matter why it was removed.

          • Mike Quinoa

            Paleo Huntress, you said: “If removing meat from the diet improved health, we’d see improvements in religious vegetarians too. We don’t. We see worse health, not better.”

            I replied: “Really? Then how do you explain the fact that Seventh Day Adventist vegetarians have greater longevity than do average Americans?”

            Not only do the SDA vegetarians (“religious vegetarians”) have better longevity than the average American, but they also have better longevity than non-vegetarian SDAs, who I assume don’t smoke, drink, use drugs and have promiscuous sex either. There’s your apples to apples.
            Personally, I’m not seeing “worse health” for the veg SDAs.

          • Paleo Huntress

            Feign ignorance all you wish, Mike. There are two possibilities here, either you truly are too ignorant to understand the distinction, or you understand it perfectly and you’re too unethical to make an attempt at any semblance of a genuine comparison.

          • Mike Quinoa

            Who says there are only “two possibilities” here? Your mudslinging only demonstrates you have no strong retaliatory argument.

            Studies have shown veg SDAs to be healthier than their non-veg SDA counterparts. As I said before, I’m not seeing “worse health” for the veg SDAs. I’m sure both factions don’t smoke, drink, use drugs, or have promiscuous sex, so I would contend this is a very fair comparison between two groups who are similar apart from their chosen diet.

          • Paleo Huntress

            They’ve also shown that the fish, dairy and egg eating SDA vegetarians are healthier than the vegans. The point to making the religious distinction is to stress that nothing but meat consumption changes. Now you can argue the letter of my distinction or you can pull up your big-boy britches and acknowledge the spirit.

          • Mike Quinoa

            “Now you can argue the letter of my distinction or you can pull up your big-boy britches and acknowledge the spirit.”
            Or I can pursue some other tack.You seem to have a real issue with giving people ultimatums—a bad case of the fallacy of false dilemma.

          • Paleo Huntress

            Ah yes, comment on being called out rather than on the topic itself. What other choice do you really have? If you acknowledge the spirit, your argument falls apart… I don’t blame you.

          • Paleo Huntress

            When you can eat grass and you have a rumen to ferment it, and you are able to extract as much protein from it as a cow can, THEN you can ask that question with integrity.

            Your source wasn’t Dr. Fuhrman, it was a vegan blogger.

          • Mike Quinoa

            My point about the cow is that all plant foods contain protein—even enough to build a cow.

            “Your source wasn’t Dr. Fuhrman, it was a vegan blogger.”

            Yeah, I know. I already explained to LieDetector that my source was not Dr. Fuhrman.

          • http://jolkapolkaskitchen.blogspot.com/ WholeFoodChomper

            I believe he was addressing the “skip the mythology” part of your comment and indicating that there is no mythology there.

          • Paleo Huntress

            “[P]rotein is found in almost everything and in some cases much much more than meat…”

            Myth.

          • BPCveg

            Yes. I also intended to point out that, according to the dieticians, the fact that meat has more protein (by mass) is irrelevant to human health.
            It is as if, you, Mike and I are arguing with a potato chip addict who says “look you get more salt on a diet based on chips’…..and we are thinking ‘maybe, but who cares!’

          • Paleo Huntress

            Isn’t it funny, you weren’t interested in telling another vegan that the protein content was irrelevant. Only the omni that pointed out the error.

            I’ve never seen that dance before. ~rolls eyes~

            It is a MYTH that there are veggies that contain more protein than meat.

            You don’t have to like it, you don’t have to find it relevant, but it’s still true. And if it were truly as irrelevant as you suggest, it wouldn’t be something anyone would bother trying to prove or disprove. Actions speak louder than words. =)

          • http://jolkapolkaskitchen.blogspot.com/ WholeFoodChomper

            Protein is most definitely important to human health, no one is arguing it is not. However, BPCveg did not say that protein content was irrelevant. He said, according to dietitians, “the fact that meat has more protein (by mass) is irrelevant to human health.” Again, not that protein was irrelevant.

            BTW-It’s not a dance, it’s a discussion. Although, I like the metaphor of dancing.

          • Paleo Huntress

            WholeFoodChomper,

            ~SMH~ Sometimes I wonder of the plant-based community has to WORK at misinterpreting or if it really is a symptom of the diet.

            It wasn’t the protein that he said was irrelevant, it was that meat contains MORE, that he said as irrelevant. Do try and keep up. Then you won’t have to use so many words unnecessarily.

          • http://jolkapolkaskitchen.blogspot.com/ WholeFoodChomper

            I was following the flow of the conversation. In the previous comment YOU said, “Isn’t it funny, you weren’t interested in telling another vegan that the protein content was irrelevant. Only the omni that pointed out the error.”

            That was the part of your comment I was responding to. If I misunderstood, fine. Mea culpa. No big whoop.

            If you feel like you need to duke it out over the so-called “protein myth,” so be it.

            However, condescension, sarcasm, and snarkiness (symptom of the omni/paleo diet, perhaps?) will do nothing to make your points any more valid, in fact they make you very off putting.

          • BPCveg

            @WholeFoodChomper:disqus , I agree with you that this discussion has turned disrespectful, which is why I am reluctant to directly communicate with this person.

          • Paleo Huntress

            I’ll keep that in mind the next time I’m engaging with another cherry-picked-data enthusiast. It’s good to know there is a reliable way to shut them down. =)

          • Paleo Huntress

            Oh don’t be silly.

            I.
            Eat.
            Meat.

            That is the deciding factor for “off-putting” and the one that most of the folks here use- though there have been a few who can see past that and have been kind. You interjected yourself into this part of the thread where you really had no business, first to respond to a comment directed at someone else with what you believe was intended, and then again to “school” me on what turns out to be your misunderstanding, rather than mine. It’s not that there are any rules against you posting anywhere you like here, but it’s a bit like sitting in a restaurant having a conversation with your dinner-mate and the person at the next table feels its their place to interject. Legal, but still rude.

            There is no duking it out over the protein myth- it is only vegans who create any myths about plants having more protein. The scientific world knows better, it isn’t disputed. And I haven’t made ANY arguments about how much protein is needed or whether either source is “better”. I have made only ONE argument- and that it this- It is a myth that there are any veggies that contain more protein than meat. That so many here appear unable to differentiate between a scientific fact and a position-argument is rather frightening given the scientific slant of this blog.

            So you’ve defended yourself but you didn’t apologize, and if you’d either-

            1.) stayed out of a conversation that wasn’t directed at you– or

            2.) Made SURE you understood the context before taking it upon yourself to criticize–

            -you wouldn’t have any cause to.

            …and you’re inferring that I’m rude?

            Right.

          • http://jolkapolkaskitchen.blogspot.com/ WholeFoodChomper

            This is a discussion board. People come here to discuss and comment. Sometimes that means that they include themselves in other conversations/threads. That is how a discussion board works.

            I’m not inferring that you are rude. You have made it abundantly clear that you are rude all by yourself.

            You seem very angry. Maybe you should do something about that.

            Best of luck to you.

            BTW- I. Eat. Meat, too.

          • Paleo Huntress

            Oh I’m happy to have people JOIN the conversation with relevant info, but butting in to school someone when you have NO IDEA what they meant is just rude. Perhaps it takes one to know one?  I’m OK with being rude, some folks just beg for it. =)

          • http://jolkapolkaskitchen.blogspot.com/ WholeFoodChomper

            It seems we have philosophical differences on how to be human.

          • Paleo Huntress

            Are you familiar with the seagull mentality? This is when a person sh*ts on you and they “fly” away… They do it from a distance, from a place they believe to be elevated and then when you complain, they pretend to be utterly unaware of the trespass.

            You are a seagull. That’s why you don’t know how to be human.

          • HemoDynamic, M.D.

            I have been reading all the posts and I have to say I hope everyone can take a step back and evaluate whether or not what they say (type) is constructive or destructive. If it’s in anyway destructive than maybe we could retype it in a way that we all benefit and not alienate each other.

          • VegAtHeart

            @HemoDynamic:disqus
            I agree with your advice and have removed the inappropriate comments that I previously made on impulse. Thank you for your input.

          • Toxins

            Is this BCPVeg?

          • VegAtHeart

            Yes, with a new alias.

          • Real World Vegan

            VegAtHeart,you seem to understand the posting technicalities of this forum pretty well and kudos to you for removing the ugly posts [tho adding an apology wouldve been better]. lots followed suit but they appear not to know that the forum doesnt remove comments when you click ‘delete’ and that the content has to be edited or it stays put, but the authors name is removed from it. definitely a plus to the person who wants to pretend they werent bashing, but unfortunate that it allows the ugliness to remain in the thread without the author being held accountable for it. anonymous bashing is even uglier than the blatant crap.

          • VegAtHeart

            I apologize for the disrespectful remarks that I previously made.

            Disqus has provided instructions on how to edit and delete comments.

            All the best.

          • PaleoBS

            Its not a myth that only meat(animal products) contains cholosterol.

          • Thea

            re: “…very off putting.”
            Amen!

            Paleo: No one here cares what you eat. What we care about is having a civil dialog. That you think it is appropriate to try to “…shut them down” at all, let alone by being rude, shows that you do not understand this site or maybe lack the maturity level to participate.

            I don’t know how old you are, but if you are old enough to post on this site, you should know better.

            There was a great discussion on another page on NutritionFacts where “Margaret” pushed the paleo line really hard. While Margaret didn’t always make sense, her posts were almost always respectful. I carefully read what she wrote. She understands the concept of exchanging ideas civilly, and she is welcome here as far as I am concerned.

            I am clearly not the only person put off by your rudeness. It is time to clean up your act or go elsewhere.

          • Paleo Huntress

            I haven’t pushed the “paleo line” AT ALL, actually. Lies are lies, ignorance is ignorance and myths are myths. I called them out. You don’t have to like my methods or my “tone”, but it doesn’t change that the message is true. You want to sit around and pat each other on the backs for all agreeing, that is of course your prerogative, but I’m not going to help you with it. The truth is more important to me than “civil dialogue”. That is for the politicians and the good ‘ole boys, not the folks changing the world. =)

          • Voyeur

            Paleo huntress: “The truth is more important to me than “civil dialogue”.”

            This is where the problem lies! Truth discussed in a civil way has a much more positive and powerful impact and engenders growth, not demise.

          • Paleo Huntress

            Several times a year, my family unplugs from the internet for a few weeks. We’ve found it’s pretty easy to lose perspective when engaging with others, all from behind anonymous user IDs. So I’m back with a fresh perspective and a positive attitude and will do my best to be civil. =)

            When the choices are between civil lies or curt truth, I’ll still take the truth. The tone of the truth isn’t as important to me as that it IS the truth, but I agree that it’s important.

            What I find interesting (and it applies pretty universally, not just to this forum) is that sarcasm and ugliness is pretty well-tolerated from people we agree with and is called out from people we do not. I’m pretty sure that it’s just human nature, but I think it’s a worthwhile thing to be aware of when we’re getting ready to comment about someone else’s behavior.

            I just finished reading over a couple of weeks’ worth of comments from this community and the ugliness and snark is pretty well represented by the pb members here, but criticism of that ugliness is noticeably missing from their pb peers. Most of us appear more than happy to tolerate watching someone being treated badly if we disagree with them. And it’s easy to spot those who know their own behavior is bad, because they go back and delete the evidence. Hopefully that is about restoring the integrity of the thread and not about avoiding responsibility for the insult.

            These are a just a few observations from someone with a fresh perspective. I’m hoping that going forward we are all able to do better.

          • SpeakingTruth

            Too bad b/c it precisely civil dialogue that has done more to change the world for the better than hate speech and sarcasm ever have. Truth is hard to hear and see when covered in the goo of anger and venom.

          • http://jolkapolkaskitchen.blogspot.com/ WholeFoodChomper

            It does make me wonder why the low-carb/Paleo folks get so angry when making their points. This is not the first time where I have seen such exchanges become so disrespectful.

          • Paleo Huntress

            I’m betting it has something to do with ignorant vegans lumping low carb and paleo together.

          • http://jolkapolkaskitchen.blogspot.com/ WholeFoodChomper

            Perhaps, that may be (part of) it. Still, that reason does not warrant name calling, disrespect, and anger.

          • BPCveg

            Thank you, Thea, for helping to gentrify this forum by ushering out the ruffians and shit disturbers.

          • Paleo Huntress

            “Kicking up and bringing to light the stinking rot of bullshit wherever she finds it!” ~Paleo Huntress, Bullshit Disturber Extraordinaire

          • BPCveg

            That’s the spirit. In case you haven’t noticed, there are plenty more NutritionFacts pages covering cholesterol and paleo issues that you haven’t vandalized yet:

            http://nutritionfacts.org/topics/cholesterol/
            http://nutritionfacts.org/index.php?s=paleo

          • informed consumer

            Sorry, but you need to recheck you facts. Meat does NOT “always contain more protein than plants” as you said. Green leafy vegetables like kale, romaine lettuce, and broccoli have MORE protein per calorie than a high quality beef steak. This is also true of lean chicken and eggs. And vegetables do not contain all of the artery clogging cholesterol that animal products contain. It is dangerous that our food industry uses false marketing claims and spreads mis-information to sell products that harm us. It is apparent from your post that it has worked on people that are uninformed.

          • Paleo Huntress

            lol  well if you say so, it must be true.  but Im not interested in your say-so, provide some -evidence-. I think it is -you- that needs to recheck your facts.
            According to data from the USDA database:

            50 calories of sirloin (a high fat cut) contains 7 grams of protein

            50 calories of kale contains 3 grams of protein
            50 calories of broccoli contains 4 grams of protein

            50 calories of romaine lettuce contains 4 grams of protein

            The sirloin is almost 100% assimilable, while the kale, broccoli and lettuce are at best, 66%, putting the net protein absorbed from the plant foods even lower.
            (per RWV)

          • Lisa Stetler Insana

            Wheat is the cause of countless cancer and other diseases of this modern day. Modern wheat is not good for anyone and not everyone is meant to eat vegan.

          • JacquieRN

            Hi Lisa, could you please cite research that connects wheat to cancer?

          • Lisa Stetler Insana

            You are on a computer. Look it up. Read the Wheat Belly book. There is plenty of research. I’ve done mine. Do your own because unless you do it yourself you aren’t going to believe it anyway.

          • JacquieRN

            Hi Lisa, I have done nutritional research for years as well. The reason I asked you to share your resource is that we aspire to scientific debate on this site. Sharing research, links, resources, etc., is helpful for knowledge exchange. Therefore, thank you for sharing one of your resources as the Wheat Belly. I have read it and it is not particularly well backed up by evidence theory.

            For instance: Davis states that the wheat grown & used today is “the altered offspring of thousands of genetic manipulations” that doesn’t even remotely resemble the wheat consumed by our ancestors. He blames changes in the gluten protein in modern wheat (from that found in wheat as recently as 1960) for the increased incidence of celiac disease and inflammatory diseases ranging from rheumatoid arthritis to inflammatory bowel disease. I have seen no evidence that substantiates these claims.

            As one source (of many) with references to research on the flipside check here:

            https://www.drmcdougall.com/misc/2014nl/jan/smoke.htm

          • Lisa Stetler Insana

            I am at work and don’t have the time right now to look up and post countless studies that prove what I say. I have seen countless people quit wheat and lose huge amounts of weight including that ring of dangerous fat around the middle. I’ve seen people improve their health in massive ways. People who cured their diabetes and could go off those medications that they had been taking for years. People with chronic rashes and other health issues that went away with in a week of stopping wheat. My acid reflux…gone after just a week off wheat. One slice of bread will being it back. And the withdrawl symptoms…horrible. Anyone I know who have kickd the wheat habit find themselves feeling very ill upon ingesting it after a time of obtaining. I suppose it’s all in who you choose to believe. I will choose to believe studies done by those who don’t have a stake in the wheat industry. If the study is in anyway connected to our government then I’m sorry but it is skewed in some way. Our government and the agencies that belong to it have a huge stake I. Keeping us I’ll and unhealthy.

          • Modus Operandi

            Actually greens have more protein than meat (per calorie or per weight, or both).
            The myth is that we need as much protein as we consume.
            Check out vegan bodybuilders.

        • BPCveg

          Your statement that evidently offended one, namely, “protein is found in almost everything and in some cases much much more than meat” was correct.

          For example, wheat gluten, which is a vegetable source of protein (81% protein) has much higher protein than most meat products.

          http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/cereal-grains-and-pasta/7738/2

          Even beans fair much better than certain types of meat.

          e.g. compare lima beans (20% protein) with a frankfurter (14% protein):

          http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/vegetables-and-vegetable-products/2791/2

          http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/sausages-and-luncheon-meats/1515/2

          Those who are proud of over-consuming protein should also note the dangers of excessive protein consumption:

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protein_(nutrient)#Excess_consumption

          • http://jolkapolkaskitchen.blogspot.com/ WholeFoodChomper

            Like I said, @BPCveg:disqus is keepin’ it real!

          • Paleo Huntress

            Oh please, we’re talking about whole food, right? Wheat gluten is not a vegetable, it’s the purified protein FRACTION of wheat. <–(and the absolute WORST thing you can put in your body) Shall we compare that to whey? (also around 80% protein)– a purified protein FRACTION of dairy? .<

            So let's look at the lima beans and hot dogs for a moment- (Hot dogs aren't meat, btw, and this one you used for comparison hasn't been grilled or fried, so its fat and water content is much higher than it would be after it was prepared- [more disingenuous comparisons] and there is no measurable amount of carbohydrate in actual meat, but I'll humor you because your comparison is STILL in favor of my argument.) ~shrugs~

            Both contain 5 grams of protein, but by volume, the hotdog (52 g serving) contains more than twice the protein of the beans (124 g serving). Or, to put it another way, you have to eat more than TWICE the beans to get the same protein. You really have to stick to the same measures across the board.

            And for the last time, the protease inhibitors found in plants food, ESPECIALLY LEGUMES, prevents the cleaving of the amino acids (as much as 50% in some cases). So when you see that beans contain x-number of grams of protein, you should count only one half to two thirds in your calculations.

            Even straight up though, content to content, there is no vegetable with more protein than meat.

          • Real World Vegan

            a google search for ‘paleo vegan protein’ flagged this page and I find you here! we vegans can be real d*cks. if I recall you were once vegan so you probably know that first hand. as a paleo vegan i get crap from both camps, the vegans say you cant be paleo and vegan, and the paleos say you cant be vegan and paleo. i can be what i am tho, a vegan that eliminates legumes and grains.

            i wish more vegans understood that people are more savvy today and that you cant educate others with lies anymore. pubmed is a click away and people know how to use it. as soon as we get caught in a lie, people realize its all BS and stop listening. i enjoy your contributions in every forum ive bumped into you in, even tho sometimes i dont agree. im amazed you managed to stay civil.

            there are valid reasons a person can have for being vegan, we shouldnt have to lie to convince others and it wouldnt hurt to be just a little less reactive because wed save a lot of time without the strawmen.

          • Paleo Huntress

            Hi RWV!

            I think the last thread we shared was about body building? You added lots of great information to that thread, it really bulked up my library.

            Yeah, my tolerance for BS runs low at times, and it gets harder to be civil toward folks who use passive-aggression rather than being straight-forward, but I manage for the most part.

            It’s good to see you here, it’ll be nice to see comments from a vegan who doesn’t believe his diet is the stuff of the gods and who knows what the actual science is and therefore the real-life advantages and limitations.

          • BPCveg

            Perhaps you and your new boyfriend, RWV, could exchange love letters elsewhere.

          • Real World Vegan

            wow dude, i know we dont agree about everything but i admit i expect a level of maturity above ‘if you like her so much why dont you marry her’. we’re not in the schoolyard. adults exchange compliments, advice and ideas in the real world. lighten up.

          • BPCveg

            You are welcome. Please start by changing your pompous alias.

          • Real World Vegan

            abusively and insultingly accusing others of being abusive and insulting? rich. i live in the real world where i can see past my own choices and wfpb is only one kind of healthy diet and where there are many more. you should join the rest of us here in the real world. you might find yourself with a sunnier nature.

          • BPCveg

            I noticed the bb (bimbo boyfriend) has been acting a little defensive lately. You may want to encourage him to cut back on all those roids that have been clouding his judgement.

          • Real World Vegan

            ‘Thank you, Thea, for helping to gentrify this forum’ -VegAtHeart f/k/a BPCveg

            we vegans are such a pious, self aggrandizing bunch. huntress left that comment 4 days ago and you’ve been active in the community every day since. why would you post this crap now? it doesn’t add anything to the topic, its pure spirit. no argument, blogs are pollyanna places when everyones uber polite, but they certainly aren’t as informative or entertaining as those with a little edge. it boggles that some of the people commenting about huntress believe themselves so righteous with you proudly starting a bashing campaign while thanking someone -else- for ‘helping to gentrify’ the forum. what kind of person responds with such juvenile taunts as ‘bimbo boyfriend’? roids? vandal? pompous? its laughable that you criticized her for name-calling and at the worst, i see her suggesting a lack of reading comprehension [and after reading the comments she was responding to, her frustration was warranted] and the insistence that veganism isn’t magic. not the politest thing to say but light years ahead of the ugly sh*t youre spewing.you are the bully. you rally others against huntress, entreating them to ‘mock and ridicule’? there is nothing in her comments that warrants it, but damn she makes some really good arguments and they are contrary to yours.

            i hope this forum sees you for who you are and isnt prompted to join you in the gutter merely because youre vegan. most of the world already finds us insufferable, we dont need to prove them right.

          • VegAtHeart

            “what kind of person responds with such juvenile taunts as…” Real World Vegan

            Although I was not the one to throw the first spear, you are correct that I recently returned a few. I remind you that this all started with you entering into my conversation with Paleo Huntress, taking sides and labelling me a hypocrite. You launched these ad hominem attacks without rationally discussing your points of disagreement. I was very hurt by the disrespectful manner in which you spoke to me.

            You have insinuated a number of times that I am trying to proselytize veganism. Nothing could be farther from the truth. My interest is solely in understanding the science of vegan nutrition and how to effectively implement it. There is no arrogance it trying to become more learned on subject of personal interest.

            I think that the essential reason for the bad blood in this particular discussion is a disagreement over the claim that some people require meat (or eggs) for health benefits such as protein and cholesterol. I do not believe this argument to be true as I feel that it contradicts the established scientific knowledge as communicated by the dieticians and Dr. Greger. As you can see from the thumbs up next to many of my comments, some readers have found my contributions on this topic to be of value.

          • Real World Vegan

            taking sides? there are no sides here. there is truth, there is myth and there is opinion. we are all trying to find what works best for each of us. becoming more polarized by taking sides is counterproductive imo. ive read the comments about issues w/reading comprehension and they offended pretty much everyone, but the observation is tough to deny when it keeps happening, even after people have already been made aware. when your whole identity is defined by any one thing in your life [like diet] you start viewing the world through that filter and that can make it hard to listen or -read- honestly.

            1st dude, i didn’t call you a hypocrite and even explained that the comment wasnt directed at you personally and that i was just posting at the bottom of the thread where yours happened to be the last comment. still tho, regarding the hypocrisy i mentioned, Coacervate shared an anecdote about statins and you appeared to accept it at face value and respond to his story respectfully. in fact many anecdotes that favor pb diets have been shared throughout the thread and they all seem to be accepted as truth or at the very least are not challenged. but when someone shares an anecdote that doesnt support pb diets, suddenly anecdotes are worthless and the person sharing one is a liar or even too stupid to have done veganism ‘right’. i assume that you are able to appreciate the hypocrisy in that? we cant have it both ways.

            2nd not a single person has claimed that meat or eggs are required for health, even huntress who eats both hasnt said so.

            3rd, huntress was recently told, ‘People come here to discuss and comment. Sometimes that means that they include themselves in other conversations/threads.’ looks the community accepts this and i assume youve been part of it for a while? your comment was snarky and dismissive of a valid point and you were comparing lima beans to hot dogs? seriously dude, way to be dishonest. it looked like only vegans are taken seriously in this forum so i thought it was important to share that vegans can definitely have issues with protein. your comment also included more bashing for claims that she didn’t make, which though i understand having it pointed out isn’t comfortable, its hard to deny that there appears to be a trend with you bashing people and denying claims [straw men] that aren’t actually being made. in your shoes, id be concerned about what was triggering me and preventing me from hearing the message the way it is written and id take some time trying to defuse that trigger. i know it can be hard to hear advice amidst criticism so feel free to tell me to go to hell, but i hope you can take it at face value and believe i mean it to be helpful.

            i think youre saying youre a nice guy and that you behaved out of character. i apologize that my tone or your perceptions of me taking someones side against you deeply hurt you. [i wonder if huntress was deeply hurt by your tone, or you taking toxins side against her, 'I have closely followed Toxins' comments on Nutrition facts for over one year and think he is one of the most intelligent contributors.'? considering you know what its like to be reactive to someones tone, perhaps you are a little more empathetic to her reaction now?] ive also been deeply hurt by people, by loved ones, by friends, by colleagues at times, but i cant say ive ever being deeply hurt by a stranger on the internet. if you are truly not the abusive guy youve been being here in the last few days, why would you give a stranger the power to turn you into him? being that reactive makes your position look insecure. another possible place for introspection?

            the term ‘established’ doesnt mean its the dominant theory, it just means there are some people with cred that agree. the dominating position in nutrition science is still that animal foods and protein are significant and important. in response to this, ‘my interest is solely in understanding the science of vegan nutrition and how to effectively implement it. There is no arrogance it trying to become more learned on subject of personal interest.’ perhaps it is the fact that you have dismissed other nutrition sciences as valid that creates the problem here. isnt it more ideal to look at -all- of the nutritional science? if the only school you bother with is the wfpb school you cant possibly be well informed on nutrition in general and with your eyes closed to half the data, how could anyone not be proselytizing when talking about it?

          • Real World Vegan

            i love this vegan athlete blog and i think this guy has the right attitude. hopefully i can get the formatting to copy over. enjoy!

            No Meat Athlete

            Why Vegans and Paleos Should Stop Hating Each Other

            Most of the foods that I eat — and those in a typical healthy vegan diet (as opposed to the junk-food variety) — are Paleo.

            Sure, the seeds are iffy. And I probably eat beans three or four times a week, and even wheat once in a while, which Paleos wouldn’t do.

            But beyond that, the foods on my list, by and large, could have been eaten by a caveman.

            Guess what? The converse is true, too. Most (yes, most) of a Paleo dieter’s foods are vegan. They’re whole foods, including a ton of vegetables and nuts, a fair amount of fruits, and no dairy.

            Though we focus on the differences in our diets, and fight like pissed-off hornets as a result, the healthy versions of both Paleo and vegan diets look an awful lot alike.

            Here are just a few of the things we agree on:

            -Vegetables are good, and organic vegetables are better.

            -Nuts are good.

            -Fruits are good (with some qualifications).

            -Fast food is awful.

            -It isn’t natural or healthy for adult humans to drink milk meant for baby cows.

            -Whole food is crucial; we should eat food as close to its natural state as possible.

            -Processed food is evil, and there’s something very wrong with the system that is foisting it upon us.

            Do you realize what a small minority these shared beliefs put us in?

            Each day, 1 in 4 Americans eats fast food. Forty-four percent eat it once per week!

            Only about a quarter of Americans never eat fast food, so we’ve got a lot in common already, without even considering our common avoidance of dairy. I can’t find a figure for how exclusive a group it is that doesn’t consume dairy, but and as NY Times columnist and Vegan Before 6 advocate Mark Bittman puts it, “Drinking milk is as American as Mom and apple pie.”

            And we still haven’t even cordoned ourselves off from the masses who buy mostly processed, packaged foods to eat at home — the vast majority of whoever remains after we eliminate fast food and dairy, I’m sure.

            Essentially, those of us who avoid fast food, pass on milk, and choose whole foods are the weirdos, in a world of processed food and rapidly expanding waistlines.

            Even when it comes to meat — the “staple” of the Paleo diet (more on this in a second) — I think most Paleos would agree that what our factory farm system produces, whether due to the way the animals are confined or what they’re fed or what’s injected into them, is not healthy.

            And the healthiest vegan athletes, by my judgement anyway, advocate limiting grains or avoiding them entirely. Very often they rely on pseudograins like quinoa (technically seeds) instead, which don’t jive with Paleo, but I think most Paleos would agree that seeds trump wheat and grains any day.

            Basically: we’re far more alike than we are different.

            So why do we hate each other?

            I get that the ethical issues muddy things up a bit. Vegans hate that Paleos so proudly eat meat; Paleos hate that vegans try to tell them something that humans have done throughout our history is suddenly wrong.

            But for now, let’s put that aside, and acknowledge that if all meat-eaters ate meat raised the way the Paleo diet specifies it should be, our food system would be a heck of a lot more humane (and healthy) than it currently is.

            Speaking of meat, I asked my online-buddy Joel Runyon, what he thought about the vegan/Paleo feud, he had this to say:

            The biggest misconception about the paleo diet is that it’s all about eating meat. Not true! Paleo is about eating whole, real food that hasn’t been processed a thousand times & packed with tons of sugar.

            And as he explains on his new site, Ultimate Paleo Guide,

            … that means no twinkies, oreos or your favorite breakfast cereal. Sorry, but we’re not sorry … if it’s got a bunch of chemicals that you can’t pronounce in it, it’s probably not paleo – sorry!

            Gee, sounds a lot like how I eat.

          • Real World Vegan

            im a bb and my last mass gain was a nightmare to get through. i found it impossible to get enough protein from whole foods and had to resort to concentrated vegan protein powders, which goes way against my whole food ideals. before that i was eating all day long which aint easy when you have to work for a living. why take offense at the truth? if you decide it doesnt change anything for you that’s fine, but insisting you can make the claim true when its not possible without processed food just makes our entire community look like frauds.

            i didnt see any claims of pride about over consuming protein and am beginning to understand what huntress meant when she said you were being disingenuous. watch the strawmen dude, they bite us in the a**.

        • http://jolkapolkaskitchen.blogspot.com/ WholeFoodChomper

          Good points, @9bc1cfb1178977ce8d7d9681ec6fedd4:disqus. Humanity has proved time and again that we are not so good at moderation. I believe it was Dr. McDougall who said, “Moderation is for moderate personalities.” When it comes to eating in the Western world moderation is a losing proposition. It has not and will not work to improve Westerners health via eating habits.

          • Gary Loewenthal

            This is just a general reply. I think Paleo Huntress is implying that to get enough protein on a vegan diet, we have to eat a lot of veggies. That sounds like a win-win.

            Re: wheat. It has been a staple food in the Near East for 10,000 years, so that wouldn’t be my candidate for “worst” thing you can eat. Studies show that one slice of processed meat a day significantly raises pancreatic cancer risk. To name one food group worse than wheat.

          • Phaedra

            Gary Loewenthal,

            I don’t believe “processed meat” is really a food group if we’re talking about whole food. I also think that the paleo community gets a lot of stuff right, that it does take time to adapt to certain foods and that we are not universally adapted to all of them, and that since this is the case, many of us are healthier when we don’t eat them. If wheat was a staple in the Middle East and you happen to be of Middle Eastern heritage, you’ll probably tolerate it pretty well. The same way that Northern dairying cultures tolerate dairy pretty well (including those in the Middle East) with lactase persistence. I see the discussion about Dr. Campbell finding a closer relationship between disease and wheat, than with meat, and it seems likely that the Chinese ate plenty of processed meat if they were eating processed wheat. If we can distinguish between whole and processed wheat-based foods, we should be able to distinguish between whole and processed animal foods. I’ve never met a pro-dairy vegan, they are usually quick to point out that we aren’t adapted to eating dairy, but usually that same vegan is arguing for eating wheat, even though we know that all human babies are born with the ability to digest dairy and that the same can’t be said for wheat.

            ["Re: wheat. It has been a staple food in the Near East for 10,000 years, so that wouldn't be my candidate for "worst" thing you can eat. Studies show that one slice of processed meat a day significantly raises pancreatic cancer risk. To name one food group worse than wheat."]

      • http://jolkapolkaskitchen.blogspot.com/ WholeFoodChomper

        Well, an egg is not really an entree either, but that is not the point here. Eating the occasional egg– or dare I say– another animal based protein while consuming a predominately PBD, is probably fine.

        You said don’t mention nuts, however, I have found that when I am “starving” and not much is at hand (that is, I need to whip up a meal) that a handful of nuts does a great job of tiding me over until I can have an entree. Similarly, whole wheat toast, a tortilla, or apple slices with an almond (or other nut butter) butter spread is quite effective as well (the addition of cinnamon makes it extra yummy).

        Another quick go to, is beans. It does not take much effort to whip them up into a dip or spread. Ever try a bean no-egg salad? Or, if that requires too much time even just eating beans plain works, too. Although, for a super duper quick fix, I usually season them a bit or make them into a bean salad (beans and salad dressing is all that is required).

        My best strategy, however, is to try and not find my self in a situation where I am super hungry with nothing on hand. When time permits, I try to prepare a few meals all at once and in advance, so that I can have them ready when necessary to save time and get food in the ol’ pie (bean?) hole ASAP. Pre-preparing homemade bean/veggie patties, soups, as well as other favorite entrees when I have the time really is a huge time saver when time does not allow for more than reheating and eating.

        Finally, lets not forget greens and grains. Green veggies are all rich in protein, and they provide loads of micronutrients with no cholesterol and virtually no fat. As for grains, just one cup of cooked quinoa contains 18 grams of protein. Other whole grains, including whole grain bread, brown rice, barley are all healthy protein-rich foods, as well.

        So, I try to keep greens, beans, and grains on hand for quick meal preparations, as well.

        The other thought I had was if you are finding that you are feeling weak since you have started a PBD, you may want to ask yourself some additional questions to see if you are truly not getting enough protein (which is very rare in the Western world even on a PBD)? Are you eating enough? Are you getting enough B12, vitamin D? Are you eating too much raw kale and other raw goitrogenic veggies that might have made you hypothyroid (and thereby lower your energy)? How are your iron levels?

        This article by Dr. G may be of further guidance: http://nutritionfacts.org/2012/11/01/how-to-enhance-mineral-absorption/

        • Real World Vegan

          according to my functional medicine doc, protein deficiency due to poor absorption is pretty common in the vegans he sees. the first thing he recommends is an elimination diet (like GAPS). he says the vast majority of his patients respond well to removing grains and legumes (and sometimes nuts and seeds too) and that sometimes after healing the gut they can add them back again. he also said that quinoa causes even more trouble for some. the natural soap it contains can make holes in the gut lining and allow tiny particles of food directly into the bloodstream which may in turn cause autoimmune reactions. It can take up to three months to see the difference but most see it within 30 days. its a pretty benign experiment that could really pay off.

          • Mike Quinoa

            That’s why you rinse quinoa thoroughly—to get rid of the saponins.

          • Real World Vegan

            very true, unrinsed quinoa is gagworthy. but rinsing doesnt get rid of all or even most of the bad crap. this study found that after ‘scrubbing and washing’ not just rinsing, the level of saponin-A was reduced by 31% tops, and in some cases not at all. the phytic acid was reduced only by about 30% tho it isnt super high in quinoa to begin with. so even after rinsing, the saponin content is still pretty high and it still has the potential to wreak havoc in the gut. and unlike gluten it has nothing to do with whether youre sensitive or not. its a chemical reaction thats pretty universal.

            Food Chemistry Volume 48, Issue 2, 1993, Pages 137–143

          • Mike Quinoa

            I researched your link. To view the full report it cost $35.00. No thanks. But I was able to print the summary:
            “After scrubbing and washing, the level of saponin-A remaining in the seeds decreased to 0·31% of the dry weight, and saponin-B was completely removed by this process.The content of phytic acid in the quinoa seeds was about 1% of the dry matter, and scrubbing and washing reduced the phytic acid content of the seeds by about 30%. Neither protease inhibitor nor tannins were detected in the quinoa seeds.”
            So, the saponin-A was reduced to 0.31% of the dry weight. Don’t know what it was in the beginning. The dry weight of the phytic acid is actually more than the dry weight of the saponin-A. Anyway, doesn’t sound so bad. I’ll keep enjoying my quinoa.

          • Real World Vegan

            dude, no one said you shouldnt eat quinoa. [youve chosen to be its namesake FFS]

            a minor correction- the study doesn’t read 0-[.]31%, it reads 0-31%. Theres a huge difference there. i gotta say, i participate in a lot of vegan forums and there are a few that are powder kegs, but this community is definitely up there in reactivity in the realm of my personal experience with pb forums. doc says some people cannot heal their guts when they eat quinoa because the saponins punch little holes in their mucosal cell walls. and as stated, since scrubbed quinoa still contains saponin. those people probably shouldnt eat quinoa. its pretty straightforward and really doesnt say anything about whether you specifically should eat it or not.

            we could haggle over the numbers and what they should mean to each of us but why not just look at the effect of saponins on the gut? this study concluded ‘saponins readily increase the permeability of the small intestinal mucosal cells, thereby inhibiting active nutrient transport, and facilitating the uptake of materials to which the gut would normally be impermeable.’ Journal of Nutrition 12/1986; 116(11):2270-7.

            who knows how much quinoa different individuals might need to eat for gut probs, but there is definitely evidence that they do occur for some people.

          • Mike Quinoa

            Actually, it is 0.31%, not 0-31%. They use a period, not a dash. And it’s not as if their keyboard lacks a dash key—they use it in the phrase “saponin-A.”

            Your quoted study doesn’t reference quinoa at all, washed or no. It was, as well, an in vitro study on rats. An in vivo study on humans would be more informative for our purposes.

            The authors did conclude, however, that saponins may be useful in controlling human plasma cholesterol and in the treatment of cardiovascular disease.

          • Real World Vegan

            sorry dude. this is a snapshot of the page.

          • Mike Quinoa

            Take a look at the dash-mark in the phrase “saponin-A.” That is not the same character as the one used in “0·31%” Why is that so? My post of two days ago was a copy and paste from the website document. If you have a link to access the full report for free that would be helpful.
            As I pointed out, it was an in vitro study on rats. Not exactly conclusive for humans.

          • Real World Vegan

            it isn’t an in vitro study on rats, its a measure of the saponin in scrubbed quinoa. and i cant give you access dude, i get full access at the uni library but theres no way to transfer it to you.

            i also cant tell you why its so, but id guess that in one case the dash represents a link between the parts and in the other case it represents a range. but studies are full of odd characters and copying and pasting isnt always reliable if your computer cant duplicate the special characters. my keyboard offers three different dashes. its obvious that it isnt the same character as the dash seen in ‘saponin-a’, but its even more obvious that it isnt the period used at the ends of the sentences.

          • Mike Quinoa

            I think the mystery is solved.

            This is from their abstract:

            “The amount of saponin A was 0·7% of the dry weight and that of the saponin B was 0·2% of the dry weight. These were the major saponins found in the quinoa bran collected while polishing the seeds. After scrubbing and washing, the level of saponin-A remaining in the seeds decreased to 0·31% of the dry weight, and saponin-B was completely removed by this process.”
            So it is, in fact, a decimal point, meaning there aren’t a lot of saponins remaining in scrubbed quinoa.

          • Real World Vegan

            i see the exact same thing as before. you are using your interpretation of the conclusion to define the original parameters but that isn’t what i see. i see that they tested several samples and they are telling us that the amount of saponin ranged from 0% in some sample to 7% in others.

            anyway, setting the argument over differing interpretations aside, ill take a look at it through your interpretations for a sec. if the original content was .7% and [considering that you rinse the quinoa before cooking i believe its a safe assumption that you believe the saponin is mostly undesirable] and the finished content is .31%, the reduction is even poorer than i stated. in my analysis, the reduction was almost two thirds and in yours in is just over half. [i don't know how much saponin it takes to cause a reaction and without that information id be wary of defining .31% as safe. im sure the poison is in the dose too.] if the point is to prove quinoa is safe after rinsing, the original interpretation of the data favors it more than the one you’re insisting on, but id rather be accurate than ‘right’ so im glad you offered your interpretation too.

            clearly dude, you’ve bonded with the quinoa and im confident in ppls ability to weigh evidence for themselves. im gonna bow out of this piece of the thread and leave you and your manna in blissful solitude.

          • Mike Quinoa

            “They are telling us that the amount of saponin ranged from 0% in some sample to 7% in others.”

            Let’s say the “·” is in fact a dash mark denoting a range. Then the starting amount of saponin A was 0 – 7% of the dry weight.

            After scrubbing and washing, the level of saponin-A remaining in the seeds decreased to 0 – 31% of the dry weight??? Decreased to 0 – 31% from 0 – 7%. That makes no sense.

            So it is, in fact, a decimal point, meaning there aren’t a lot of saponins remaining in the scrubbed quinoa.
            Anyway, it hasn’t killed me yet (lol).

      • Gary Loewenthal

        The latest generation of veggie meats are not very processed. For instance, Field Roast sausages are basically grains, veggies, fruits, legumes, and spices/herbs – foods that have sustained most of the world since the dawn of civilization. A bit high in sodium though. Maybe not an everyday food, but delicious and filling in chili, hash browns, etc.

  • mojo191

    For decades, conventional medicine has made cholesterol the big bugaboo, conveniently forgetting that cholesterol is needed by our bodies in order to manufacture not only all of our hormones but even more importantly, CoQ10, without which our hearts are unable to beat. One wonders whether the whole controversy might not have been been deliberately manufactured by the medical-industrial complex (Big Pharma) in order to ultimately reap big profits putting all Americans on Lipitor and other statin drugs for “maintenance” for the rest of their lives… not that those on statins haven’t shown other problems like severe muscle wasting disease and cardiac insufficiency.

    The problem, as I see it, is not cholesterol, per se, but, rather, oxidized, calicified cholesterol plaque. With regard to the calcification, sufficient intake of Vitamin K2 is essential to keep the parathyroid gland from taking too much calcium out of the bones and teeth and depositing it in the blood, where it can calcify softctissue, arteries and cholesterol that has been deposited to sooth arteries that have been irritated by excess homocysteine. And, as far as oxidation of the plaques, themselves, sufficient intake of antioxidants should make that a less likely occurrence.

    If such precautions are taken, I can’t see any reason why eggs (especially if they are organic) couldn’t be taken in moderation. Just saying…

    • editor d

      All the cholesterol you will ever need is made by your liver. You need 0 intake. Look it up. If it were not true then life long vegans like Joaquin Phoenix would be dead right now. I haven’t had cholesterol in 2 years now and my heart beats quite well.

      Also what does moderation mean? One egg a week? One a day? One a month? Moderation is worthless because it means something different to everyone. Why not just eat the healthiest way possible. Why have one cigarette a day when you could just quit?

      • mojo191

        Editor d: “All the cholesterol you will ever need is made by your liver. You need 0 intake. Look it up.”

        Editor d, your assertion, shown above, presupposes a case in which people’s livers are healthy and have not have not sustained any damage due to heavy metal toxicity which, in the world we currently live in, is sadly not the case.

        When liver toxicity has damaged the liver’s cytochrome p450 enzymes, they are no longer capable of making all the cholesterol the body needs for its various functions. See below:

        “Breaking down toxins creates byproducts that can damage the liver. Although the liver has a great capacity for regeneration, constant exposure to toxic substances can cause serious, sometimes irreversible harm.”
        http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/toxic-hepatitis/DS00811/DSECTION=causes

        [The liver's] “cytochrome P450 (CYP450) enzymes are essential for the production of cholesterol, steroids, prostacyclins, and thromboxane A2. They also are necessary for the detoxification of foreign chemicals and the metabolism of drugs. CYP450 enzymes are so named because they are bound to membranes within a cell (cyto) and contain a heme pigment (chrome and P) that absorbs light at a wavelength of 450 nm when exposed to carbon monoxide. There are more than 50 CYP450 enzymes, but the CYP1A2, CYP2C9, CYP2C19, CYP2D6, CYP3A4, and CYP3A5 enzymes metabolize 90 percent of drugs.1,2 These enzymes are predominantly expressed in the liver, but they also occur in the small intestine (reducing drug bioavailability), lungs, placenta, and kidneys.”2

        http://www.aafp.org/afp/2007/0801/p391.html

        In addition, if a person with damaged cytochrome p450 liver enzymes is trying to get by with your scanty recommendations above, it may be highly recommended that they also get their cholesterol blood levels checked quite regularly to make sure that they have adequate levels of cholesterol in their blood, as too low levels of blood cholesterol have been correlated, in research studies, with the risk of hyper-aggressive behavior and suicide — see below:

        Psychiatr Pol. 1996 May-Jun;30(3):499-509.
        [Low concentration level of total serum cholesterol as a risk factor for suicidal and aggressive behavior].
        [Article in Polish]
        Ainiyet J, Rybakowski J.
        Source
        Kliniki Psychiatrii Dorosłych AM w Poznaniu.
        Abstract

        “The data have been presented for possible association between low total serum cholesterol concentration and the increased risk of suicidal and aggressive behavior. The analysis of results from some long-term epidemiological studies shows an excess of suicides and violent death cases among persons with low baseline total serum cholesterol level and in those in whom this level was lowered by means of pharmacotherapy or dieting. In patients hospitalized on psychiatric wards, having low total serum cholesterol concentration, a higher intensity of suicidal thoughts and tendencies was found. Such relationship was most evident in patients with depression. In some populations, an association between low total cholesterol level and the tendency to aggressive behavior was also found. Higher intensity of aggression was also observed in animals receiving low-cholesterol diet. A hypothesis was discussed, postulating the connection between low cholesterol level and lower activity of central serotonergic structures responsible for the inhibition of impulsive behavior.”

        http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8848510

        Interestingly enough, in Traditional Chinese Medicine, imbalances in the liver and gallbladder have been correlated for millennia with emotional imbalances regarding the emotions of anger, resentment, blame and guilt, which dovetails nicely with the study above, if we take account of situations in which the liver’s cytochrome p450 enzymes have been rendered not sufficiently operative to synthesize all the cholesterol that the body might need, thereby generating the aggressiveness and suicidal ideation and behavior noted in the research paper cited above.

        • Mike Quinoa

          Hi mojo191,

          You seem to agree with Editor d’s statement that, “All the cholesterol you will ever need is made by your liver. You need 0 intake,” with the caveat that most people’s livers are damaged from heavy metal toxicity, and can longer produce adequate cholesterol. What percentage of people are we talking about here? That would give some context to your remark.

          You seem to be implying that dietary intake of cholesterol will raise cholesterol levels to a healthy benchmark in people that may suffer from the aforementioned damaged livers. It seems then that dietary cholesterol can raise one’s cholesterol level. Is this a good thing for those people who have not undergone any heavy-metal related liver damage? In other words, these people’s livers are already manufacturing adequate cholesterol for their needs.

          Also regarding your comment about the possible association between low total serum cholesterol concentration and the increased risk of suicidal and aggressive behaviour, does that mean that the rural Chinese with an average total cholesterol level of 127 mg/dL are more prone to these types of behaviours than any other given population subset?

        • HereHere

          Whenever I have friends or relatives who get their bloodwork tested, they have never been diagnosed with a lack of cholesterol. In most cases, it seems their levels are too high. They are encouraged to make dietary changes and if they fail to do so, they are commonly put on statins. A study came out last month showing that statins increase the risk of type 2 diabetes and kidney injury (failure). I’ve never heard of anyone getting sick from too little cholesterol. I’d like to see the data on this, it is a thought-provoking topic.

      • Real World Vegan

        the same thing can be said about glucose. you need zero intake and your body can make all it needs from protein. we know that extra glucose causes inflammation, metabolic dysfunction and fat gain, so maybe the best choice would be not to eat any carbohydrate at all. why have even 50 grams a day when you could just quit?

        • Mike Quinoa

          “Why have even 50 grams a day when you could just quit?”
          Because fruits and vegetables contain wonderful antioxidants and phytonutrients. As you pointed out, “extra” glucose is the problem. People who are concerned can always look for low glycemic load carbs.

          • Real World Vegan

            ‘Because fruits and vegetables contain wonderful antioxidants and phytonutrients.’

            and eggs contain wonderful antioxidants and nutrients too. a 2011 study published in the journal Food Chemistry found that egg proteins were converted by enzymes in the stomach and small intestines and produced peptides that act the same way ACE inhibitors work. they also found that two raw egg yolks have almost twice as many antioxidant properties as an apple and about the same as half a serving (25 grams) of cranberries and that when cooked they were still better than the apple. ive never heard anyone say that they eat eggs for the cholesterol, but it seems reasonable to me that if we know that the body will make less cholesterol when we eat more cholesterol, than there is about as much risk of getting high serum cholesterol from eggs as there is getting diabetes from carrots or rice. so then the question becomes, are eggs nutritious? by every scientific standard they are.

            you could also argue that there are unhealthy components in eggs, but that rap applies to plant foods too. saponins, protease inhibitors, chelators, lectins, phytate, soyatoxin, oxalates, goitrogenic compounds, salicylates, aflatoxin, oligosaccharides, phytoestrogens, free fructose and the sh*t list goes on and on. wanna claim that experts believe that some of these are healthy? the same argument applies to most of the components of eggs.

            it makes us hypocrites to claim that we should just quit eggs because they contain components that we decided are unhealthy in excess when we cant refute that plants contain many similarly unhealthy components too.

            Food Chemistry, 2011; 129 (1): 155

          • Mike Quinoa

            Do you not eat fruits and vegetables? They have fiber, while eggs have none.

          • Real World Vegan

            i do not know what youre saying here dude. people who eat eggs usually eat fruit and veggies too. what if I said we shouldnt eat eggs cuz they contain no vitamin d? youd probably say i could eat something else that does. we vegans dont have a corner on plant eating. eggs dont need to contain fiber cuz no one is eating only eggs.

          • Mike Quinoa

            You’re the one that suggested that, “maybe the best choice would be not to eat any carbohydrate at all. why have even 50 grams a day when you could just quit?”
            If you eat fruits and vegetables, you’re getting carbs. If you don’t want any carbohydrates at all, then you won’t be eating fruits and vegetables. As you pointed out earlier, one can obtain protein-derived glucose.

          • Real World Vegan

            please keep it within context, its a more respectful way to debate. the argument is that we dont need to eat carbohydrate to get glucose, the body makes it. just like the body makes cholesterol. and just like the body makes more cholesterol when we eat less of it, it makes more glucose when we eat less of it. one could exceed their daily need for fiber with greens and still consume fewer than 20 net grams of carbohydrate. is it really so hard to concede that the points are similar?

          • Mike Quinoa

            We seem to be talking in circles.

            You’re the one that originally suggested that, “maybe the best choice would be not to eat any carbohydrate at all.”

            Then I mentioned “fruits and vegetables contain wonderful antioxidants and phytonutrients.”

            But, fruits and veggies have carbs.

            And I agreed with your statement that one can obtain protein-derived glucose.

            I think we are in agreement about all those points.

          • Real World Vegan

            my point is that suggesting we not eat eggs because the body can make cholesterol is the same as suggesting we not eat carby veggies because the body can make glucose. Both contain other nutrients that are valuable. if you agree with that, then we are in agreement.

          • Mike Quinoa

            Unless you’re in starvation mode, and cannibalizing your own tissues, your body will get its glucose preferentially from food. Whereas you don’t need to eat eggs or other cholesterol-containing foods for your body to synthesize its own cholesterol.

          • Real World Vegan

            ‘starvation mode’ is an inflammtory buzz term used by low-carb opponents, and in the same way that pb advocates argue that protein isnt an issue when getting enough calories, glucose isn’t either. ketogenic pathways arent starvation mechanisms, they are alternative energy pathways used by the body when the energy composition changes.

            the body goes into ketosis every single night which is why most of us wake up with ‘morning breath’ even though we brushed our teeth before bed. ketosis is muscle sparing and the bodys need for glucose is really reduced on a ketogenic diet. we are amazingly versatile machines. if a person eats only animal food [as surely most primitive people did for most of the winter in colder climates], the body will make glucose from dietary protein, not its own muscle. and if youre trying to lose body fat, the bonus is that the conversion is inefficient and almost half the calories are lost to the process itself meaning youll use more calories for the same activities.

            bottom line, the body doesnt need plant foods for glucose. so why eat them? the answer is because they contain other stuff thats good for us. just like eggs.

          • Mike Quinoa

            “Bottom line, the body doesnt need plant foods for glucose. so why eat them? the answer is because they contain other stuff thats good for us.”

            That’s what I’ve been saying all along.

            Actually, what I meant by “starvation mode” was a person that was actually starving to death. I didn’t realize the phrase was an “inflammatory buzz term used by low-carb opponents.”

          • Real World Vegan

            im glad i was able to help you learn something today dude. im just gonna hit the comment that started this thread. “Why not just eat the healthiest way possible. Why have one cigarette a day when you could just quit?” and you have made an excellent argument for eating eggs. eggs and veggies arent cigarettes, they are highly nutritious foods. people dont quit eggs for the same reason they dont quit veggies. both are nutritious foods full of antioxidants and both contain components considered harmful when separated out or consumed in excess.

          • Mike Quinoa

            RWV,

            The thing I had an issue with was your statement:
            “”maybe the best choice would be not to eat any carbohydrate at all. why have even 50 grams a day when you could just quit?”
            I’ve shown how that would be unhealthy by, of necessity, excluding fruits and veggies. Have you ever personally attempted a zero carb diet?
            Also, why is a vegan such as yourself continually promoting eggs???

          • Real World Vegan

            that should read ‘what if I said we shouldnt eat cranberries cuz they contain no vitamin d?’ will edit the original comment and delete this one.

          • Real World Vegan

            i expected you to have an issue with it, its as absurd as suggesting we not eat eggs for the same reason. eggs are only one kind of animal food though, what if id said we should all just quit kale or we should all just quit Brazil nuts? same diff.

            yes, i followed a ketogenic diet (no plant foods) for almost 6 months several years ago.

            the only thing im promoting is honesty. i dont eat animal foods for ethical reasons but thats because i seem to do pretty well without them. if that ever changes, ill eat them again. my wife doesnt do well as a vegan so she eats eggs and fish and her health is just better with them. obviously some people do well on a vegan diet but ‘some’ isnt all, and people dont take us seriously when we lie, even if its accidentally.

            like it or not there are lots of good reasons to eat eggs.

          • Mike Quinoa

            “yes, i followed a ketogenic diet (no plant foods) for almost 6 months several years ago.”

            So why did you give it up?

            ” i dont eat animal foods for ethical reasons but thats because i seem to do pretty well without them.”
            If you’re an ethical vegan, then that makes your adulation of eggs an even more mysterious thing.

          • Real World Vegan

            I gave it up because i got bored. my performance and energy were phenomenal but my food choices got seriously repetitive.

            it aint ‘adulation’ of eggs, its honest science. if i had to choose an animal food that was most ethical, it would be the free range eggs my wife gets from a friend of ours. those hens are treated like royalty. the only way my insistence that eggs are nutritious would be mysterious to you is if your diet was so much doctrine that you couldnt separate the science from the ethics. people are wiser to BS artists and more savvy now. and they rarely give you a second change once youve shown yourself a liar, so i choose to stay honest in it.

            id go back to eating pastured animal foods today if i had to choose between veganism with beans and grains or paleo omni without them. from the ethical angle, the latter diet kills fewer animals and uses up fewer resources. at the moment, being vegan is something of a personal challenge, i like being able to say i eat zero animal food. but like i wrote previously, if my health or performance ever declines [and it prolly will cuz few vegans dont see an eventual decline in health and performance] ill include ethical animal foods again. animal welfare is important to me, but i live in the real world where human welfare comes first.

          • Mike Quinoa

            “cuz few vegans dont see an eventual decline in health and performance”
            So why are you still vegan? And what’s your scientific reference for that statement?

          • Real World Vegan

            dude, you seem like a decent enough guy, but id rather have a convo than swing at balls from a pitching machine. you dont seem into a discussion and no matter what response i give, you have another challenge waiting to pitch my way. and hey, i love a good challenge, but im not into it just for the sake of arguing. if you want to justify your choices with a barrage of challenges thats your business. im not interested in batting anymore.

            im vegan because it works for me right now. its inline with my ethical ideals and tho my strength and performance didnt improve when i went vegan, they havent dropped off either. i hope that people are fluid enuf in their life to tweak something when it doesnt work and as i said, if [and/or when] veganism stops working for me, itll be ethical omni. what more could anyone want than to do what works until it doesnt?

          • Mike Quinoa

            Hi Real World Vegan,

            I think we’ve had a few good discussions. Anytime someone makes a blanket statement, they should be prepared to scientifically back it up. That’s why I asked for clarification of your previous post.
            I fully expect other people to question my assertions if I don’t back them up scientifically.

    • Guest2

      I disagree with you about eggs. Even if the cholesterol doesn’t harm you, something else in it must. The Harvard Physicians Study found an increase in all cause mortality as a result of eating just one egg a week.

      The question of Vitamin K2 is an interesting one however, one that I’ve wondered about. Our bodies are capable of converting some vitamin K1 to K2, which can then prevent calcification of the arteries. However, I wonder if this is sufficient, or if we need some in our diet or as a supplement for optimal health. Natto is a natural vegan source of K2 but it tastes too nasty for me. This subject would be an interesting one for Dr.Greger to present in a video.

      • mojo191

        Really, guest 2? Well check out the study referenced by Robert J. Rowen, MD, below, for a “second opinion”:

        “What about cholesterol? Don’t eggs raise your cholesterol levels? I’ve told you in the past that eggs don’t raise LDL cholesterol levels. And this study [see below] confirmed that. These researchers found NO increase in serum LDL (bad) cholesterol. However, HDL (good) cholesterol increased 5%. Total serum cholesterol did increase. However, I’d expect that in this group, since most were taking statins. Statins would poison their livers’ natural production of cholesterol. So, the increase would reflect absorption from the eggs offsetting the damaging effects of the statins. The point here is that eggs actually improve the cholesterol sub fraction ratios.

        Why are eggs so good for your eyes? It’s the deep orange/yellow color of eggs. As in fruits and veggies, the deep color indicates its richness in eye and health-preserving nutrients. The color of egg yolks is far richer from eggs of range-fed chickens than factory farms. Why? The natural compounds chickens eat in range insects and seed is what the animals really need over the manmade feed designed for production, not health.

        I consider eggs a very healthy food. Eggs are the standard for quality protein. They’re loaded with lecithin, which protects you from unwanted effects of cholesterol. The problem with eggs is only the source, and how you cook them. Again, seek organic free-range eggs. Confirm their quality with visual inspection of the yolk color. The darker/richer orange/yellow the better.” – Robert J. Rowen, MD

        Ref: Am J Clin Nutr, 2009; 90(5).

        http://www.secondopinionnewsletter.com/Health-Alert-Archive/View-Archive/1770/How-a-chicken-can-save-your-eyesight-.htm

        • HereHere

          It was believed for decades that lecithin was protective of heard disease, but new research shows it increases the risk of cardiovascular events. Although eggs have healthy things in them, they are not healthy. Sorry egg industry.

          “The research, published in the April 25 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine, focused on microbes in the gut and blood levels of that chemical mediator, a substance called TMAO (trimethylamine-N-oxide). When you eat an egg, bacteria in the gut help convert the lecithin to TMAO.

          In the study, those with the highest levels of TMAO in their blood had a “2.5-fold higher risk of major adverse cardiovascular events” than those with the lowest amount of TMAO, MedPage Today reported.” Source: http://www.latimes.com/features/food/dailydish/la-fe-dd-eggs-lecithin-heart-disease-20130425,0,2290039.story

          • Paleo Huntress

            If eating meat increases heart disease we’d expect to see lower rates in vegans and vegetarians. Early studies suggested that was the case, but newer, higher quality studies that have controlled for confounding factors don’t found any survival advantage in vegetarians. One study compared the mortality of people who shopped in health food stores (both vegetarians and omnivores) to people in the general population. They found that both vegetarians and omnivores in the health food store group lived longer than people in the general population. This suggests that eating meat in the context of a healthy diet does not have the same effect as eating meat in the context of an unhealthy diet. A very large study performed in the U.K. in 2003 including over 65,000 subjects corroborated these results: no difference in mortality was observed between vegetarians and omnivores.

          • HereHere

            Check out this study, of 70,000 published in 2013. http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/261382.php

            There is also a study of 45,000 done in England and Scotland, released in January of this year, showing a 32% reduced risk of hospitalization and death for the vegetarian group, after accounting for factors such as “age, smoking, alcohol intake, physical activity, education level and socioeconomic background”. That is a huge difference. http://www.ox.ac.uk/media/news_stories/2013/130130.html

          • Paleo Huntress

            I’m sorry HereHere, I insist my data be of high quality.

            A meta-analysis covering over 1.2 million participants found that consumption of fresh, unprocessed red meat is not associated with increased risk of coronary heart disease (CHD), stroke or diabetes.

            Conclusions

            Consumption of processed meats, but not red meats, is associated with higher incidence of CHD and diabetes. These results highlight the need for better understanding of potential mechanisms of effects, and for particular focus on processed meats for dietary and policy recommendations.

            And in cultures where religious vegetarians live side by side with omnis, eating the same foods in every way except for meat, the vegetarians have MORE disease.

            ~shrugs~

          • HereHere

            I’m sorry Paleo, it seems you did not examine the links I sent. The first link, if you read it, showed that the study was published in the peer-reviewed and highly respected Journal of the American Medical Association (Internal Medicine). They state: “Vegetarians may live longer than meat-eaters, according to a new study published in JAMA Internal Medicine.
            The research involved over 70,000 members of the Seventh-day Adventist Church and showed that vegetarian diets are linked to reduced death rates with more favorable results for males than females. The potential association between diet and mortality is a critical area of research, the authors explained.” (June 2013) http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/261382.php

            The second link I posted was done by Oxford University researchers, one of the leading Universities in the world.It was published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, which is also a peer-reviewed medical journal. The article states, “The risk of hospitalisation or death from heart disease is 32% lower in vegetarians than people who eat meat and fish, according to a new study from the University of Oxford.”
            http://www.ox.ac.uk/media/news_stories/2013/130130.html.

            I’m glad that you are seeing success with your diet, and I hope the effects are long-term and serve you well. Just keep in mind, the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (formerly the American Dietetic Association) has posted information about the paleo diet under “healthy weight/fad diets” and while recognizing some merits of the paleo philosophy, they state, ” But a typical plan also exceeds the Dietary Guidelines for daily fat and protein intake and falls short on carbohydrate recommendations, according to a review from U.S. News & World Report. ” (source: http://www.eatright.org/Public/content.aspx?id=6442471551) (and they also say the diet may require supplementation, lack variety, and may be hard to sustain).

            I’m glad you are on this forum to get and share information. I would encourage you to cite your sources, especially when quoting direct text. I wouldn’t want you to have to fight charges of copyright infringement due to plagiarism. It is also helpful for other readers, who would like to be able to verify the statements and the source of the statements.

            ps – I make excellent scrambled eggs on toast using soft tofu, some nutritional yeast, salt, and mustard. It has no cholesterol and almost no saturated fat. Since anthropologists have found a variety of grain microfossils (and lentils) on our paleolithic ancestor’s dental calculus, grains should now be considered perfectly fine in the paleo diet. (Citation of research on p. 13 of this PDF: http://www.nsca.com/uploadedFiles/NSCA/Inactive_Content/Program_Books/PTC_2013_Program_Book/Aragon.pdf). The presenter holds a M.Sc. in Nutrition, so I think he has some credibility, but he is simply citing other scientific researchers.

            Sorry for the long post; I hope you find it helpful and encouraging.

          • Paleo Huntress

            First, my quotes usually INCLUDE the citations. (Note the citation in the second quote) I think I overwrote the first citation when I started writing the second paragraph. And though I believe EVERYONE should take responsibility for evidencing their own argument, anyone who is as reliant on internet search engines as you appear to be can find that source in less than 3 seconds.

            It’d be great if instead of citing opinion articles, if you would simply point to the DATA.

            Back to the topic though, there’s nothing wrong with the information in the studies themselves, the problem is that you treat them as though they mean significantly MORE than they actually do. Observational/population studies simply cannot prove the cause and effect you are claiming that they can. This is where the lack of quality comes into play. And it’s unfortunate that so many are so easily duped by this kind of bait and switch BS.

            I am curious though, what type of encouragement are you hoping I’ll find?

            And finally, what is the defining qualifier in the title of the article you linked? I’ll give you a hint, I’ll put it in bold font for you.

            “Vegetarians may live longer than meat-eaters, according to a new study published in JAMA Internal Medicine.”

            So even the RESEARCHERS can’t find cause and effect so they don’t conclude that vegetarians DO live longer, but that they may. And these are the folks to DID THE STUDY. And yet somehow, you know better? This is how data gets twisted and misrepresented by the vegan community.

            PS. You make scrambled TOFU on toast. (funny that vegan foods all “replace” a real food) I don’t eat either. You’d have to hold a gun to one of my children’s heads to get me to eat soy especially. But hey, I’m glad that you are seeing success with your diet, and I hope the effects are long-term and serve you well. If you want to have a pissing contest over specific diets, I suggest you head over to one of the paleo forums and ask what people eat. In the meantime, you are making assumptions and don’t have a clue what my diet looks like so I invite you to not be the snark who believes themselves clever while actually putting their foot in their mouth, and stick to the topic at hand. =)

          • HereHere

            Thank you for your citation. I was able to find a free, full-text copy of the meta-analysis. That is rare, and very helpful. The meta-analysis does have some big problems, however. One is that they are all based on observational studies (a method which you yourself have critiqued, although one which I think has significant epidemiological merit). A second is that all studies specifically comparing vegetarian and vegan diets to meat diets were excluded. A third is that it is weighed excessively one a single study (see critique, in the same published journal, here: http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/123/3/e16.long#ref-4)

            The Chinese study of 100 people is interesting. The researchers conclude, “In summary, contrary to common belief, vegetarians, at least in the Chinese, might have accelerated atherosclerosis and abnormal arterial endothelial function, compared with omnivore control subjects. The increased risk could only be partially explained by their higher blood pressure, triglyceride, homocysteine, and lower vitamin B12 concentrations.” http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0735109705020024

            Note the use of the word “might”. I would also note that although they did age and gender matching, they did not match for income, which could be a huge a factor in any country. Hopefully, all the patient cohorts had a similar socioeconomic profile.

            I don’t have a link to the actual data for the 7th Day Adventist Study done in the USA, but there is some data in the abstract, and here is the concluding statement from it: “CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Vegetarian diets are associated with lower all-cause mortality and with some reductions in cause-specific mortality. Results appeared to be more robust in males. These favorable associations should be considered carefully by those offering dietary guidance.” Source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23836264

            For the Oxford study, the full free text is not available, except to those with deep pockets, for the Oxford study yet again. I did find an abstract on PubMed. The conclusion: “Consuming a vegetarian diet was associated with lower IHD risk, a finding that is probably mediated by differences in non-HDL cholesterol, and systolic blood pressure”. There are some data in both these abstracts, but won’t give you as complete a picture about the study as a full text http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23364007

            As for encouragement, I was thinking that you were here to seek out nutritional facts based on evidence-based research to help you refine your diet. I am always trying to learn more about nutrition so that I can better refine my diet (and still enjoy food!). Since you had mentioned on this site that you had reversed two very serious diseases using diet, and your screen name uses the word paleo, I did make an assumption about your diet. Sorry. Given your success, I am sure you can understand the power of foods. As the evidence comes in over the days and years, I make adjustments to my diet (and lifestyle). I’m glad that I am seeing success with my diet (not that I had any serious disease before), and I hope the effects are long-term and serve me well, too. :D

            You might be interested in the research presented on this website on soy, specifically whether it is harmful or helpful, dangerous or cancer-protective on this website. Even water can kill, so it goes back to the ‘dose makes the poison’ and finding out what dose (e.g. daily intake) is beneficial, and what dose is harmful. It seems the safe upper limit is somewhere around 5-7 servings per day, but that is what I concluded from the research. (I have also researched soy on pubmed, and it prevents breast cancer and the recurrence of breast cancer in those who have had it). You can have a quick look and make your own conclusions. You may have other research at your fingertips. You may still want to avoid soy, or you may not. That is entirely your choice.

          • Paleo Huntress

            Soy is high in inflammatory poly fats, high in chelators, high in protease inhibitors and high in estrogen mimickers. It’s also goitrogenic and most is GM’d. So sure, none of that stuff should be TOO dangerous in small quantities. But frankly, small quantities wouldn’t contain enough nutrition to be worthwhile and I can get the same nutritional benefit in a serving of animal food, especially the protein, in a mere fraction of the volume of soy I’d need to consume. And… without the anti-nutritional components. That just makes more sense to me. ~shrugs~ Not to mention that fact that tofu is just… gross. The stuff vegans convince themselves is tasty is a riot. Even the Asians (who ate SO VERY LITTLE of it traditionally) knew it needed LOTS of help from animal food and salt to be edible.

            And check it out, when it benefits your argument, you actually ARE able to determine which science is bad. It’s a shame you can’t do that with the science that contradicts your argument too.

            ALL observational studies are good for little more than helping us form a hypothesis. I was confident you’d help me make that point if I shared similar data that was contrary to your ideals.

            Best!

          • Mike Quinoa

            Paleo, what is the reference for your statement:

            “Even the Asians (who ate SO VERY LITTLE of it traditionally) knew it needed LOTS of help from animal food and salt to be edible.”

            How do you define “so very little” in units of measurement?
            Okinawans eat quite a bit of soy and they enjoy one of the longest lifespans on the planet.

          • Paleo Huntress

            The Okinawans don’t represent traditional Asia AT ALL. In fact, the purple sweet potato they’re known for is native to the Americas. Still though, most of their soy is fermented, in fact, unlike other Asian cultures, the Okinawans even ferment most of their tofu. And they max out at 3 ounces, which represents approximately 75 calories. And even in their low calorie diet, 75 calories is less than 5% of their intake.

            I’ll add too, it appears that regardless of what they eat, Okinawans have an advantage.

            “Centenarians represent a rare phenotype appearing in roughly 10–20 per 100,000 persons in most industrialized countries but as high as 40–50 per 100,000 persons in Okinawa, Japan. Siblings of centenarians in Okinawa have been found to have cumulative survival advantages such that female centenarian siblings have a 2.58-fold likelihood and male siblings a 5.43-fold likelihood (versus their birth cohorts) of reaching the age of 90 years. This is indicative of a strong familial component to longevity. Centenarians may live such extraordinarily long lives in large part due to genetic variations that either affect the rate of aging and/or have genes that result in decreased susceptibility to age-associated diseases. Some of the most promising candidate genes appear to be those involved in regulatory pathways such as insulin signaling, immunoinflammatory response, stress resistance or cardiovascular function.”

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3259160/

            In other words, the Okinawans may have the ideal genes to handle a high carb diet and their longevity may not be related to their diet much at all.

            We are not Okinawan.

          • Mike Quinoa

            But still, how do you define “so very little” in units of measurement? “So very little” is a subjective generalization. Surely you have a concrete figure in mind as the basis for your statement.

          • Paleo Huntress

            HereHere,

            I realize that I read your last comment far too quickly and misjudged your tone. Please accept my apology for the harshness of my response. I suspect you and I probably have more in common than have differences and you seem really genuine.

        • Paleo Huntress

          I agree… I eat at least two a day and sometimes as many as 6. My diabetes and heart disease have vanished, so I’m good with the nutrition and health properties of eggs. Eggs rock!

      • Paleo Huntress

        The problem with observational studies is the confounders. Real scientists know that the value in an observational study comes only in the forming of a hypothesis that will lead to controlled studies. We cannot ascertain direct cause and effect from population observation.

        For example, what do most people eat WITH eggs? Hash browns? Toast? Home fries? Pancakes with syrup? Sausage? Fruit juice? How do you know it’s the eggs and NOT what was eaten WITH the eggs?

        Short answer? You don’t.

    • Dan Lundeen

      Contempt of court! Cholesterol and eggs are bad for you period and do not do you any good whatsoever. It’s been settled for 50 years.

      • mojo191

        Dan, your statements seem more apropos to ones heard from members of a religious cult than they do to statements made in scientific research papers, as you can see in research studies I’ve cited below.

        • Dan Lundeen

          I smell a troll! And I thought rotten eggs were bad. I’ve got a court order and that makes me sound like a religious zealot to a cholesterol confusionist with broscience?

        • Paleo Huntress

          It’s par for the course that Dan will accuse you of trolling or of being paid by whatever industry he decides you’re promoting– that his constant comments about Campbell’s new bible read MUCH more like those from the bloggers paid to promote HFCS not withstanding.

          • Dan Lundeen

            That’s ridiculous PH the thread was about Campbell’s upstanding work.

          • Paleo Huntress

            Oh? Do tell me what this comment had to do with Campbell’s “upstanding work” before you inserted it there. lol Zealots are rarely aware of the depth of their zeal.

            Comment from Dan to Hannah • 2 days ago

        • Dan Lundeen

          There’s a reason PH and the other paleotrolls on this site are banned from posting their nonsense on other sites . . .

          • Paleo Huntress

            Oh? Which sites have I been “banned” from? Please do tell, I’m quite curious to know whose skin I got under.

            It’s comical that you MODERATE an online forum. The idea that you can be even the smallest bit objective about the subject matter is ludicrous. <–(Not a moderator after all.. Phew!)

            I'd LOVE to hear your thoughts on the nutrient deficiencies of grains and seeds. Seems even you are concerned about nutrient deficits from eating grain. Who’da thunk.

            “Vegan diets are low in zinc, and phytates found in grains, nuts, seeds and legumes are known to inhibit absorption of zinc from the digestive tract. Does anyone have any practical advice or experience in getting enough zinc on a vegan diet?”

            FWIW, Dr. Greger invited me here with his Paleolithic post. =)

          • Joe

            I enjoy reading different points of view. Paleo Huntress you are welcome here!

            A properly designed vegan diet will give plenty of zinc. A poorly designed one will be deficient in lots of things! We should remember that you could live entirely off bagels and call yourself vegan.

            I think we need to be careful of finding studies that justify our point of view. Its tempting, but sometimes studies can be misleading – or poorly executed. Nothing is proven absolutely. In my case I don’t eat eggs because I feel the balance of evidence leans towards the negative. Could change though!

    • Shelly Villaverde

      I agree with mojo. And if people are paying attention, it all has to do with the “mighty buck” and the giant pharmaceutical companies that are trying to get everyone sick, and keep it that way. they have a pill for EVERYTHING, and cover up side effects with pills instead of getting to the root of the problem. Rx drugs are all man made synthetic drugs that our bodies cannot recognize. Be your own advocate. Do your research, and never trust the government. :) Afterall, look at Monsanto, and what they are able to do. Poisoning all Americans without anyone knowing for years.

    • Chad

      Many vitamins and most minerals, that are also required by our bodies, have harmful effects above certain levels or under certain conditions. No scientist need resort to a conspiracy theory to study how cholesterol may also be harmful above certain levels or under certain conditions.

    • Chad

      “For decades, conventional medicine has made cholesterol the big bugaboo, conveniently forgetting that cholesterol is needed by our bodies…”
      Many vitamins and most minerals, that are also required by our bodies, have intake levels above which they are harmful to our bodies. Conventional medicine need not conveniently forget anything about cholesterol to understand that it is required but also dangerous under certain scenario’s.

      • Paleo Huntress

        You are so right, Chad- I mean, look at how valuable selenium is… but eat a couple of cans of Brazil nuts in a week and you’ll poison yourself with the stuff. The human body uses about 1000 mg of cholesterol. An egg contains about 150. Endogenous or exogenous doesn’t matter. Eggs are incredible.

        • Chad

          Oops. Didn’t know what the website did with my comment, hence the double entry.
          Anyways, my only point is that saying that some nutrient cannot be bad for you because it is also required is too simplistic. And as such, stating that conventional medicine had to overlook the fact that cholesterol is required in order to raise concerns about excess cholesterol seems to me to be unfounded.

          • Paleo Huntress

            I understood you, and I absolutely agree. It has been shown repeatedly that altering dietary cholesterol has only a 5% impact on serum cholesterol either way. Elevated serum cholesterol is a function of systemic inflammation. So go ahead and eat your eggs- you’d have to eat buckets of them to get “too much” cholesterol. Then if you find your serum cholesterol is too high, try cutting out inflammatory grains, plant fats and free fructose and watch it drop like a lead weight.

  • DrakeMo

    I understand that frozen custard is so creamy because of egg yolks. Culver’s frozen custard is a favorite of mine, but I am wondering how many egg yolks I am getting in a small serving. Any way to find out?

    • Heather

      DrakeMo, why not experiment and find a dairy free custard that you can love? Last year I adopted a plant based, whole foods diet, even though I loved the taste of yogurt, cheese, butter, eggs, mayonnaise, etc…. but after learning new recipes and substitutes, I’m (surprisingly!) not missing a thing! My taste buds have change too. I was making someone else a sandwich with regular egg mayo and got some on my finger. I licked it off my finger without thinking and EWW, I almost gagged! I couldn’t believe it! It had only been 3 months since I would put like 4 tablespoon of mayo on my own sandwiches. There are tons of options and substitutes for what you’ve been used to, I promise!

      http://www.veganbaking.net/component/jreviews/recipes/vegan-custard-and-pudding-recipes_c243/#.UdRrIzBBmAk

      • Thea

        Heather: Nice reply! I agree with you and have had similar experiences. It’s amazing what substitutes are out there.

    • HereHere

      You can download the nutrition guide here: http://culvers-bece73af.s3.amazonaws.com/page-content/menu/nutrition-guide.pdf One pint has 300.3 mg cholesterol and 1.6 g of trans fat. So it is a food best avoided. According to the USDA, a poached large (50g) egg has 185 mg of cholesterol, so there would be slightly less than 2 eggs per pint. http://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/foods/show/119?fg=&man=&lfacet=&format=&count=&max=25&offset=&sort=&qlookup=egg

      I like Julie’s organic sorbets, which are dairy free and have a lovely texture (as long as you don’t freezer burn them, of course). Great as an occasional treat.

      • Paleo Huntress

        lol We absolutely KNOW sugar is toxic and yet it’s OK for a treat– but an egg will kill you? Oh the twisted thinking of the vegan.

        • Toni Kulma

          Even the FdA does not allow the egg board to use the words “safe” or any form of the word “healthy” when advertising eggs. What does that tell you? Watch Dr. Greger latest year-end video for all of the freedom of information act released paperwork he has, citing the Egg Board and FDA conversations. So funny when they are trying to figure out words to use to describe eggs…… trying to convince foolish people that they should really eat the unsafe unhealthy things.

          • Paleo Huntress

            “Even the FDA”?

            LMAO

            Well there’s your problem right there, you consider the FDA an authority. They are so corrupt and negligent that I use their advice as my guidance for what not to do.

            15 Disturbing Facts About the FDA

            Feel free to take advice from special interest groups. I’m good with you not eating eggs, that leaves more of the phenomenally nutritious little powerhouses for me and my family. Human beings and our ancestors have been eating eggs since the beginning of our evolution– MILLIONS of years of empirical evidence FTW!

          • Dan Lundeen

            Toni, the FDA may have their shortcomings but definitely have the facts here: 100′s of thousands poisoned every year by proteobacteria laced unsafe eggs and each unhealthful egg is packed with cholesterol and other baddies. The paleo trolls generally don’t watch the videos or review the sources cited and only want to scream and shout total nonsense like salmonellae and cholesterol iare good for everyone. The egg industry wants to tell us that there is absolutely no evidence that eggs are unhealthy or unsafe. those are the lies the fda stopped. Best to ignore the paleotrolls if you want meaningful discussions.

          • Paleo Huntress

            There isn’t a SINGLE documented case of food poisoning from eggs at home. Not. A. One.

            Hundreds of thousands? Please. Instead of watching videos, perhaps you should open the CDC’s report instead.

    • zak
  • deborahconner

    What the egg production industry does to unwanted male chicks — the shredder — should be enough to make you pass their aisle by. Goes for dairy as well. (Many ways to shred. How about the life of a veal calf?) The cost of production per unit of protein makes it clear that it’s simply smarter to eat the veggie rather than feed it to “livestock” and the sad lives they are forced to lead.

    • Paleo Huntress

      Chickens are perfectly formed to eat the cereal grains that human beings cannot eat healthfully. Just as cows are perfectly formed to eat the grass that we cannot eat healthfully. The animals turn something we can’t eat, into something we can.

      Perfect.

      • deborahconner

        And their quality of life? Is that being seen to? That’s the question. But yes, cows should eat grass, not corn / grain, esp Monsanto corn.

        • Paleo Huntress

          That would depend on who is raising them. Grass-fed beef is being raised on pasture so chances are they have a pretty good life. When it comes to animals in the wild, do you know which ones are most likely to be killed first? Its’ the babies. My neighbors have laying hens who happily pluck the pests out of their garden all day, and we get our eggs from them. They don’t throw any animals into grinders.

          Bottom line though, animals that can turn plants that human cannot eat, into food that we can eat, and can do it with little or no cultivation, irrigation or loss of topsoil is the better use of our land and the SMARTER choice.

          • deborahconner

            How I wish this could be the way it is done everywhere. I suspect, and studies back it up, that the mass warehousing and unnatural, unbalanced feeding and even breeding of animals gretly contributes to the detrimantal studies we find here.

          • Paleo Huntress

            Agreed. To quote Michael Pollan’s An Animal’s Place– “Grass fed beef for everybody!”

          • Mike Quinoa

            Grass fed beef for everybody? That will never happen. Most North American families can’t afford it. As well, there’s not enough pasture land to produce the quantity of meat we now consume. If you want to look at the relative healthfulness of meat, you have to look at factory-farmed meat, because that’s the type of meat the vast majority of the populace consumes.

          • Paleo Huntress

            http://michaelpollan.com/

            I’m sure Mr. Pollan would love to hear your thoughts. You should hit him up.

          • Mike Quinoa

            According to a March 2011 CNN article, the market for grass-fed beef is still relatively small — possibly less than 3% of all U.S. beef sales. I’m sure it has gone up somewhat since then. Still, grain- and soy-fed factory-farm grade beef is what most North Americans eat.

            Do you consider that kind of meat a healthful food? I don’t. Most people would agree that grass-fed is the healthier choice. The infrastructure is not there to produce grass-fed beef for everybody, nor do ranchers like the much longer to-market time.

            So Americans eat a not-particularly-healthful food. Like eating an apple turnover, when they should be eating the apple.

          • Paleo Huntress

            Couldn’t I say the very same thing to you about NOT eating meat? Less than 5% of people are vegetarian, and only a tiny fraction of that are vegan. Would you be swayed to eat conventional meat again simply because vegetarians don’t make up much of the population? That’s a silly argument.

            Ranchers will produce the product that people buy. Like it or not, what we BUY drives the market. What we don’t buy isn’t even noticed. If you want animal food to be humanely raised on its natural diet, you need to BUY those foods. When other producers see a market growing, they will investigate finding a place in that market. No one notices when you stop buying meat because EVERYONE eats produce and there are more than enough conventional meat-eaters to make up for your drop in the bucket. But if your dollars go to another market, that gets their attention.

            Problems don’t get solved by abandoning them. That is what the vegan movement is akin to, abandoning the animals to their conventional lives. You have to work from within the problem to solve it. If the consumer demands healthy, humanely raised animal food, you’ll get it. Otherwise it’ll be conventional all the way, but at least you can comfort yourself with the knowledge that you aren’t eating it.

            The world has more natural grassland than any other type of land. It is foolish to think it makes sense to cultivate this land for crops when ruminants can graze on it with few to no resources going into the land, and the land remains healthy. Now this doesn’t mean that we can feed the world on pastured beef, but we can’t feed them on crops grown on that land either.

          • Mike Quinoa

            Maybe I didn’t express my point clearly enough.

            I’ve read a lot of forums, and the posters there that promote the consumption of meat always seem to promote only grass-fed, organic beef. Is this not what you eat and recommend yourself? The silent implication is that this elite group of people look down on regular beef, and would never consume it themselves.

            This is not however what the majority of Americans eat. They eat the grain- and soy-fed factory-farm grade meat, as well as non-muscle, “mystery” meats, such as hot dogs, sausages, and conventional hamburgers.

            Fifty years ago all cattle were pasture-fed, but both the population and the level of meat consumption have increased significantly since then. Many families can’t afford grass-fed beef, so they’re stuck with an inferior product. They would be much better off with inexpensive and healthful sources of plant protein.

            Public lands in the west are becoming decimated and “cow-burnt” by over-pasturing. Only if the price of grass-fed beef drops substantially (highly unlikely) will it create a dent in the market.

            Vegetable protein is healthful, complete, and a much better choice for the average American than the de facto standard, feedlot beef.

          • Paleo Huntress

            You expressed your point just fine, I simply disagree. Unless and until people evolve the digestion appropriate to eat grass, ruminants will be a valuable conversion.

            The majority of Americans don’t eat organic and non-GMO either, but it doesn’t stop us from insisting on it ourselves or encouraging others to eat it. Does that make all of us “elite”?

            No.

            It doesn’t matter whether we agree on “how much” pastured meat should be a part of the diet, the fact is that it SHOULD be a part of the diet in whatever ratio it gets there in. As plant-only sources of protein are a wasteful and inefficient use of our land and resources. When we have less money, we simply eat less meat, we don’t eat poorer quality meat. And seeing as fresh produce is the most expensive thing in the human diet both by calorie and by protein content, even next to grass-fed beef, it’s a little disingenuous to suggest it’s a cheaper alternative.

          • Mike Quinoa

            “As plant-only sources of protein are a wasteful and inefficient use of our land and resources.”

            How so?

            “When we have less money, we simply eat less meat, we don’t eat poorer quality meat.”
            Good luck in selling that to the general public.

            I didn’t mention fresh produce specifically, but calories and protein content are certainly not the only parameters to judge a food’s nutritional worth by. Things like phytonutrients, fiber, and anti-oxidants have a huge bearing on our health. Fresh produce is loaded with the latter.

          • Paleo Huntress

            I agree that fresh produce is the bomb, but when people have less money to spend, they’re going to look for the foods that provide the most calories and protein per dollar. And though it may be hard to sell eating less meat, it’s much easier than selling eating NO meat.

            And as I said, grain and legume agriculture decimates our land. We are destroying our topsoil with it 17 times faster than it can be replaced. Managed grazing ruminants reduce that loss by 80%. And they don’t need fertilizers, cultivation or tons of water like the crops do.

          • Mike Quinoa

            The most calories and protein per dollar? You can’t beat beans, peas and lentils. Consumption of produce is non-negotiable. You have to eat produce to stay healthy regardless of what else you eat. In-season or on-sale produce is not expensive. It might not be organic, but it’s not a whole lot of money.

            As you know, most of the grain grown is fed to livestock in meat production, not directly to human mouths. Our current legume / grain production could feed the entire world if we ate it at source.

            Avoiding monoculture crops, and strategic crop rotation can help preserve topsoil.

            Factory-farm ruminants (once again, this is where the bulk of our meat comes from) are absolute water guzzlers.

          • Paleo Huntress

            I think you must have missed this–> “grain and legume agriculture decimates our land.”

            Here is the answer- eat pastured meat. =) When the market grows, production grows. That is capitalism at its finest.

          • Mike Quinoa

            “I think you must have missed this–> “grain and legume agriculture decimates our land.” ”

            Where are your citations for that statement?

            “Here is the answer- eat pastured meat. =) When the market grows, production grows. That is capitalism at its finest.”

            As I’ve stated before, families without a lot of income can’t afford pastured meat. Production can’t grow for a commodity that’s, for many, unaffordable in the first place.

            Since you seem to strongly favour grass-fed beef, I have a question for you. Only given the two choices, would you eat factory-farm beef or chickpeas?

          • Paleo Huntress

            Me personally? Since the high carbohydrate content of chick peas would cause disease in me in no time, I’d eat the meat. I guess it’s a good thing we live in the real world where we have more than two choices, eh?

          • Paleo Huntress

            From Jonathan Safran Foer’s Eating Animals

            Clearly vegetarians who eat soya, chickpeas, lentils, rice and certain imported foods are not as green as a Fife dieter eating locally grown turnips, kale and oats. Ask a preachy vegetarian to audit their food sourcing and they may not come out much cleaner than a “selective omnivore”.

            It is argued that the average rich world vegetarian may not consume much less of the planet’s resources than the average moderate omnivore: a report last week for the Worldwide Fund for Nature on the impact of food production pointed out that highly processed vegetarian meat substitutes or foods made of imported soya (as in tofu) might actually use more arable land and resources than their beef or dairy equivalents.

          • Mike Quinoa

            Naturally if you source your produce locally, you will be greener. A vegan or vegetarian can do that as well as any other type of consumer, Fife dieter or no.
            “If one cares about the environment, one must care about eating animals … Someone who regularly eats factory-farmed products cannot call himself an environmentalist without divorcing that word from its meaning.”
            Jonathan Safran Foer, Eating Animals

            “Livestock agriculture produces more greenhouse gas emissions than every train, truck, car and aeroplane put together. The resources consumed by one average omnivore in pursuit of animal protein would nourish as many as 10 vegetarians.”

          • Mike Quinoa

            Grass fed beef for everybody? That will never happen. Most North American families can’t afford it. As well, there’s not enough pasture land to produce the quantity of meat we now consume. If you want to look at the relative healthfulness of meat, you have to look at factory-farmed meat, because that’s the type of meat the vast majority of the populace consumes

          • Paleo Huntress

            As you wish, Buttercup. Feel free to post it a third time even.

          • b00mer

            Hi PH, if you feel you have an educated opinion on nutritional aspects of eating animals, by all means share. I enjoy checking out the citations you offer.

            However you are quite clearly unaware of certain aspects of animal agriculture in terms of animals’ well-being.

            Since this is a forum for nutrition discussion, I won’t address the inaccuracy of your claims. If you choose to learn, there are plenty of other places to do so. If you don’t want to know, that’s fine too, but then be responsible and refrain from commenting on the subject.

          • Paleo Huntress

            b00mer,

            When you know me or have participated in a thread where we’ve discussing animal welfare, you may then be qualified to determine what aspect I’m “clearly unaware of”. In the meantime, I ask you to respect that you are not the only one who knows when a topic is inappropriate for a forum. However, in my case, I choose to NOT insults folks over it BECAUSE this is not the place to hash it out and it is far more respectful to honor that than to make passive-agressive attacks such as the one you just made.

            FWIW, I’m an ethical omni– animal welfare is of the utmost importance to me and my current diet takes fewer lives than my vegan diet did.

            In the future, I’ll expect you to refrain from commenting on things and people you are clearly unaware of certain aspects of.

            Thank you.

          • b00mer

            Your statement that your neighbors don’t put their hens into grinders indicates that you don’t understand the context of the original statement. That is not my opinion of you, that is the logical interpretation of your comment.

          • Paleo Huntress

            ALL of interpretation is based on opinion, so yes, it IS your opinion. But the fact that you can’t differentiate between different types of animal agriculture speaks to your ignorance on the subject, not mine. I KNOW what happens in the conventional egg industry, that’s why I don’t eat conventional eggs. It isn’t necessary to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Most folks think we should keep the baby… I like the baby… I agree.  =)

      • Toxins

        Any evidence to claim that cereal grains are unhealthful? This review examines whole grains and the compounds within as well as their health benefits. I fail to see any mention of the ill effects of whole grains since they apparently wreak such havoc upon our health.

        http://www.healthgrain.org/webfm_send/251

        • Paleo Huntress

          I know my user name sort of invites criticism from those who cannot differentiate between the topic at hand and their own biases, but I’ll not be dragged into debating MY diet for your amusement. We hashed it out pretty thoroughly in the paleo thread and if you wish to continue to do so there, I’m definitely game. In the meantime though, unless you want to be challenged by a slew of unrelated comments about the “toxins” in your diet, I suggest you stick to the topic. ;-)

          • Toxins

            I am curious as to how you come to your conclusions. I am unsure why you are being so evasive and I can only assume that you don’t have any evidence for your assertion that grains are unhealthful. It is also strange to me that you try to “talk” your way out of situations you are uncomfortable with. This is not a forum with a set of guidelines on what can be asked or what cannot be.

        • Paleo Huntress

          Yup. =) Lots of evidence.

          Aoki K (1991) “Time required for gene frequency change in a deterministic model of gene-culture coevolution, with special reference to the lactose absorption problem.” Theoretical Population Biology, vol. 40,pp. 354-368.

          Auger I et al. (1997) “A function for the QKRAA amino acid motif: mediating binding of DnaJ to DnaK.” J Clin Invest, vol. 99, pp. 1818-1822.

          Batchelor AJ et al. (1983) “Reduced plasma half-life of radio-labelled 25-hydroxy vitamin D3 in subjects receiving a high-fiber diet.” Brit J Nutr, vol. 49, pp. 213-216.

          Berger SA et al. (1989) “Relationship between infectious diseases and human blood type.” Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis, vol. 8, pp. 681-689.

          Blair R et al. (1989) “Biotin bioavailability from protein supplements and cereal grains for growing broiler chickens.” Int J Vit Nutr Res, vol. 59, pp. 55-58.

          Bradbury JH et al. (1984) “Digestibility of proteins of the histological components of cooked and raw rice.” Brit J Nutr, vol. 52, pp. 507-513.

          Brand-Miller JC, Colagiuri S (1994) “The carnivore connection: dietary carbohydrate in the evolution of NIDDM.” Diabetologia, vol. 37, pp. 1280-1286.

          Budiansky S (1992) The Covenant of the Wild: Why Animals Chose Domestication. New York: William Morrow & Co.

          Buonocore V et al. (1977) “Wheat protein inhibitors of alpha amylase.” Phytochemistry, vol. 16, pp. 811-820.

          Calloway DH et al. (1971) “Reduction of intestinal gas-forming properties of legumes by traditional and experimental processing methods.” J Food Sci, vol. 36, pp. 251-255.

          Cavalli-Sforza LL et al. (1993) “Demic expansions and human evolution.” Science, vol. 259, pp. 639-646.

          Clement MR et al. (1987) “A new mechanism for induced vitamin D deficiency in calcium deprivation.” Nature, vol. 325, pp. 62-65.

          Cordain L (1999) “Cereal grains: humanity’s double-edged sword.” World Review of Nutrition and Dietetics, vol. 84, pp. 19-73.

          Dagnelie PC et al. (1990) “High prevalence of rickets in infants on macrobiotic diets.” Am J Clin Nutr, vol. 51, pp. 202-208.

          De Castro JMB et al. (1997) “A hominid from the lower pleistocene of Atapuerca, Spain: possible ancestor to neandertals and modern humans.” Science, vol. 276, pp. 1392-1395.

          Dickey W et al. (1994) “Lewis phenotype, secretor status, and coeliac disease.” Gut, vol. 35, pp. 769-770.

          Dybwad A et al. (1996) “Increases in serum and synovial fluid antibodies to immunoselected peptides in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.” Ann Rhem Dis, vol. 55, pp. 437-441.

          Eaton SB et al. (1985) “Paleolithic nutrition: A consideration of its nature and current implications.” N Engl J Med, vol. 312, pp. 283-289.

          Eaton SB (1992) “Humans, lipids and evolution.” Lipids, vol. 27, pp. 814-820.

          Elliott RB et al. (1984) “Dietary protein: a trigger of insulin-dependent diabetes in the BB rat?” Diabetologia, vol. 26, pp. 297-299.

          Ewer TK (1950) “Rachitogenicity of green oats.” Nature, vol. 166, pp. 732-733.

          Ford JA et al. (1972) “Biochemical response of late rickets and osteomalacia to a chupatty-free diet.” Brit Med J, vol. 1972;ii pp. 446-447.

          Ford JA et al. (1977) “A possible relationship between high-extraction cereal and rickets and osteomalacia.” Advances in Exp Med & Biol, vol. 81, pp. 353-362.

          Golenser J et al. (1983) “Inhibitory effect of a fava bean component on the in vitro development of plasmodium falciparum in normal and glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase-deficient erythrocytes.” Blood, vol. 61,pp. 507-510.

          Golub MS et al. (1996) “Adolescent growth and maturation in zinc-deprived rhesus monkeys.” Am J Clin Nutr, vol. 64, pp. 274-282.

          Grant et al. (1982) “The effect of heating on the haemagglutinating activity and nutritional properties of bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) seeds.” J Sci Food Agric, vol. 33, pp. 1324-1326.

          Gupta YP (1987) “Antinutritional and toxic factors in food legumes: a review.” Plant Foods for Human Nutrition, vol. 37, pp. 201-228.

          Halsted JA et al. (1972) “Zinc deficiency in man, The Shiraz Experiment.” Am J Med, vol. 53, pp. 277-284.

          Harlan JR (1992) Crops and Man. Madison, Wisconsin: American Society of Agronomy, Inc.

          Hawkes K, O’Connell JF (1985) “Optimal foraging models and the case of the !Kung.” Am Anthropologist, vol. 87, pp. 401-405.

          Hein HO et al. (1992) “The Lewis blood group–a new genetic marker of ischaemic heart disease.” J Intern Med, vol. 232, pp. 481-487.

          Hengtrakul P et al. (1991) “Effects of cereal alkylresorcinols on human platelet thromboxane production.” J Nutr Biochem, vol. 2, pp. 20-24.

          Hidiroglou M et al. (1980) “Effect of a single intramuscular dose of vitamin D on concentrations of liposoluble vitamins in the plasma of heifers winter-fed oat silage, grass silage or hay.” Can J Anim Sci, vol. 60,pp. 311-318.

          Hochman LG et al. (1993) “Brittle nails: response to daily biotin supplementation.” Cutis, vol. 51, pp. 303-305.

          Hoofar J et al. (1993) “Prophylactic nutritional modification of the incidence of diabetes in autoimmune non-obese diabetic (NOD) mice.” Brit J Nutr, vol. 69, pp. 597-607.

          Kimbel WH et al. (1996) “Late pliocene Homo and oldowan tools from the Hadar formation (Kada Hadar Member), Ethiopia.” J Hum Evol, vol. 31, pp. 549-561.

          Koch AE et al. (1994) “Soluble intercellular adhesion molecule-1 in arthritis.” Clin Immuunol Immunopathol, vol. 71, pp. 208-215.

          Kopinksi JS et al. (1989) “Biotin studies in pigs: Biotin availability in feedstuffs for pigs and chickens.” Brit J Nutr, vol. 62, pp. 773-780.

          Larick R, Ciochon RL (1996) “The African emergence and early dispersals of the genus Homo.” Am Scientist, vol. 84, pp. 538-551.

          Liener IE (1986) “Nutritional significance of lectins in the diet.” In: Liener IE (ed.), The Lectins: Properties, Functions, and Applications in Biology and Medicine. Orlando: Academic Press. (pp. 527-552)

          Liener IE (1994) “Implications of antinutritional components in soybean foods.” Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr, vol. 34, pp. 31-67.

          Livingstone JN, Purvis BJ (1980) “Effects of wheat germ agglutinin on insulin binding and insulin sensitivity of fat cells.” American Journal of Physiology, vol. 238, pp. E267-E275.

          MacAuliffe T et al. (1976) “Variable rachitogenic effects of grain and alleviation by extraction or supplementation with vitamin D, fat and antibiotics.” Poultry Science, vol. 55, pp. 2142-2147.

          Macri A et al. (1977) “Adaptation of the domestic chicken, Gallus domesticus, to continuous feeding of albumin amylase inhibitors from wheat flour as gastro-resistant microgranules.” Poultry Science, vol. 56,pp. 434-441.

          Neel JV (1962) “Diabete mellitus: A ‘thrifty’ genotype rendered detrimental by ‘Progress.’ ” Am J Hum Genetics, vol. 14, pp. 353-362.

          Noah ND et al. (1980) “Food poisoning from raw red kidney beans.” Brit Med J, vol. 2, pp. 236-237.

          O’Donnell MD et al. (1976) “Purification and properties of an alpha-amylase inhibitor from wheat.” Biochimica et Biophysica Acta, vol. 422, pp. 159-169.

          Oldstone MBA (1987) “Molecular mimicry and autoimmune disease.” Cell, vol. 50, pp. 819-820.

          Perez-Maceda B et al. (1991) “Antibodies to dietary antigens in rheumatoid arthritis–possible molecular mimicry mechanism.” Clin Chim Acta, vol. 203, pp. 153-165.

          Pusztai A et al. (1981) “The toxicity of Phaseolus vulgaris lectins: nitrogen balance and immunochemical studies.” J Sci Food Agric, vol. 32, pp. 1037-1046.

          Pusztai A et al. (1993a) “Antinutritive effects of wheat-germ agglutinin and other N-acetylglucosamine-specific lectins.” Brit J Nutr, vol. 70, pp. 313-321.

          Pusztai A (1993b) “Dietary lectins are metabolic signals for the gut and modulate immune and hormone functions.” Eur J Clin Nutr, vol. 47, pp. 691-699.

          Reaven GM (1994) “Syndrome X: Six years later.” J Int Med, vol. 236 (suppl. 736), pp. 13-22.

          Reinhold JG (1971) “High phytate content of rural Iranian bread: a possible cause of human zinc deficiency.” Am J Clin Nutr, vol. 24, pp. 1204-1206.

          Robertson I et al. (1981) “The role of cereals in the aetiology of nutritional rickets: the lesson of the Irish National Nutrition Survey 1943-1948.” Brit J Nutr, vol. 45, pp. 17-22.

          Sandstrom B et al. (1987) “Zinc absorption in humans from meals based on rye, barley, oatmeat, triticale and whole wheat.” J Nutr, vol. 117, pp. 1898-1902.

          Schalin-Jantti C et al. (1996) “Polymorphism of the glycogen synthase gene in hypertensive and normotensive subjects.” Hypertension, vol. 27, pp. 67-71.

          Schechter Y (1983) “Bound lectins that mimic insulin produce persistent insulin-like activities.” Endocrinology, vol. 113, pp. 1921-1926.

          Scott FW, Sarwar G, Cloutier HE (1988a) “Diabetogenicity of various protein sources in the diet of the diabetes-prone BB rat.” Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology, vol. 246, pp. 277-285.

          Scott FW et al. (1988b) “Evidence for a critical role of diet in the development of insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus.” Diabetes Research, vol. 7, pp. 153-157.

          Scott FW et al. (1991) “Conference summary: Diet as an environmental factor in development of insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus.” Can J Physiol Pharmacol, vol. 69, pp. 311-319.

          Sedlet K et al. (1984) “Growth-depressing effects of 5-n-pentadecylresorcinol: a model for cereal alkylresorcinols.” Cereal Chem, vol. 61, pp. 239-241.

          Simoons FJ (1978) “The geographic hypothesis and lactose malabsorption: A weighing of the evidence.” Dig Dis, vol. 11, pp. 963-980.

          Simoons FJ (1981) “Celiac disease as a geographic problem.” In: Walcher DN, Kretchmer N (eds.) Food, Nutrition and Evolution. New York: Masson Publishing. (pp. 179-199)

          Singh VK et al. (1993) “Antibodies to myelin basic protein in children with autistic behavior.” Brain, Behavior and Immunity, vol. 7, pp. 97-103.

          Sly MR et al. (1984) “Exacerbation of rickets and osteomalacia by maize: a study of bone histomorphometry and composition in young baboons.” Calcif Tissue Int, vol. 36, pp. 370-379.

          Sobiech KA et al. (1983) “Determination of amylase by measurement of enzymatic activity and by enzyme immunoassay and radioimmunoassay.” Arch Immunol Therap Exp, vol. 31, pp. 845-848.

          Stead IM, Bourke JB, and Brothwell (1986) Lindow Man: The Body in the Bog. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press.

          Stephen A (1994) “Whole grains–impact of consuming whole grains on physiological effects of dietary fiber and starch.” Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr, vol. 34, pp. 499-511.

          Storlien LH et al. (1996) “Laboratory chow-induced insulin resistance: a possible contributor to autoimmune type I diabetes in rodents.” Diabetologia, vol. 39, pp. 618-620.

          Warren RP et al. (1996) “Strong association of the third hypervariable region of HLA-DR beta 1 with autism.” J Neuroimmunol, vol. 67, pp. 97-102.

          Watkins BA (1990) “Dietary biotin effects on desaturation and elongation of 14C linoleic acid in the chicken.” Nutr Res, vol. 10, pp. 325-334.

          Zohary D (1969) “The progenitors of wheat and barley in relation to domestication and agricultural dispersal in the old world.” In: Ucko PJ, Dimbleby GW (eds.) The Domestication and Exploitation of Plants and Animals. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co. (pp. 46-66)

          • Toxins

            Too many studies to honestly look through, I tried but I realized after the first few how irrelevant many of them were. Many of them refer to anti nutrients which are eliminated with cooking, and some that even double as antioxidants, most are animal studies with rats. Some of the studies regarding whole grains encourage their consumption. I could not get the full text on this one but based on the abstract “Evidence indicates that such effects are beneficial and that whole-grain consumption should be encouraged.”

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7811380

            I don’t even know where to start. If this was truly a mountain of nutrition knowledge showing that whole grains were harmful to health its hard to believe that dietary recommendations would not be influenced. My guess is that you didn’t even look at these and just copied and pasted from somewhere to have the appearance of actually having evidence.

          • Real World Vegan

            dude, you claimed was that there was -no- evidence and now that a comprehensive list has been provided, its ‘too much’ to look thru? you wrote, ‘I am not a “zealout”, my diet is based on science’, but dude, if youre only willing to read what you believe supports your choice, its not based on science at all. its cool to c&p citations, thats why theyre created, to give credit to the researchers. whats ugly is c&p-ing the review without giving giving credit.

            you cant say theres no evidence anymore dude, you can only say you dont know. it was offered and you didnt feel like reviewing it. that falls on you.

          • Real World Vegan

            theres a more concise peer-reviewed summary here- Cereal grains: humanity’s double-edged sword. (1999) World Review of Nutrition and Dietetics, vol. 84,pp. 19-73

            the list huntress provided looks like the citations from this article.

          • Paleo Huntress

            Yes, RWV, it is the resource list from the Dr.’s paper.

          • Toxins

            The paper brings up many non issues and has many false premises that animal foods and dairy are essential to ones diet for optimal health. I didn’t realize that human beings had also been suckling cows for more then 10,00 years.

            The author bases his stance on an evolutionary standpoint which is more philosophy then anything, the fact that grains are missing vitamin A, b12 and C is also not significant and also that grains contain anti nutrients which as I said above, double as antioxidants or are eliminated with cooking.

            Using this criteria then of course, grains are poison, but its not applicable to modern life. I know of no evidence from studies showing that whole grains are deleterious, as the author claims. The opposite is true, as whole grains have been strongly associated with decreased mortality from chronic diseases.

          • Paleo Huntress

            Toxins,

            “The paper brings up many non issues and has many false premises that animal foods and dairy are essential to ones diet for optimal health. I didn’t realize that human beings had also been suckling cows more then the 10,000 year mark.”

            From this statement alone it is easy to see that you didn’t read the paper. Dairy is NOT part of Cordain’s paleo diet (Cordain wrote the article you are commenting on) specifically because primitive people didn’t eat dairy (or grains and legumes) in quantity, or at all.

            From an article titled- The Adverse Effects of Milk co-authored by Dr. Cordain:

            “I believe that all dairy products are problematic. Cheeses do not cause the high insulin response as does milk, yogurt and other fermented dairy products, but is one of the most acidic of all foods.”

            “[T]he commonly held notion that milk is a highly nutritious food is simply untrue.

            “I don’t view it [lack of dairy] as a nutritional gap, but rather a liability [consuming dairy] which causes our health to suffer in the long run.

            “Humans have existed on this planet for 2.5 million years, and only in the past 10,000 have we ever consumed milk or dairy products. Like all other mammals on the planet, we did quite well without milk (once we were weaned) for the rest of our adult lives.”

            The fact that you somehow came away from that paper believing it claims “dairy is essential” is even further evidence that your biases blind you to evidence offered by others. The reason you see no evidence is because you’re willfully blind to seeing it, not because it isn’t there.

          • Toxins

            “However, as more and more cereal grains are included in the diet, they tend to displace the calories that would be provided by other foods (meats, dairy products, fruits and vegetables), and can consequently disrupt adequate nutritional balance….However, as is the
            case for vitamins, as more and more cereal grains are included in the diet, they tend to displace dairy and vegetable sources of calcium.”

            So it appears he is advocating for the nutritional quality of dairy.

            His only comment on dairy being harmful is that it has a similar amino acid profile to humans which can trigger autoimmune disorders, which by the way, meat has been implicated in the same regard.
            http://www.direct-ms.org/pdf/NutritionOther/ArthritisMeat.pdf

            Again, the points the author raises are NON issues. Its a desperate scramble to find something wrong with grains. As I said again, the antinutrients the author goes in depth about are eliminated with cooking and this is fairly well established common nutrition knowledge. I will post again many of the positive attributes and phytonutrients of grains for your viewing pleasure.
            http://www.healthgrain.org/webfm_send/251

          • Paleo Huntress

            OK Toxins… let’s look at it.

            From your quote, Cordain writes-

            “they tend to displace the calories that would be provided by other foods (meats, dairy products, fruits and vegetables)

            In your first comment, YOU wrote,

            “The paper… has many false premises that… dairy are[is] essential to ones diet for optimal health.”

            Would you show me where the statement (or even the implication) is made that dairy is essential to one’s diet for optimal health?

            This is a paper on cereal grains, not a paper on dairy. You should be able to differentiate between a statement of fact (“grains have replaced other foods including dairy”) and a statement of support. (“dairy is essential”)

            I am not interested in your reductionist evidence. You have demonstrated repeatedly that you can dismiss the individual nutrients found in animal foods, so evidence of individual nutrients found in plant foods is similarly moot.

            Instead, show evidence that animal foods cause harm in a whole food diet or that grains improve health in a whole food diet. Reductionist thinking is worthless, as we don’t eat parts of whole foods, we eat the whole food.

          • Paleo Huntress

            The site you keep linking to to prove grain is healthy (healthgrain) is NOT a scientific journal or subject to peer-review. It is the global grain-industry’s marketing network and is funded by memberships purchased by corporate processed-food manufacturers. (go to the page for the rest)

          • Toxins

            So the micronutrients do not exist then? Does bias negate studies? I could claim, and do in fact claim, that the review you posted is extremely biased and does not paint a truthful picture. Even ignoring the opinions of the authors of the study I shared (which are by the way backed with legitmate cited evidence), the phytonutrients still exist and are quite health promoting.

            I don’t know of any studies showing the ill effects of whole grains other then that ridiculous review which brought to light every antinutrient that exist in grains and blaming grains for every possible disease. I would like to see some actual legitimate studies proving his point rather than this biased and irrelevant review.

          • Paleo Huntress

            Address the data individually and explain why each trial isn’t relevant. You don’t get to group together and dismiss an entire body of work merely because you don’t like it. Even Campbell found a stronger correlation between disease and wheat than disease and meat.
            How do you define a plant based diet? This is a simple question, right?

          • Paleo Huntress

            “Does the bias negate papers?”

            I can’t believe you actually ask this considering this entire post is about the biases created by an industry that does its own research. Yes, bias DOES negate papers. Does it negate all of them? I’m sure it doesn’t- but when something is funded by an industry, you have to look very closely at the conclusions.

            Data is data. Don’t point to a blog, to an article or to a vegan website. Point to the data. If you consider a specific piece of data “ridiculous’ then cite it and explain why. You keep going on about how bodies of evidence are more significant than individual studies, and when an entire body is offered, you probably don’t have much choice but to back-pedal.

            Campbell published several papers looking at the effect of wheat, and found it correlated with disease. He wrote:

            “Wheat protein, unlike casein for example, did not stimulate cancer development, but when its limiting amino acid, lysine, was restored, it acted just like casein. There have been literally thousands of studies going back many decades showing a similar effect on body growth and other events associated with body growth—all resulting from differences in amino acid composition of different proteins.~T. Colin Campbell

            In other words, when you eat beans with bread for example, [like when you eat a veggie burger], you fill in the lysine deficiency in the wheat, and the wheat becomes disease promoting just like the isolated casein did in his studies.

            I see this as pretty relevant and unbiased, Toxins. What do you think the plant-based Campbell’s bias could be?

          • Toxins

            How much protein caused an increase in IGF-1? Where is the evidence for campbell’s claim? Dr. Greger has covered IGF-1 growth due to protein and the only plant food found to cause elevated igf-1 levels was soy, but only after 3-5 servings.
            http://nutritionfacts.org/topics/igf-1/

            I don’t idolize campbell like you may think, I am unfamiliar with his work.

          • Paleo Huntress

            This is another reductionist argument. You continue to argue for the pros and cons of isolated compounds instead of looking at the whole food. We can’t know what other compounds a food might contain that could nullify effects you consider negative.

            For example, we know that the naturally occurring selenium in fatty fish prevents the absorption of heavy metals the fish may contain. Obviously if we measure the heavy metals on their own we will conclude that the fish aren’t safe to eat, but when compared to a low selenium, mercury-contaminated, plant-food (like rice), the fish would actually be safer to eat because the net value of mercury absorbed will be lower.

            Who cares about isolated IGF-1? Wheat consumption has 4 TIMES the association with disease as meat does according to Campbell [Greger's mentor]. Obviously there is something else in meat that is protective.

          • Paleo Huntress

            “I know of no evidence from studies showing that whole grains are deleterious, as the author claims.

            This would be because of that willful blindness I mentioned. There is a citation list a mile long and you haven’t read any of articles cited. You can say you truly don’t know, but that’s not because the evidence doesn’t exist, but because you refuse to read or acknowledge it.

            “The opposite is true, as whole grains have been strongly associated with decreased mortality from chronic diseases.”

            No, Toxins, I’m sorry, the opposite is not true. Whole grains have NOT been strongly associated with decreased mortality from chronic disease. What has been associated, is replacing processed grains with whole grains. There is no evidence whatsoever that whole grains decrease mortality when compared to whole-food diets that are completely grain-free. In fact, just the opposite.

            This fact has been pointed out to you repeatedly and you continue to ignore it. You appear to have scads of citations stored away to support your ideals, so why not simply share the citations from the studies that show a decrease in mortality from chronic diseases when whole grains are added to an already grain-free diet?

          • Real World Vegan

            toxins,

            paleo huntress has been trying to post a response here and for some reason it isnt posting. she sent me the post and asked me to try posting it for her.

            The website you keep linking as proof of the healthfulness of whole grains (healthgrain.com) is NOT a scientific journal or subject to peer-review. It is the global grain-industry’s marketing network and is funded by memberships purchased by corporate processed food manufacturers. The group is funded by memberships from Big Food and agribusiness.

            Members include- (This is a list from their website)

            Barilla- “Italy’s largest food-processing industry.”

            Budapest University of Technology and Economics- “Technological research including development of new food products and functional food.”

            Cereal Partners Worldwide- “[M]anufacturers of breakfast cereals. The business was formed in 1990 as a 50:50 joint venture between Nestlé S.A. and American food giant General Mills.

            CreaNutrition AG (CN)- “international marketing, sales and research subsidiary of Swedish Oat Fiber AB, instrumental in the development of unique and proprietary technologies relative to the processing of oat based food ingredients”

            Danish Whole Grain Campaign- “consumer education programs and active support of manufacturers who are making whole grain products.”

            DeVries Nutrition Solutions- “16 years experience in the Research & Development of the food industry, respectively in the Dairy Industry and the Bakery Ingredient Supplies Industry.

            ETH Zürich- “Developing new precompetitive innovative healthy bread products with SME bakeries throughout Europe”

            Finnish Bread Information- “Acts as a general information service of bread business. Promotes the importance of bread on improving the public health in Finland by using different methods of communication. Established in 1961″

            Grains & Legumes Nutrition Council (Australia)- “Go Grains provides leadership to the grains and legumes industry by focusing on: Industry issues in relation to grains and legumes, awareness and increased consumption, Consumption and trend data, Profiles and networks with industry leaders

            Innova Management (Switzerland)- “Research into products, recycling and resource efficiency, water management and the food & drinks industry.”

            IGV (Germany)- “The unit works on milling, extrusion, roasting and non-food use of cereals, pulses, oilseeds and other processing of agricultural raw materials.

            International Association for Cereal Science and Technology- “ICC is a non-political, non-profit-making, neutral forum for cereal scientists and technologists.”Kellogg- Self explanatory

            I’m not even half way through the membership list yet and it’s glaringly obvious that this organization is about increasing profits for the processed foods and processed grains industry. THIS is why the actual data matters.

          • Paleo Huntress

            Thank you, RWV.

          • Paleo Huntress

            This citation makes the claim that whole grain consumption should be encouraged based on its pre-biotic ability to produce butyrate. However, butter is the richest known source of butyrate (and it’s preformed). So given that there are better sources of butyrate, the recommendation is rather moot.

            But this is what I’ve been referring to since we started debating here- you take the conclusion as data– but the people writing the conclusions are just people, with real biases and funding sources they are required to respect. The conclusion isn’t data, only the data is data.

            You have been asked repeatedly to provide just one single source demonstrating harm when eggs (or saturated fat) are eaten within the context of a whole food diet. You keep saying the evidence is overwhelming, and I’m definitely open to exploring it. But I’m not clear why you haven’t yet shared a single whole-food study if there are so many to choose from.

        • Paleo Huntress

          Also, when you take the data directly from “Diet, Life-style, and Mortality in China”, Campbells opus, you find this-

          Wheat has a correlation of 0.67 with heart disease- the strongest association between any food and heart disease.

          Plant protein has a correlation of 0.21 with heart disease (positive)

          Non-fish animal protein has a correlation of 0.01 with heart disease (neutral)

          Fish protein has a correlation of -0.11 with heart disease (inverse)

          Meat intake has a correlation of -0.28 with heart disease (strongly inverse)

          Fish intake has a correlation of -0.15 with heart disease (inverse)

          Egg intake has a correlation of -0.13 with heart disease (inverse)

          • Toxins

            Wheat does not equate to whole wheat and usually means refined grains. I am also unfamiliar with the China study as I have never read the book or paper.

          • Real World Vegan

            These weren’t epidemiological or observational studies, they were controlled studies performed by Campbell.

          • Paleo Huntress

            Perhaps it’s a good time to get familiar with it then. You keep saying there isn’t a shred of evidence, but it seems more likely that you are just “unfamiliar” with the evidence.

          • Real World Vegan

            fwiw, reading over doc gregers ‘about me’ page turns this up-

            “Dr. Greger is…honored to teach part of Dr. T. Colin Campbell’s esteemed nutrition course at Cornell University.”

            dr greger supports campbells work. can you worship at the alter of greger without paying homage to campbell too?

          • Real World Vegan

            is this part of minger’s review?

          • Paleo Huntress

            Yes. =)

  • Plantstrongdoc M.D

    Eggs should be labeled with a warning sign – “Ingesting eggs causes cardiovascular disease ” My father (first heartattack at age 46) came happily to me, and said that scientific investigation showed that you can eat up to 7 eggs per week without problems! The egg lobby is doing a great job! The bulk of evidence shows clearly that eggs is not a health food. The safe upper -limit is probably one egg…………per year.

    • Paleo Huntress

      At the end of my two year stint in whole-food veganism, I’d gained 65lbs and had a fresh diagnosis of type II with a total cholesterol of over 300. My CRP was off the charts! Six years into a paleo template, eating 2-6 pastured eggs per DAY, my cholesterol is down almost 150 points and the ratio idealized. I’ve lost over 100lbs and the inflammation and diabetes is gone.

      It would be interesting if this was an unusual case, but it’s quite common. In my case, the eggs should have had an “Ingesting eggs cures cardiovascular disease” claim instead. =)

      The incredible edible egg!

      • Toxins

        Clearly you were doing something wrong to be gaining this much weight on a diet with such low caloric density. Speaking of personal anecdotes, which by the way really does not add any scientific ground to this conversation. I went from 157 pounds to 148 once going whole foods plant based. Not much weight loss, but I am 5% body fat after hydrostatic weighing. I couldn’t help but lose those few pounds. I ate plenty of food yet still I lost weight. Now you see the problem with personal anecdotes, they go both ways. Some may claim with the same standard of evidence that their grandmother lived till their 90′s but smokes a pack of cigarettes everyday.

  • Dan Lundeen

    Dr. G, FYI in my opinion you should include the court rulings as authorities, especially since you read from them in the video. The case went to the 7th Circuit twice, the first time they reversed the trial court which had found for the NECN, and the US Supreme Court denied writ of certiori, and after remand to the trial court, the second time they affirmed the trial court after it found for the FTC. For all those interested the 7th Circuit Opinions in which the NECN were held to be liars and frauds are available here:

    http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11113845817486470381&hl=en&as_sdt=2,44

    http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=15949682007365413108&hl=en&as_sdt=2,44

    • Dan Lundeen

      The NECN was notably enjoined from advertising that:
      A.
      1. Represents that there is no scientific evidence that eating eggs increases the risk of heart attacks, heart disease, atherosclerosis, arteriosclerosis, or any attendant condition;
      2. Represents that there is scientific evidence that dietary cholesterol, including that in eggs, decreases the risk of heart attacks, heart disease, atherosclerosis, arteriosclerosis, or any attendant condition;
      3. Represents that there is scientific evidence that avoiding dietary cholesterol, including that in eggs, increases the risk of heart attacks, heart disease, atherosclerosis, arteriosclerosis, or any attendant condition;
      4. Represents that eating eggs does not increase the blood cholesterol level in a normal person;
      5. Represents that the blood cholesterol level is prevented from being raised or lowered by dietary cholesterol intake;
      6. Represents that the human body increases its manufacture of cholesterol in an amount equal to a decrease in dietary cholesterol intake;
      7. Represents that the average human body eliminates the same amount of cholesterol as that eaten;
      8. Represents that dietary cholesterol, including that in eggs, is needed by the body for building sex hormones, for transmitting nerve impulses and for maintaining life in cells; or
      9. Utilizes the name “National Commission on Egg Nutrition” unless it is clearly and conspicuously disclosed in immediate conjunction with the name that the National Commission on Egg Nutrition is composed of egg producers and other individuals and organizations of, or relating to, the egg industry.
      B.
      1. Represents that eating eggs does not increase the risk of heart attacks, heart disease, atherosclerosis, arteriosclerosis, or any attendant condition or
      2. Makes any representation concerning the relationship of dietary cholesterol, including that in eggs, to heart attacks, heart disease, atherosclerosis, arteriosclerosis, or any attendant condition
      unless it is clearly and conspicuously disclosed in immediate conjunction therewith that there is a controversy among medical experts concerning the relationship of dietary cholesterol, including that in eggs, to heart disease, and that respondents are presenting their side of that controversy.
      C.
      1. Represents that there exists, or describes, scientific evidence which supports the theory that consumption of dietary cholesterol, including that in eggs, does not increase the risk of heart attacks, heart disease, atherosclerosis, arteriosclerosis, or any attendant condition or
      2. Makes any representation concerning the state of the available evidence or information concerning the relationship of dietary cholesterol, including that in eggs, to heart attacks, heart disease, atherosclerosis, arteriosclerosis, or any attendant condition
      unless it is clearly and conspicuously disclosed in immediate conjunction therewith that many medical experts believe that existing evidence indicates that increased consumption of dietary cholesterol, including that in eggs, may increase the risk of heart disease.
      D.
      1. Represents as insignificant the available scientific evidence that the consumption of dietary cholesterol, including that in eggs, may increase the risk of heart attacks, heart disease, atherosclerosis, arteriosclerosis, or any attendant condition, or represents that there is overwhelming scientific evidence or otherwise misrepresents the amount of scientific evidence that eating eggs does not increase the risk of heart attacks, heart disease, atherosclerosis, arteriosclerosis or any attendant condition.
      2. Misrepresents in any manner the physiological effects of consuming dietary cholesterol or eggs.

      • http://nutritionfacts.org/ Michael Greger M.D.

        Thank you so much for posting these Dan!

        • Plantstrongdoc M.D.

          Michael,
          You are the eggspert….

  • Dan Lundeen

    Contempt of court! “more than 40 years of research have shown that healthy adults can eat eggs without significantly impacting their risk of heart disease” http://www.incredibleegg.org/health-and-nutrition/cracking-the-cholesterol-myth Can anything be done to stop these fraudsters?

  • Big Broccoli

    Great video. Remember, that it may also be the excess choline in the eggs, not just the cholesterol, as pointed out in a major ground-breaking study that came out in the past year. Dr. Greger has a video about it. It is suspected that the carnitine in meat AND the choline found in eggs and other animal products are turned into TMAO by omnivores’ gut bacteria, and it is this TMAO that is so dangerous to our systems.

    Search for the video called: “Carnitine, Choline, Cancer and Cholesterol: The TMAO Connection” for more info.

  • Mike

    Dr. Greger, the paleo diet fanatics love to point to recent research that claims that cholesterol is not bad for you. They are actually recommending the increase in egg intake.
    Have you seen any of this so called research and what are your thoughts on the tie in with the paleo diet?

  • Coacervate

    I think I’ve just lost [another] friend. He came over and busted a gut on a big job for me…I made a vegetarian lunch (I caved in and put cheese on the burrito). The “protein question” came up. How do you get enough. “I have to eat eggs or I don’t get enough”. Well I’ll let you fill in the rest. It did not exactly end well.

    How can we explain to people when they’ve been brainwashed so effectively? He raises his own chickens, knows what they eat, knows they are healthy for him and his family. He really didn’t want to hear about eggs. I am not a pushy type but I can’t remain silent. There is no easy way is there?

    You reading this you derned stubborn dutchman? I’m not standing by quietly while your healthy food plugs up your and your beautiful family’s plumbing. Eat whole foods/Plant-based. Just do it for a month. See if you go protein deficient. You won’t. What can I do JZ? I know this is truer than the truest thing. Should I just pretend its ok that the Machine’s got you? I cant fight alone against this monster. THEY know the truth. They twist and spin and lie so your family will suffer while they get the benefit. All we have to do is throw a spanner in the works and it will all come crashing down. Like the Matrix, except this is freakin reality.

    READ/Watch this website, watch Forks over Knives, watch Dr Gregers vids. I know you would never think of smoking. This is just as bad…just as deadly. You are addicted mate, just as surely as a junkie is to … junk. Meat is not murder, it IS suicide. Don’t eat cholesterol. Do as I say. I am superior to you. I am the king of you. I am omnipresent. I heard that! Put that butter away. Eat raw unprocessed grain. and Kale. and that hedge. It is way overgrown. I’ll wrastle you for it…………. Pals right? You know I’d cut off an arm for you…except you’d just BBQ it. Eggzactly.

    Well, this has got to be the most emotional post ever written. To clic or not to clic… et manu et corde!

    • b

      I find it is usually not beneficial to argue the facts of your research against the facts of their research. I try to avoid such conversations by not making claims of what I do or do not eat and why. Of course it is easier said than done. The only answer I find that gets people to maybe stop and think for a minute is: “Yeah, it’s tuff but we all got choices to make; but the results are getting pretty substantial now.”

      For men, it’s also fun to point out that erectile dysfunction (ED) may be a mostly vascular condition.

    • Thea

      Coacervate: Ouch. I feel for you. When it is someone you care about, it can be *very* hard to keep quiet.

      For what it’s worth, here’s how I handle it when I’m dealing with someone I’m not all that close to: wince or other look to show that I’m baffled by such a bizarre statement (like someone just told me that smoking cigarettes is good for them – bleeeesssssss their heart), but actually say nothing. I think that there are few people who have the skills to have the kind of conversation that would make a positive difference. I’m not one of them. So, the best I can do for such a person is continue to be a role model.

      On rare occasions, if I think the person if smart enough to benefit, I will *later* e-mail the person some 3rd party information about the topic at hand (say “protein”) with an intro such as: “I was thinking about what you said about protein. I thought you might be interested in learning what the experts say about it. See below. If this doesn’t interest you, no problem. Feel free to let me know if you would rather not get this kind of information.” The key here is to give 3rd party, authoritative information, not just your personal summary. And then, if possible, back it up with some anecdotes. The other key is that it is by e-mail, which might help the person to think and “take in” the info instead of just reacting to conversation.

      I handle the same situation differently for someone that I am very close to: I still do not debate it head on as pressure causes people to act defensively. Instead, I wage a long-term “war” and do things like send Dr. Greger videos (but not too many so as not to overwhelm) and invite to vegan conferences with me, give presents of the movie Forks Over Knives, share lots of my food and excitement about food, buy cookbooks as presents, share articles, etc. Also known as: with as little pushing as possible, while never suggesting that they change their ways, do the best I can educate. At the same time, use well-known behavior changing techniques: positive reinforcement, ignoring the bad behavior. (You can learn a lot about this in modern dog training circles.) This 2-pronged strategy has had great success with the people closest to me, though it is not an over-night process. What I can say is that people who have sworn to me on many, many occasions that they would never be vegan are now happily and enthusiastically consuming the whole-plant-food diet.

      That’s just my 2 cents. Good luck with your friend. I hope you are able to mend fences.

      • Coacervate

        Very good advice. Much obliged. I should report that I’m back in good graces although he did not watch this vid. We’re invited for din din soon so I’ll try some of your tips. I do remember hearing my own negativity echo inside my gourd when it didn’t provoke the desired reaction in others. I could try remaining silent. Gosh, now that WOULD be a challenge, har!

    • Lloyd

      “The “protein question” came up.”

      The reason humans need protein is not really the protein, but the nine indispensable amino acids we can’t make ourselves. They originate from plants, not animals. So eating the plants cuts out the middleman that comes with cholesterol and saturated fats, and more harmful components.

    • HereHere

      For any vegan advocate, I highly, highly recommend this easy to read, easy to use psychology book: Instant Influence by Michael Pantalon. He has several steps that really work. Start with affirming their autonomy “I understand this is completely your decision”. As permission to ask a question and get them to rate on a scale of 1-10 how motivated they are to become (let’s say, vegetarian to start; or you could even ask them about eating less meat). If they say 2, you act surprised and ask them why they didn’t rate it lower. Then, they talk about the rationale they have (maybe they think it would be a bit healthier, maybe they think it would be better for the animals). That’s them figuring it out, not you preaching. The rest of the steps are in the book. But those first few steps are really key. Good luck! Don’t expect an easy, quick fix. Things take time. Sometimes years, but sometimes things happen faster.

      • Coacervate

        thank you. I just started reading it. I’ve definitely been using the tell-and-sell approach in all segments of life and pretty much failed. their eyes sorta glaze over and i would keep smelling salts handy. time to change tack!

    • b00mer

      Hi coacervate, I know the feeling. I will say that these days I take a firm, but friendly and relaxed (I may even appear bored) approach. I make it clear that I am happy to have a discussion on nutrition but that I will not engage in an “argument” based solely on the person’s taste preferences or personal beliefs without any factual information or substance. I just got sick of the blanket baseless statements of the sort: “well not eating *any* meat can’t be healthy” or “everyone’s body is different, and I need animal protein”. Oh really? Why is that? Which exact nutrients in meat do you need? What exact characteristic of the protein in meat is it that makes it so healthy and necessary? I mean most people do not even know what a protein is. I start by asking questions, essentially giving the platform over to them, and once they have completely floundered in their attempt to defend their position, I will bring up a couple objective and rather dry points. I guess you could say that I first make them defend the logic and substance of their own criticisms, before I will address them. I don’t let them get away just calling something nutritious, or saying they need it. Give me specifics.

      Regarding protein: I will usually explain that mathematically it is impossible to be protein deficient, e.g. given 2000 cal, avg 10% cal from protein, you’ve got 200 cal from protein, and 50 g. Since 10% is in line with raw foodists, personally I think ~15-20% cal from protein is more likely if you’re eating a lot of green leafies and beans, which would give you 75-100 g. Way more than needed. I try to drive the point home that the “high” protein content of animal products is simply a function of caloric density, not of protein density itself. I fully concede that in the past, high caloric density was undoubtedly favorable, but most will agree that in our modern world this is no longer beneficial. I personally love these questions I got from Fuhrman’s Eat to Live: “which do you think has more protein, 100 calories of broccoli or 100 calories of beef?” or “where do you think the calories come from in broccoli, from fat, carbs, or protein?”.

      In addition, if they bring up the “quality” of protein issue, I will address that actually, that’s now considered an antiquated perspective and will bring up igf-1 issues (don’t know if you’ve seen these videos, one is called “Higher protein means higher risk”).

      And you know what, a lot of people will agree that eating something like a 95% WFPB diet is extremely healthy; most people wish they ate more vegetables. It’s just that fear of completely letting go of their comfort foods that prevents them from endorsing it fully. So I will kind of poke and prod around that, like “why is it that you think that eating so many fruits and vegetables and beans etc up to that point is so healthy?” and “if we closed that gap and made it 100%, what is it that you think you would be missing out on?”. And if your buddy even tries to bring up lutein in eggs, give him a leaf of kale and let him know it has twenty times the lutein.

      I also tend to explain my diet from a nutritarian perspective, and I let em know, that hey, even a little bit of meat is gonna be a couple hundred calories, and my calories are valuable real estate for shoveling in all those glorious anti-cancer anti-aging health-promoting micronutrients. I don’t want to waste my calories on nutrient deficient foods. Oh that’s another favorite tactic of mine. Refer to animal products as nutrient deficient. Watch the forehead scrunch up and the head tilt. If they want to claim that animal products are nutrient dense, then they need to defend that statement.

      You never know, sometimes the people that seem the most agitated at first are the most unsure about their own diet and the most receptive to change in the end. All the best.

  • BPCveg

    Much confusion has been generated by emotionally-charged attempts to interpret human studies without keeping in mind the background of non-human animal research. Back to 1913, Nikolaj Anitschkow fed rabbits pure cholesterol and observed that they developed atherosclerotic plaques that were eerily similar to those found in humans. Anitschkow went on to describe the precise mechanism by which dietary cholesterol leads to artery clogging plaque in rabbits. This phenomenon was later confirmed in numerous other herbivorous species. In carnivores, these same results were reproduced, but only after supressing thyroid gland function. These early and somewhat forgotten studies laid the foundation for cholesterol research in humans. For further information on Anistchkow, refer to: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9395267

    Research on humans, in contrast to animal research, is limited by the challenge of controlling for variations in human anatomy and behaviour as well as restrictions posed by ethical and financial factors. Despite these limitations, there is a still a vast amount of research suggesting that the same connection exists between dietary cholesterol intake and atherosclerosis as that observed in non-human animals. For instance, observational studies on the Tarahumara Indians of Mexico, by and large a plant-based society subsisting on “beans, corn and squash” where “meat was seldom eaten. The chief animal food product consumed with some regularity was eggs, averaging 2 per week”, showed that cholesterol intake was directly proportional blood cholesterol levels. For details refer to: http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/31/7/1131.full.pdf

    For anyone who wants to gain a solid understanding of the history of cholesterol research, written by an expert, I suggest “The Cholesterol Wars : The Skeptics versus the Preponderance of Evidence” by Daniel Steinberg.
    For those pressed for time, a good start is to read “Twenty questions on atherosclerosis” by William Roberts:
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1312295/

    • Coacervate

      Thanks for the references. The last one … from NIH…one question was about statin safety. The response was the straight party line, 1 in 10,000 get myopathy.

      Informally, I observe a lot of people who take statins. Many, I would say most, report achy joints, tiredness, muscle weakness and “senior moments”. AND most seem to be convinced these are signs of aging and to be expected. I was among them for 8 long years. When I finally got the courage to go off them my symptoms just went away over about 2 weeks.

      Isn’t it likely that the medical folks focus is on the wrong side effects? OK, 1/10000 have their muscles dissolve. But what about all this anecdotal evidence?

      I’m asking because every time I see my dr he pleads with me to “go on a small dose of simvastatin”. He apologized because he kept upping the dose because my cholesterol was outta sight. Of course I was eating all the eggs and meat and dairy I loved because I was taking a magic pill. I certainly do not blame him…although he SHOULD have told me about vegan options. He admits it…He figured it was too hard, he could smell the McNuggets on my breath.

      Now I’m statin free and vegan for 2 years. Yet my cholesterol continues to decline (3.9 at last count). I’m asking…What would you do? Would you take a small dose? How small? Open question to all really. Thanks

      • BPCveg

        Thanks for sharing the inspiring story of your transition to veganism. I wish you very well and hope that you continue to benefit from all the excellent advice on nutritionfacts.org.

        To provide my point of view on your interesting question, I can offer you the story of my father. After developing stable angina fifteen years ago, my dad switched to vegetarianism under my influence. He simultaneously followed his cardiologist’s suggestion of taking a standard dose (20mg/day) of atorvastatin (i.e. Lipitor). He has complained of the standard symptoms (leg pain, memory loss, etc). He has also been moderately active, given physical limitations posed by angina and asthma. Four years ago, convinced by the weight of nutritional evidence, he again followed me on the path to veganism and has, ever since, been following a Gregeresque whole-foods plant-based diet. Encouraged by Greger’s website and hoping to wean himself off of all drugs, my father gradually reduced the drug dose while having his cholesterol levels measured every 3 months. He has cycled between 20mg and 0mg and we have plotted his LDL versus time along with his statin dose versus time. These curves clearly show, in his case, an inverse relationship between his statin dose and his LDL level. It seems that he requires 5 mg pills to maintain his LDL levels in the ideal range for a heart patient (i.e. < 70 mg/dL, to use American units). So he continues with the healthiest vegetable rich diet he can possibly attain, while maintaining this low level of statin. It is a compromise, but hopefully the right strategy to achieve the correct balance to reduce medication while still maintaining a healthful lifestyle. I hope that my description of this strategy will be useful to someone out there in a similar situation.

        • Coacervate

          OK sounds good. in principle. I’ll see if my GP would go along. Any idea what the time intervals should be? how long does it take for a statin regime to level out? Also, I have always wondered if there is a lower limit to blood cholesterol levels? Can I go too low?

          • BPCveg

            I only have an anecdotal response to your first two questions: when experimenting with atorvastatin (i.e. Lipitor) dose in the range of 0 to 20 mg, my father found that his LDL leveled off between dose changes every 3 months.

            I suspect that there is a lower limit to the healthy range of blood cholesterol levels, which may explain the side effects that you described. See. for example, an old Lancet abstract discussing this issue:

            http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/9643758

          • Coacervate

            Thanks again BPCveg…we are only allowed simvastatin here and 10 mgs sounds much better than the 80 I was on…But the thing is even on that high dose my cholesterol was too high. It was only after I switched to WF/PB that it started coming down. I’m a mystery to science! (Of course I was eating SAD while taking statin…like so many I was going to take a pill to solve my health problems.) The only person who really got me thinking about diet was my Indian cardiologist. I wish you could see the look on her face when after the bypass, I asked her how much pork was allowed. Ho boy, heh. Come a long way Baby!

          • Real World Vegan

            i didnt bother with defending huntress cuz she holds her own pretty well, but im reading the entire string of messages thru and the word hypocrite comes to mind when talking about anecdote.

          • BPCveg

            In my statement “I only have an anecdotal response”, the word “only” concedes that I am not providing serious evidence. Nice try.

          • Real World Vegan

            my comment wasnt directed at you specifically, i just chose the end of this piece of the thread for the comment. i dont know why stating that its an anecdote makes it valuable when all anecdote is ‘worthless’, but thats your logic at work not mine. this entire sub-thread started with an anecdote so i couldnt help but appreciate the irony.

      • Thea

        Coacervate: I don’t have any advice for you, but I wanted to thank you for sharing your story. If more doctors read stories like this, it might help others avoid the pain you have suffered. Good for you on taking your health into your own hands!

        • Coacervate

          Thank you Thea, It feels like coming out of a coma or something.

      • Paleo Huntress

        My cholesterol rose steadily as a vegan. It was well over 300 at the end of my 2 year stint. When I ditched it and went paleo, it dropped almost 150 points.

        I’d never take a statin… but as a vegan I was told to several times. Now my cholesterol is low normal (and I eat 2-4 eggs EVERY day) plus butter, lard, red meat, cream and other assorted animal foods.

        • Coacervate

          Paleo, you will admit that you are a mystery to science and should be studied? I mean that sincerely. One important way science advances is by studying the outliers at the extremes of a given phenomenon. Meanwhiile, best of luck and keep eating assorted animal foods.

          • Paleo Huntress

            If I were an outlier, I’d absolutely agree. Unfortunately, high cholesterol, metabolic syndrome and heart disease is pretty common among vegans.

            I expect you’ll be quick to point out that all of this can be avoided with the “right” vegan diet– but then you’d also be quick to deny that all of the issues connected to omni diets can be avoided too. So many vegans are unable to differentiate between different omni diets while railing on about how many different vegan diets there are. The bottom line is that disease is connected to processed and artificial foods. The human animal has been eating animal foods for hundreds of thousands of years healthfully. It’s just as likely that it is the junk-food in the omni diets that causes disease, as it is the junk-food in vegan diets. Once that is eliminated, it comes down to finding what works best for your individual physiology. Veganism was terrible for me… and it is for many, and I’ve found that returning to whole food omni restored my health. It isn’t magic, it’s just the truth.

            I’ve been eating a paleo diet for more than 6 years now. I’m still waiting for the arterial sclerosis, hypertension, tooth decay, obesity and elevated cholesterol that surely WILL re-assail me <–(according to most every militant vegan I've met) to make its way. In the meantime though, I thank you for your well-wishes as I intend to continue eating assorted pastured animal foods and avoiding the grains and legumes that caused disease in me and that are responsible for the deaths of billions of animals collaterally. =)

          • BPCveg

            Your claim that “Unfortunately, high cholesterol, metabolic syndrome and heart disease is pretty common among vegans.” is contrary to the position of the American dieticians.

            The following link will take you to their position statement:

            http://www.eatright.org/About/Content.aspx?id=8357
            On page 7, they state the following:

            “Two large cohort studies (97,98) and one metaanalysis (99) found that vegetarians were at lower risk of death from ischemic heart disease than nonvegetarians. The lower risk of death was seen in both lacto-ovo-vegetarians and vegans (99).”

            “Based on blood lipid levels in one large cohort study, the incidence of ischemic heart disease was estimated to be 24% lower in lifelong vegetarians and 57% lower in lifelong vegans compared to
            meat eaters”

            Next, your claim that “The human animal has been eating animal foods for hundreds of thousands of years healthfully.” is not based on reliable data at all. You seem to passionately argue in favour of the paleo diet, but with what evidence?

            If we rank sources of nutrition data based on reliability, paleontological data would rank lowest. Here is my ranking of nutrition source data from most to least reliable:
            1- controlled studies on non-human animals (most reliable; relevance to humans is debatable);
            2- randomized group trials on humans;
            3- observational studies on human populations;
            4- case studies on individual humans;
            5- anecdotal reports by people;
            6- archeological/paleontological studies of ancient humans (least reliable).

          • Paleo Huntress

            Ah yes, in the US where health factors confound the data. People believe going vegan is healthy and alongside that they quit smoking, stop drinking, get fit, cut out junk food, etc… But in cultures where people are vegan for religious reasons, their health is worse than omnis. Go figure.
            FWIW, “lower risk” means nothing more or less than “lower”. It doesn’t in ANY WAY suggest that the disease isn’t still quite common. So if for example, omnis had an overall disease rate of 80% and vegans had one of 79%, that would both be less risk AND “quite common”. So your “evidence” does nothing to refute mine.
            Vegans have better health than the general SADer in SPITE of cutting out animal foods, not because of it.

          • BPCveg

            What you have stated above doesn’t make any sense to me. It just seems like you have provided rant after rant trying very hard to convince people interested in vegetarianism that they should go paleo. But I wonder, if you are so dead set against vegetarianism, why bother participating in a website devoted to it.
            Don’t you have something better to do, like chasing squirrels around.

          • Paleo Huntress

            Awww, don’t be silly, there are lots of vegetarian paleos. I have no issues at all with vegetarian diets. =)
            I’m here because I was invited by Dr. Gregor with his Paleo post. I’ve also been welcomed by members of this community… get over yourself.
            I recommend research from sources outside your comfort zone, things will start to make more sense then.

          • BPCveg

            Okay.

          • Toxins

            Conduct yourself in a more professional manner and perhaps your posts will be taken with more seriousness rather than your caustic, egotistical replies. I know of no evidence whatsoever supporting the “health benefits” of a paleo diet. The paleo diet is unfounded on real science and is based on philosophical thinking. Why should we idolize ancient people who had no knowledge of nutrition and ate whatever was available to them, this does not determine the healthfulness of their diet. They lived on average till the mid 50′s so I see no point in idolizing this group.

          • Paleo Huntress

            More straw men? Please try to stay on topic.

          • Coacervate

            I’ll let my lawyer speak for me: Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I’m just a caveman. I fell on some ice and later got thawed out by some of your scientists. Your world frightens and confuses me! Sometimes the honking horns of your traffic make me want to get out of my BMW.. and run off into the hills, or wherever.. Sometimes when I get a message on my fax machine, I wonder: “Did little demons get inside and type it?” I don’t know! My primitive mind can’t grasp these concepts. But there is one thing I do know – when a man like my client slips and falls on a sidewalk in front of a public library, then he is entitled to no less than two million in compensatory damages, and two million in punitive damages. Thank you.

          • Paleo Huntress

            ~clutches chest wounded~ I’ve never heard that one before. Aren’t you the clever one… did you think that one up all with your own small mind?
            Nothing says, “I have no good argument” better than a personal attack. Thank you for making it so clear.

          • Coacervate
          • Paleo Huntress

            The reference has been done to death. Try an original thought.

            http://www.cheeseslave.com/top-10-reasons-im-not-paleo/

          • Real World Vegan

            my cholesterol spiked when i went vegan too, plus my gut was a mess and i was so gassy that my then girlfriend went on strike. as a bb i was already eating a whole food diet so im guessing that thats why the usual benefits seen by a new vegetarian werent there. my motivation was animal ethics and i wasnt willing to give up yet. i ate mostly whole grains and beans to meet my protein needs and a paleo guy at my gym suggested that could be why. so after a little research i tried a modified 30 day paleo challenge and went back for more blood work. i already knew my gut was better but i was really surprised at the cholesterol. the hdl stayed about the same but the ldl dropped almost 40 points in a month. i ate just as much carbohydrate but got it from tubers and fruit mostly. my doc thought i might have celiacs but the tests all came back negative

            i ate just as much carbohydrate but got it from tubers and fruit mostly. my girlfriend is now my wife and she is a paleo vegetarian who eats eggs and some cultured dairy. we never have eaten much added fat but we’ve been adding coconut and palm oils to our diet for the last few months and my body fat percentage actually went down another point and though my cholesterol hasnt changed much, my inflammation markers have all improved since adding it and it helps with the mass gains.

            its all a work in progress but its working well for us and we stay open to new options. anyway i wanted to add my own anecdote {worthless though it may be} to huntress’. i had high cholesterol as a vegan too, higher than when i ate animal food. and even now its higher than it was before i went vegan.

          • Coacervate

            Interesting RWV, I’m not quite clear, what do you mean by “I was bb” . I too saw a big increase in cholesterol when I started WF/PB. But I attributed that spike to the fact I also stopped the statin “cold turkey”. It took a full year for it to finally get to my goal of under 4 mMolar.

            I talk to everyone who will listen about cholesterol. The story seems complex. Here is a post I posted in MacDougalls “Discussion Board” to the echos of crickets:
            ****************************************************
            From a previous poster eXtremE: ….”All humans want as much pleasure as we can get and as little pain as possible.

            Coacervate: I with you right up to here. All humans don’t want pleasure. Remember Jack Nicholson in Little Shop of Horrors? He loved being in that dentist’s chair. We all had a good laugh but the fact is for any trait there are going to be poles or extremes as your name implies.

            I was thinking in the context of this thread… that the history of the forum was not always balanced. I would say about once a month I get someone sorta in-my-face about their low cholesterol on a SAD diet. Not everyone has “attitude”, however, they all are sincere. If significant groups see their blood chemistry worsen on any particular diet there is an opportunity to learn more about the etiology of chronic disease. I just wish we could test the hypothesis is all I’m saying. Am I in the wrong place to be asking this question? I’ve been very bad and I simply must be punished

            **************************************************************
            End of snip

            We hear arguments that humans ate this way or that or that we evolved in such and such an enviroment. Really, the whole nature of mutation/selection causes isolated populations to diverge. So there could easily be a significant gene pool tuned to Plant-based nutrition and, perhaps those derived from isolated populations living in all sorts of environments where other foods were more accessible. I can envision a present day human mix with people ranging in these traits just as they do in every other trait. In fact couldn’t we make the argument that it would be really unlikely that we would be universally homogenous in this single capacity? Is it heresy to even ask the question, are there actually some Paleo’s among us?

          • Real World Vegan

            im sorry for the confusion, bb stands for body builder. there are cultures around the globe that eat extremely varying diets, both in macro and mirco nutrient content, in good health. i dont know how any thinking person could believe that we dont have varying nutritional needs, so basically, i agree. i eat a significant amount of carbohydrate, but because of what i do, my diet still ends up being partly ketogenic. i time my meals to my workouts and use the carbohydrate to fuel and replenish glycogen and the insulin to repair muscle. but then the glucose is gone and im depending on fat again, and even more so when im cutting. there is no doubt in my mind that both glucose and insulin cause inflammation when allowed to sit around in the bloodstream. this forum appears to favor the long drawn out trickle of slow carb sources of glucose like beans, but my research tells me that this just keeps insulin levels up and causes inflammation in me. plus i find that alternating between glucogenic and ketogenic mechanisms seem to keep both sharper and i no longer get the post meal energy crash or depend on my last meal to fuel my next workout.

            regarding your snippet about pleasure, thats the place where we disagree. i did a research project in college on the mechanisms behind sadism and masochism and ultimately those who enjoy pain do actually enjoy it. it is pleasure for them. so just as love and hate for the same person can exist at the same time, so can pain and pleasure. so id say that even those people are driven by the desire for pleasure.

            ive never been on a statin and my cholesterol was good before i went vegan. it got much higher within the first few months and the ratio was bad, the ldl shot up and the particle size got dense and small. i actually dont buy into the idea that cholesterol is much to worry about unless it is extremely high and see it more as a diagnostic tool. if my cholesterol rose again but my inflammation stayed low, it wouldnt concern me in the least. i expect it to rise as i age since it appears to have a protective effect, especially in women. i voraciously consume data as its published and im convinced that low cholesterol is more harmful than high as long as the high isn’t out of the park high.

          • Coacervate

            OK if you like pain then pain is pleasure and I’m wrong. But I’m right becasue my point, poorly made, was that even for something as intense as physical sensation there is a bell curve or some shape of curve. usually most people are somewhere in the middle…normal. But there are ALWAYS some folks at the extremes. I’m trying to make a case that some folks may be better suited to a high fat / low carb diet. Maybe You are a rare breed. I’m serious when I say we should study you. Under anesthetic of course!

            But there is one point I think you should completely rethink. You’ve read studies that have convinced you that low cholesterol is more harmful than high….up to a point. What if some studies are done by scientists who are paid to get a certain result? Or they have some interest that biases their interpretation of their own data? What about Forks over Knives, did you watch that? That fighter, Mark Danzig, how does he do it? The unique thing about this site is the total focus on INDEPENDENT research and good science vs. the bad science from people with a financial interest in feeding you their product.

            I have a cholesterol meter. We should get some hard core paleos and some willing WF/PB (oh, thats whole foods plant-based you bb) and get them to switch diets for a month and see what happens. Young folks who are able to withstand the change. Not me…way too far down the atherosclerotic nightmare to change paths now.

            What are your other blood chemistry like? BP good? Is “cutting” bb lingo for heavy work out?

            I believe that people are sincere about their experiences. But the data that I’ve seen is very sound: The vast majority, the ones in that center portion of the nutritional bell curve, are far healthier on WF/PB. We can still learn a lot from the outliers. Now relax and count backward from a hundred, pay no attention to the drip.

          • Real World Vegan

            it wasn’t me you said should be studied dude and my case isnt extreme. my cholesterol went up when i went vegan and down when i removed grains and beans. its in the healthy range now but its still ‘higher’ than when i was omni. I maintain my membership at the uni library so i have access to all of the data and im very well versed in following the funding. im with you that its an important factor to consider. knowing that the statin industry is a multi billion dollar industry and the best selling drug in pharma history, who will rake in the most cash by convincing us that our cholesterol levels should be lower? 50 per cent of heart attack victims have low or normal cholesterol and 50 per cent of people with high cholesterol don’t have heart attacks. that is some pretty da*n solid empirical evidence.

            i did see forks over knives. i enjoyed it for the most part but it was littered with half truths and misrepresentations and as a vegan it bugs the sh*t out of me when well meaning film makers take too much creative license and end up making the community look like buffoons.

            as an aside, there are a significant number of paleo vegetarians (my wife) and paleo vegans (myself) and a large segment of the paleo omni community that started in veganism and left to go paleo. most of them say they left it because it was making them ill. i dont know how many were as ill as huntress, but its not an uncommon story at in the paleo communities. i dont know why you havent heard about it but it could be that communities like this one cater to people coming into veganism and not the ones leaving it.

          • Coacervate

            If a person’s cholesterol spikes when they stop eating cholesterol, that is interesting. at least to me that signals something important we could learn about metabolism. I do not mean to use the word outlier as an insult or anything.

            After the spike (as mine did but I attributed it to a rebound effect from statin withdrawal) does it come back down over time? Mine did. And I wonder if you had stuck it out would yours do so too. I have a friend who said he wanted to try WF/PB but green leafy’s made him gassy. I got him to start with a single tablespoon of chopped kale in his soup. and gradually he increased his “dose” until his bowel bugs switched to happy plant munchers. For many the change must be gradual.

            But you are not concerned with cholesterol and I think we will differ on that, I can tell. Ah, life in the trenches of the diet wars is not easy. But someday…who knows.

            Would you consider this…on a scale of say 1 to 10, what are the chances you might consider gradually switching to WF/PB (not “vegan” per say) over some period, a few months? Not that your going to actually do it. But could you put a number on the possibility?

          • Real World Vegan

            thanks for clarifying what you meant by outlier but id like to assure you that i didn’t take offense to it. what im trying to make clear is that im -not- an outlier, my experience is quite common. if you search google or yahoo for ‘high cholesterol vegan’ youll see lots of vegans complaining about it. granted they arent all wf but theyre not eating any cholesterol either.

            i already eat a wfpb diet, the only exception is during a mass gain where i supplement vegan protein powders. it is interesting that it spiked because i went from meeting my protein needs with dense animal food sources to grains and beans. the vegan community is in love with grains and beans but they are very inflammatory foods for most people and most vegan athletes tend to limit them. since it is inflammation that raises serum cholesterol it makes sense that mine rose when my consumption of grains and beans rose.

            i waited almost 18 months before going paleo and i dont know how long the rebound could be expected to take but going vegan paleo corrected it almost instantly. it would have been an interesting experiment to see if it ever returned on its own, but why would anyone not stick with what gave them immediate and lasting benefit? life is too short to mess around with stuff that aint workin.

            RE kale, i eat a whole food diet with lots of greens [spinach, cabbage, mustard, collards, beets] and lots of cruciforms. there are no probs with my gut flora.

          • Coacervate

            OK I did google it..lots of folks with high numbers. So you, the huntress, and I all saw our cholesterol spike. And lots of others it seems too. Yep, theres something in that.

            One thing about the teeming masses of “bad” vegans. You know, I keep getting caught out by processed foods containing hydrogenated crap in it. Pretty much given up anything in a package. Am lucky to live where i can grow my own food pretty much year round. I really feel for people trying to come to grips in the supermarket. its not easy.

            Also, I have to admit, I was an avid hunter and butchered my own farm animals but now the thought of hurting any of them…the chickens have names, know what i mean? Thats weird how much i’ve changed. Did plants do that or have I just gone soft. no matter of course, it is what it is.

            Did not know beans/grain are inflammatory. My CRP is so low it comes back with no number, just LOW. Thats what i mean, some can tolerate, some cant.

            I know some people have leaky bowels. I had the worst ungodly screwed up mess of a digestive non-process. I was so sick I just stored up enough “medicine” to take myself out. Really. I only did this WF/PB thing out of desperation…so depressed nothing mattered so it wasnt a will power thing…just quit eating meat/dairy/fish you know the drill.

            The message that I’m getting is cholesterol causes inflammation in arteries, meat microbes release endotoxins causing low level inflammation. Bad gut flora cause leaky guts leading to inflammation. Thats something I can get my head around. Eliminate the causes of inflammation and the body heals itself. You seem like a person more interested in squeezing top performance from an already healthy body. We come at from different perspectives looking for different outcomes, not so? SOO the big question could be, should the means be the same even if the ends are different?

            You are obviously watching you chemistry and keeping in the groove. You’ll win.

          • Real World Vegan

            coacervate, cholesterol -doesnt- cause inflammation, just the opposite, it is the bodys own endogenous anti inflammatory. the reason cholesterol builds up is because the body lays it down in layers over chronically enflamed areas, and the reason serum levels rise is because something is causing widespread inflammation [like a food intolerance]. to coin a phrase from my wapf days, ‘firefighters are found at fires and if we used the same logic that cholesterol opponents use, we should get rid of the firefighter if we want a safer community. but the firefighter is there to put out the fire just as the cholesterol is there to soothe the inflammation. the key is to prevent the inflammation, not reduce the bodys healthy response to it.’ its also the bodys precursor to endogenous d3 which is why people on statins have very low d3 levels across the board and may be why depression is rampant and suicide common among the elderly.

            the plaques found in sclerotic vessels are three quarters poly fa

          • Real World Vegan

            sorry, forgot this. cutting is the fat loss phase before a competition. it refers to the definition between muscle groups and fibers where the muscles look ‘cut’ or well defined. it follows the mass gain phase which is the heavy lifting, heaving feeding phase where muscle mass is built.

        • BPCveg

          The description you have provided of your status as a vegan is incomplete because there is no such specific vegan diet that we can all relate to…In fact, vegan does not refer to one diet but an infinite collection of diets that share a common restriction. You would need to seriously qualify your statement for it to have any meaning whatsoever.
          Judging by what you say you currently eat, you clearly flout mainstream dietary advice anyway. Thus, I would not consider your testimonial to be reliable at all.

        • Toxins

          Vegan does not equate to health. I can live off of white bread, potato chips and candy and be considered vegan. The quality of ones diet does not depend on whether or not you are vegan. The emphasis is whole foods plant based, oil free.

          • Paleo Huntress

            Psssst… there are comments all over this thread stating specifically that I was a “whole food vegan”. White bread, potato chips and candy are not whole foods.

            You are right, vegan does NOT equate health… even whole food veganism. Good try though.

          • Toxins

            We do not know what exactly you were eating, and even so, personal anecdotes do not count as evidence.

          • Paleo Huntress

            Anecdotes DO count as evidence… evidence of the impact that something had on the individual sharing the anecdote. My anecdote is proof that whole food veganism made me ill. And because it made ME ill, it’s evidence that whole food veganism is NOT good for everyone. But that is not the point, our history on this site shows that you have trouble following the context when comments are offered. For example, you insist that certain diet experts advise proponents to eat a low carb diet- then when evidence to the contrary is offered, you argue that they don’t know what they’re talking about. Well, the fact is, an expert does actually know what they advise– just as I actually know that whole food veganism was bad for ME.

            I didn’t offer my experience as proof that it’s bad for everyone, I offered it as proof that it isn’t GOOD for everyone.

          • Toxins

            I don’t believe I have ever argued for a low carbohydrate diet. To think that there is such genetic variation in the population that plant foods become unhealthful is quite shocking to think and I highly doubt this. Even so, the vast majority of the people, which is what these studies are aimed at, benefit immensely from a whole foods plant based diet. If you are the outlier (which I doubt), then what you are preaching is not applicable to the majority of the population.

          • Paleo Huntress

            ~smacks forehead~  You are just utterly unable to comprehend and follow a discussion. For anyone who is interested (though I can’t imagine why), navigate to Dr. Greger’s post on paleo diets and read Toxin’s claims that paleo gurus advocate low carb. He doesn’t remember what he wrote, but it’s all still there if you want to see it.

          • BPCveg

            I have closely followed Toxins’ comments on NutritionFacts for over one year and think he is one of the most intelligent contributors. Please show more respect for those who know more than you.

            You claim that while experimenting with a whole foods vegan diet, you became ill – you claim it almost killed you. From that experience you conclude that “My anecdote is proof that whole food veganism made me ill.” Notwithstanding the possibility that you may have overlooked an important step in healthful veganism, there are numerous other possible explanations for your experience. There are always simultaneous factors that can influence one’s health, such as:
            1- metabolic, hormonal and genetic factors that cycle over one’s lifespan;
            2- stress related changes (sometimes delayed responses after stressful experiences); and,
            3- infections and benign diseases that can go unnoticed.

          • Paleo Huntress

            BPSveg,

            Your loyalty toward your board-mate is admirable, but you don’t know anything about me or what I know. I have no respect for Toxins because he can’t follow a discussion, because his bias creates a zeal that blinds him to even the most basic logic and scientific principles and because he builds straw men and then denies them. ~shrugs~

            Imagine for a moment that I took it upon myself to challenge every vegan here who found better health when they went vegan– it wasn’t the removal of animal food but the removal of JUNK food. It was the switch to whole food, it was the new fitness program, etc. Let ME tell YOU why removing meat had NOTHING to do with your health improving. You’d find that pretty arrogant, wouldn’t you?

            YOU are arrogant, Toxins too. I spent two YEARS exploring whole food veganism, several different iterations ranging from all cooked to all raw, from high fat to low fat, from high starch to low starch… 80-10-10, McDougal, Skeletor, Cousens, etc. I saw a VEGAN dietitian every two weeks during that time frame and we worked with my doc to get monthly blood work. I also saw a functional medicine doc several times over the last 6 months. I didn’t have any infections, no parasites, no digestive issues… what I had was a body that couldn’t tolerate the excessive carbohydrate in a vegan diet.

            Now seeing as there are many whole food cultures that eat lots of carbohydrate, I’m fairly certain that had I not grown up in this culture, with fractured and artificial foods, I’d probably have tolerated it well, but seeing as I DID, and I’m pretty sure veganism’s magic doesn’t extend to time-trtavel, and can’t take me back to a time before that occurred, I have to live in the real world where as an American, my physiology can’t be compared to that of other high carb cultures.

            At the end of my 2 year stint with whole food veganism, I had a fresh diagnosis of type II diabetes. Now listen carefully, this may shock you. My current diet is absolutely IDENTICAL to the last 6 months of my vegan diet in every way except that I now eat humanely raised, pastured animal foods too. Do you understand that? I eat the same kinds of veggies, I cook them (or not) the same way.

            However, after replacing some of the starches in my diet with animal foods, my blood sugar was under control in less than three weeks. My cholesterol came down in less than 3 months. My A1C plummeted like magic. I never counted a calorie but I lost 100 lbs in 10 and a half months. I went from having one menstrual cycle a year to one every 28 days like clockwork within the year. My skin cleared up within the month.

            There’s no mystery in this. It’s just what’s true. Your magic pill isn’t magic after all. So get your head out of your presumptuous, arrogant a** and stop pretending that you know jack-sh*t about strangers.

            And then finally, in cultures where health isn’t the reason for choosing a vegan diet, omnis have better health. This isn’t anecdotal, it’s documented. Veganism doesn’t prevent or improve metabolic syndrome over vegetarian or omni diets either. So why don’t you head over to those forums and tell THEM how they’re all wrong because your vegan pill is magical and it ALWAYS works.

          • BPCveg

            Oh, I’m sorry that you were offended by my comment. Perhaps you do know more than I have given you credit for. You just haven’t provided any evidence of this.

          • Toxins

            Some points,

            1. I am not a “zealout”, my diet is based on science which is what prompted my dietary changes to begin with.

            2. You cannot continue using your personal story as evidence, this is not how one gains credibility and proves a point. Some real studies and evidence would be helpful in this situation.

            3. You are correct in that their is no native population that is completely vegan, but there is one that is quite close, and they have the most centenarians per capita.

            Caloric Restriction, the Traditional
            Okinawan Diet, and Healthy Aging

            The Diet of the World’s Longest-Lived People and Its Potential Impact on Morbidity and Life Span

            Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 1114: 434–455 (2007).

            TABLE 1. Traditional dietary intake of Okinawans and other Japanese circa 1950

            Total calories 1785

            Total weight (grams) 1262

            Caloric density (calories/gram) 1.4

            Total protein in grams (% total calories) 39 (9)

            Total carbohydrate in grams (% total calories) 382 (85)

            Total fat in grams (% total calories) 12 (6)

            Saturated fatty acid 3.7

            Monounsaturated fatty acid 3.6

            Polyunsaturated fatty acid 4.8

            Total fiber (grams) 23

            Food group Weight in grams (% total calories)

            Grains

            Rice 154 (12)

            Wheat, barley, and other grains 38 (7)

            Nuts, seeds Less than 1 (less than 1)

            Sugars 3 (less than 1)

            Oils 3 (2)

            Legumes (e.g., soy and other beans) 71 (6)

            Fish 15 (1)

            Meat (including poultry) 3 (less than 1)

            Eggs 1 (less than 1)

            Dairy less than 1 (less than 1)

            Vegetables

            Sweet potatoes 849 (69)

            Other potatoes 2 (less than1)

            Other vegetables 114 (3)

            Fruit less than 1 (less than 1)

            Seaweed 1 (less than 1)

            Pickled vegetables 0 (0)

            Foods: flavors & alcohol 7 (less than 1)

            Data derived from analysis of U.S. National Archives, archived food records, 1949 and based on survey of 2279 persons.

            Their diet was 85% carb, and 6% fat. Sweet potatoes (a Japanese sweet potato) made up almost 70% of their calories. Nuts were less than 1% of calories (the equivalent of 1/10 of an ounce a day) Oil was less than 2% of calories (which is about 1 tsp a day) and sugars were less than 1% of calories (less than a tsp a day)

            The total animal products including fish was less than 4% of calories which is less then 70 calories a day. That is the equivalent of around 2 oz of animal products or less a day.

          • Paleo Huntress

            As it turns out, even those Japanese who are Okinawan by birth but who live in different cultures have extended lives. (And you already know this because I shared the data in Dr. Greger’s Paleo diet post) If it was the diet, that wouldn’t be the case.

            Also, other sources that take into account food animals raised privately, put the animal food content closer to 20-30% of total intake. And as I’ve already pointed out, the purple sweet potato isn’t native to Okinawa, but to the Americas. It isn’t a traditional food.

            This thread is about eggs. Do you have anything to add that has to with eggs or is this yet another attempt to drag the paleo thread into this one?

          • HemoDynamic, M.D.

            Paleo Huntress: “This thread is about eggs. Do you have anything to add that has to (do) with eggs or is this yet another attempt to drag the paleo thread into this one?”

            Not one comment you have left has had anything to do with eggs. So please if you are going to stick to the topic please do so!
            Your berating of people is disappointing and defeating to the purpose of this site.

          • Paleo Huntress

            Click through to the page and enter “huntress” in the find feature of your browser. Read the comment I’ve left and then see if you can still write that same comment with any integrity. =) Go ahead, we’ll wait. Go on…

          • BPCveg

            HemoDynamic: I just wanted to express that I appreciate your polite and mature manner of handling this frustrating situation. I hope that your approach works out.
            I was wondering if the NutritionFacts team has considered more aggressive approaches for dealing with wackos who ruin the forum, such as:
            1- appointing a bouncer who gives at most one warning before banning the offender;
            2- appointing someone to apply the Richard Dawkin’s philosophy: “mock them, ridicule them”, which may seem harsh at first, but this kind of social pressure would at least put them in their place.

          • SpeakingTruth

            A moderator might be a good idea, but the Dawkin’s strategy seems counterproductive and hypocritical. I think this is one arena where fighting fire with fire does not work. I say respond by role-modeling the behavior you want to see displayed, or just ignore it (admittedly, the later is quite hard to do). Plus, it makes those who speak with hate seem even more foolish.

          • Toxins

            Yes I have claimed that paleo diet is an equivalent to low carb diet but I have never myself advocated for a low carbohydrate diet.

          • Paleo Huntress

            This is what I wrote-

            “For example, you insist that certain diet experts advise proponents to eat a low carb diet- then when evidence to the contrary is offered, you argue that they don’t know what they’re talking about.”

            Please point to the line where I write that you advocate low carb diets. No the Toxins, what I wrote is that you misinterpret and misunderstand what you read quite often, just as you’ve done again here.

    • Thea

      Nice post BPCveg!

      • BPCveg

        Thanks Thea. I always love your posts!

    • Lloyd

      Plant Positive, the destroyer of cholesterol confusionists!

    • Paleo Huntress

      BPCveg,

      “http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/31/7/1131.full.pdf”

      This would be the same study that found that even though the they ate only two eggs per week and their diets contained very little fat, (11-12% with only 2% saturated.) that “Their mean [triglyceride] values were higher than those of normal subjects in the United States.” “Tarahumara children had higher triglyceride
      levels than American children, 144 mg/dl versus 54 in Iowans and 49 to 73 in Ohioans. “16% of the children (both sexes) had triglyceride levels exceeding 150 mg/dl, and 5% in excess of 200 mg/dl. Of the adults, excluding pregnant and lactating women, 26% had levels above 150 mg/dl, and 6% had levels in excess of 200 mg/dl.”

      “VLDL [the MOST dangerous of the lipoproteins] levels were also elevated from this same comparative point of view.

      “HDL [the HEALTHY lipoprotein associated with heart health] cholesterol levels were lower than most normals in the United States.” <–this is not a good thing.

      • BPCveg

        I will reiterate my earlier comment that “research on humans, in contrast to animal research, is limited by the challenge of controlling for variations in human anatomy and behaviour.”

        The Tarahumara Indians are not representative of people in the United states. They differ in numerous ways including (but not limited to) the following:
        1- genetics;
        2- environment;
        3- fitness level (in fact they are competitive runners); and,
        4- diet.

        Since this study is not a controlled experiment, it is impossible to draw any inferences on the effect of diet on cholesterol markers.

        My intention of citing this article was to show that this observational study on the Tarahumara Indians showed an interesting relationship between the amount of cholesterol that they consumed and their blood cholesterol levels. It is interesting ONLY because it happens to be the EXACT SAME relationship that has been observed in HIGHLY CONTROLLED studies on non-human ANIMALS.

        Please note I am not claiming that this study is proof of anything…it is only suggestive! In fact, no observational study of humans can ever prove or falsify any claim about diet. The problem is that there is too much variation in any group study. The only way to get close to an understanding is by studying mechanisms. Only animal research can allow us to do this thoroughly, because we can clone animals and control their environment. Human research is meant only to show correspondence.

        Your specific quotes, although valid, were not of any concern to the authors because (see pg.9 paragraph 3):

        “populations consuming high carbohydrate diets of which the Tarahumaras are a classic example,
        habitually have a low incidence of atherosclerosis and do not have elevated triglyceride levels”

        So all your interjections on how harmful specific markers were is of no consequence, because the bottom line is that they didn’t get very much heart disease. Of course, I agree with you that we cannot attribute that to carbohydrate intake since this is not a controlled experiment.

        • Paleo Huntress

          BPCveg,

          “Since this study is not a controlled experiment, it is impossible to draw any definitive conclusions on the effect of diet on cholesterol markers.”

          It’s funny how a study is significant enough to cite when it appears to support your claim, but becomes insignificant when it doesn’t. Not surprising given the source, but still funny. =)

          You’ll likely argue that your disclaimer “research on humans, in contrast to animal research, etc, etc…” said as much, but then you wouldn’t bother citing and directly quoting from that citation, if you didn’t believe it supported your position regarding cholesterol.

          You are correct though- Observational/ epidemiological studies are worthless for ALL conclusions except the conclusion that a controlled study might be warranted. Until that controlled study is done, the only conclusion we can draw is that the Tarahumara Indians of Mexico have different diets and different disease markers than Americans do. We cannot conclude anything about the relationship between the two.

          “it is impossible to draw any definitive conclusions on the effect of diet on cholesterol markers.”

          Precisely. Thank you for helping me make that point crystal clear.

          • BPCveg

            Paleo Huntress,
            Since you enjoy poking holes in diet articles, maybe you are up for the challenge of dissecting the position statement on vegetarian/vegan diets by the world’s largest organization of food and nutrition professionals, namely:
            http://www.eatright.org/About/Content.aspx?id=8357
            Have fun!

      • LemonTree

        According to John McDougall, MD, having a lower HDL is not uncommon, or undesirable, when your other values are also low.

        This study did have some very interesting conclusions as to the healthfulness of the Tarahumara diet.

        “Of note was the fact that almost all (96%)
        of the protein in the Tarahumara diet was
        derived from vegetable sources.”

        “Previous observations indicate
        deaths from cardiac and circulatory
        complications are unknown.”

        “In addition, no hypertensive
        Tarahumara person was encountered
        and there appeared to be no rise of
        blood pressure with age.”

        “The relative incidence of obesity in the
        Tarahumaras was clearly much less than
        that of Americans. Not a single overweight
        man was seen.”

        “Particularly notable was the virtual absence of the hypertension, obesity, and the usual age rise
        of the serum cholesterol in adults. Thus, the customary diet of the Tarahumaras is adequate in
        all nutrients, is hypolipidemic, and is presumably antiatherogenic.”

        • Paleo Huntress

          “This study did have some very interesting conclusions as to the healthfulness of the Tarahumara diet.”

          Forgive the distinction, but the study didn’t actually conclude anything at all about the effect their diet has on their health. You seem to be reading something into their statement that isn’t actually there– implying (I believe) that their statements conclude that the diet provides them health, but they don’t say that at all.

          They say it provides “adequate nutrients” and that it’s hypolipidemic (low fat). Neither of these facts speaks to anything but the actual components of the foods themselves. Then they say that they “presume” it is anti-artherogenic. This is an important distinction because if they could show cause and effect, they’d state that it IS anti-artherogenic, and they don’t.

          The only thing we can conclude from this study is that the diet they eat doesn’t seem to harm them. We can’t even conclude that it makes them healthy since there were no controls. Such is the drawback of an observational study. The only thing it is good for is forming a hypothesis. In this case, the hypothesis might be, “The Tarahumara diet is a healthy diet for everyone.” But this a hypothesis, not a conclusion. Then they would need to design a controlled study to either prove of disprove it.

          FWIW, the traditional Maasai ate a diet found to be nutritious and hyPERlipidemic, with about 80% of calories coming from animal food and saturated fat. They were also healthy, strong and free of atherogenisis [formation of atheromatous lesions in arterial walls].

          A critical thinker might look at these two cultures and say that clearly, if a low fat pb diet was the key to health, the Maasai would have disease– and conversely, if a high fat, animal-food-based diet was the key, the Tarahumaras would have it. So perhaps the health isn’t about animal versus plant, or high fat versus low fat, but rather whole food versus processed food.

          And still the only take away is that the diet of the Tarahumara appears nutritionally adequate and doesn’t appear to harm them. Such is the limitation of all observational studies.

          • Real World Vegan

            i think its rockin that we all have access to the original data now, but the downside is that peeps dont always learn how to read it before they start to. science has its own language and it is used very conciously. imo, most people who misinterpret data are not educated about the language and they do it accidentally, [no assumptions or implications about you, lemontree] but there are a few ‘experts’ who appear to do it very deliberately too.

            in too many cases its knowing ‘just enuf’ to be dangerous.

          • LemonTree

            The Maasai, though very healthy, do exhibit evidence of atherosclerosis (atherogenesis, if any, apparently not studied):

            “Mann, G. V. (Vanderbilt Univ. School of Medicine, Nashville, Tenn. 37203), A. Spoerry, M. Gray, and D. Jarashow. Atherosclerosis in the Masai. Am J Epidemiol 95: 26–37, 1972.–The hearts and aortae of 50 Masai men were collected at autopsy. These pastoral people are exceptionally active and fit and they consume diets of milk and meat. The intake of animal fat exceeds that of American men. Measurements of the aorta showed extensive atherosclerosis with lipid infiltration and fibrous changes but very few complicated lesions. The coronary arteries showed intimal thickening by atherosclerosis which equaled that of old U.S. men. The Masai vessels enlarge with age to more than compensate for this disease. It is speculated that the Masai are protected from their atherosclerosis by physical fitness which causes their coronary vessels to be capacious.”
            It would be an interesting comparison if researchers could perform similar autopsies on the Tarahumara.

          • Paleo Huntress

            Yes, I’m familiar with Mann’s work. =)

            I’m going to suggest that in much the same way as McDougall claims that a condition that is unhealthy for most Americans (low HDL cholesterol (4 TIMES more predictive of heart disease than high LDL) can be healthy in some, the same applies to the Maasai. If the atherosclerosis never leads to actual disease, it’s not a risk factor.

            They’re also not as active as one might assume when reading the term, “very active”. Dirk Lund Christensen (Associate professor at the University of Copenhagen’s Department of International Health, Immunology and Microbiology, and the lead author of a different study of the Maasai) wrote:

            “Earlier studies from the 1960s and 1970s concluded that the Maasai were ‘very active’, in the way it was interpreted, they generated the false consumption that the Maasai displayed an athlete level of physical activity. From our objective measurements we can now see that their daily physical activity does not equal that of athletes. Most of their everyday physical activity is in the form of walking; very little time is spent running, which may not correspond to most people’s image of the Maasai.”

            I imagine that if they examined them closely enough to determine that their arteries were sclerotic, they would likely have noted lesions as well, had there been any. That doesn’t mean they’d mention them, but given that they were looking specifically for heart disease, it seems pretty likely.

            What’s also interesting to note is now that they’re eating corn amd millet, they are developing some obesity, but even the overweight Maasai have normal blood sugar. According to Dr. Greger and several others in this thread, saturated fat consumption causes diabetes and issues with regulating blood sugar. That clearly isn’t the case with the pound-of-butterfat-a-day Maasai.

            The fats found in arterial plaques (those formed over lesions) are 3/4 PUFAs, suggesting saturated fat from animal foods isn’t a likely contributor.

          • LemonTree

            A low HDL is not predictive of heart disease if one’s LDL and total are low as well.
            You seem to imply the Maasai are becoming obese due to the consumption of corn and millet, meanwhile the EPIC-Oxford study found plant-eating vegans to have the lowest BMIs.

          • Paleo Huntress

            LemonTree,

            I’m not implying anything. I’m saying that since adding corn and millet to their diets, the Maasai have developed the first obesity their culture has ever known. You can extrapolate anything you like from that.
            I’m familiar with the EPIC-Oxford study, and though interesting, it suffers from the same issues as every other observational study– confounding variables. In a study where people’s food shopping habits were studied, it was found that people who shop in health food stores were equally as healthy, regardless of the diet type they chose, and healthier than the general population. What this suggests is that a person who is striving for better health through diet, usually finds it. These people also move more, drink and smoke less and have better overall lifestyle habits. Consider that most plant based followers are looking for health, right?  So you are taking a entire group of people who are TRYING to be healthier overall pretty much across the board and comparing them to “everyone else”, as if the mere eating of some animal food makes the quality of all of the remaining diets identical. The problem is though, it doesn’t. There is a MASSIVE difference between the SAD and a whole food omni diet, or a pesco-vegetarian diet.
            In cultures where people are vegan for religious reasons, they aren’t slimmer, healthier or longer lived, in fact, just the opposite. They aren’t even any less likely to develop insulin resistance or metabolic syndrome.
            So while it’s a good place to form a hypothesis for study, it isn’t a conclusion, it’s an observation. In order to conclude anything, we’ll need some controlled studies.

          • Toxins

            Where is your evidence that a vegan diet causes diabetes? Where is your evidence that whole corn and millet is implicated in causing obesity?
            http://nutritionfacts.org/videos/how-to-treat-diabetes/

          • Paleo Huntress

            Where is your evidence that that claim was made?

            Strawman.

            I will not respond to links posted as if they are a comment. If you have an argument, make it, and make it it your own words. Then cite the data that supports it. Anything else will be ignored. If you can’t be bothered to author your own argument, why should anyone waste any time on you?

          • Toxins

            I figured no evidence existed for your claim.

          • Paleo Huntress

            Why be childish, Toxins? I’ll provide evidence for any claim I made. What is the claim? Just copy and paste it here. Most of your posts involve copying and pasting other people’s work so this should be simple matter for you.

          • LemonTree

            Paleo Huntress,

            If you’re not implying anything (about corn and millet), I guess it’s just a random statement. As everyone is so fond of saying, correlation does not equal causation anyway.

            “Consider that most plant-based followers are looking for health, right?”
            I’ve found a few surveys online, and they indicate most vegetarians or vegans became that way primarily over concern for animals / animal rights. Health was also a motivating factor, but further down the line. This may explain the lousy diet of junk-food vegetarians and vegans. They are fulfilling their ethical “obligations” without paying much attention to what they’re eating.
            I think as time goes on, and the science on plant-based diets becomes more refined, the health statuses of health-conscious vegans will continue to improve.

          • Paleo Huntress

            Another thought about BMI, its a poor measure of body composition. It includes lean mass as well as fat mass. Considering that a muscular person would also have a higher BMI (I’m betting RWV would be considered obese by his BMI even though he’s below 10% body fat I think he said). Perhaps the study speaks as much to vegan muscle mass as it does fat. Who knows…

          • LemonTree

            BMI is not a perfect guideline (muscle vs. fat disparities, etc.), but it is still a usable guideline nonetheless.

          • Paleo Huntress

            Not brand new, but I just came across it in another forum I frequent and it’s worth repeating.

            In 2009 a national study of more than 136,000 people was published in the American Heart Journal. It compared cholesterol levels in heart attack victims. They found that nearly 75% of patients hospitalized for a heart attack had LDL levels below 130, and 50% had LDL levels below 100. (McDougall calls 90 “optimal”). Almost 18% had LDL levels below 70.

            More than half had HDL levels below 40 mg/dL. McDougall writes this about HDL- higher is better, but a healthy diet makes this fraction of total cholesterol lower because all fractions of cholesterol are reduced.”

            He says total cholesterol should be less than 150.

            If we look at the data again, we find that more than half of the people who had heart attacks had total cholesterol of less than 150 and near ideal LDL cholesterol by McDougall’s standards.

            So, if half the people having heart attacks have low cholesterol, how can high cholesterol possibly be the culprit?

            (Am Heart J 2009;157:111-7.e2)

          • LemonTree

            “If we look at the data again, we find that more than half of the people who had heart attacks had total cholesterol of less than 150 and near ideal LDL cholesterol by McDougall’s standards.”

            That statement flies in the face of the findings of the long-running Framingham Study, which demonstrated that people who had a total cholesterol of 150 or less were virtually heart attack proof.

        • Real World Vegan

          “According to John McDougall, MD, having a lower HDL is not uncommon, or undesirable, when your other values are also low.”

          tru or not, the other values werent all low. note the quote huntress shared,

          “VLDL [the MOST dangerous of the lipoproteins] levels were also elevated from this same comparative point of view.”

          their dangerous cholesterol levels were higher than people living in the us and eating the s.a.d. i take this to mean their good cholesterol was low and their bad cholesterol was high, i dont think that fits mcdougalls parameters.

          • LemonTree

            No it doesn’t fit Dr McDougall’s parameters, which are: It’s okay to have low HDL (lipoprotein carrier) if your LDL and total are also low. Its services aren’t as necessary.

            The high VLDL (I’m not sure what a “normal” range is) is cause for concern, but in the long run doesn’t seem to be an issue:

            “Previous observations indicate
            deaths from cardiac and circulatory
            complications are unknown.”

            “In addition, no hypertensive
            Tarahumara person was encountered
            and there appeared to be no rise of
            blood pressure with age.”

          • Real World Vegan

            i agree, it doesnt seem to be an issue. my angle is that cholesterol levels in general just arent an issue hi or lo.

            in your quote from mann. it says, “—but very few complicated lesions.” looks like they did look for artherogenesis and didnt find anything worth reporting.

          • LemonTree

            They seemed to focus on just the hearts and the aortae. It’s too bad they couldn’t have taken a better look at the condition of the whole vascular system.

  • mojo191

    The more I read the posts here, the more I’m struck by their eerie resemblance to posts one would see in a religious cult of “true believers”.

    Carry on folks… I wish you the best.

    • mike

      What exactly are you saying? There is no argument there. Time to go back to school. Logic 101 would be a good start.

      • mojo191

        It was just my way of bidding you all farewell… that wasn’t meant to be a logical statement… and, judging by your behavior, you’re no one fit to be schooling anyone.

        What I find most amusing about many of you, though, is how any statement or research study that goes against your egg-hating/cholesterol-hating “religious orthodoxy” provokes an angry/disdainful/rage-filled response, giving more and more credence to the research study which found that low serum cholesterol was correlated with significant aggressive tendencies. With time, we’re likely to also find out whether low serum cholesterol’s correlation with suicidal ideation and behavior is equally merited and valid.

        • BPCveg

          Perhaps you missed the ‘Sources Cited’ section, just below the video, which lists numerous scientific articles relating to the video and discussion…something you will never find in a “religious orthodoxy”.
          Nonetheless you ARE free to believe what you like.
          Happy trails mojo191…

    • Coacervate

      I think you might be referring to mine. I was trying to take the edge off the serious-ity by being over the top. I shouldn’t have written that. It really is about making choices as pointed out by “b” below. But why not stay, keep us honest, and keep contributing. As long as I’m able to keep learning something I will keep coming back. Educate me, I mean that. I mean, surely you must be interested else you would not have written in the first place.

  • HereHere

    Thanks for eggsposing the egg industry, as it really is. This is important information to have available on the Internet.

  • LynnCS

    Raised MY blood pressure with the big bleep! Couldn’t listen to the rest. Can we expect that in future posts? Let us know now! Thanks.

  • Eggcellent

    Eggs are good for you…don’t believe this hack.

  • Mary G.

    Oh bull hockey. I’ve eaten eggs all my life. I LOVE eggs. I have hens in my backyard and sometimes eat a half dozen eggs in a day (in season). My doctor tells me I have the heart of a 20 year old (I’m 52) and she envies me.

    Cholesterol is NOT the evil thing that it’s been made out to be. Studies are showing the consumed/ingested cholesterol has little or no effect on your body’s heart health. Read this: http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/healthscience/2012/October/Cholesterol-Myth-What-Really-Causes-Heart-Disease/

    Now, go buy some lovely free-range organic eggs and make yourself a nice supper! And YES, be sure to have lots of lovely GREENS to go with them. They make a fabulous combo. =)

    • kammue

      Just because you have the heart of a 20 year old doesn’t mean you have the arteries of a 20 year old. Have you ever had your blood drawn and gotten the labs done?

      • Real World Vegan

        it doesn’t guarantee it but a healthy heart is pretty indicative of healthy arteries. if the arteries were hardened or sclerotic, her heart would be enlarged from having to work harder.

  • Robyn Vanl

    I get my eggs right off the farm. I eat two if I feel like I’m low in Iron and it helps ! I don’t eat them regularly. I have heart issues so I eat a mainly vegetarian diet. I haven’t had any adverse side effects. What do you think about that?

  • Linda Colvin

    I have been reading a lot about the harm of statin drugs, and how cholesterol really is not the problem that causes our heat disease problems (see the first issue of What Drs. Don’t Tell you magazine). So I am wondering if free range yard eggs which has been in the human diet for thousands of years is really the culprit. Mind you factory farms where chickens live a miserable life, eat one feed, and are pumped full of antibiotics, etc. are very different eggs!

  • Dan Lundeen

    Re the cholesterol confusionist posts in the comment sections such as this one: That which is gratuitously asserted may be gratuitously denied of course. I just don’t get why folks with veins in their teeth post total nonsense about eating animals and animal products on a plant-leaning forum board. Does the meat/egg/dairy lobby have that much paid depth and desperation, or does grinding and suckling other animal species (including their parasites, pathogens, heme iron, saturated fat, cholesterol, Neu5Gc, PhIP, ILGF-1, TMAO, PCB’s, antibiotic residues, dioxin, cadmium, mercury, no fiber, low potassium, no phytonutrients etc.) have psychological effects? Why should we have any respect for the carnivore posters after toiling selflessly to respond to their crazy posts with numerous sources that they don’t even bother (or intend apparently) to check out? How does being trolled give any meaning to these comment threads?

    • b00mer

      Hey, at least it means you’ve really made it when the trolls show up right?

      If those dissenting bring sources with them (real sources; not their favorite blogger), I welcome them. Even if they do sometimes bring a little grumpiness to the table. Of course fewer of those nasties you mentioned and a higher intake of serotonin and dopamine from plants might also help them out…

    • Paleo Huntress

      Dan,

      “Those familiar with this site and who actually enjoy listening to Dr. G, however, know that most people will receive enormous health benefits by eating carbs from whole plants such as beans and dates (more sugar than jellybeans)”

      Pointing to Dr. Gregor’s own blog posts to evidentiate his claims is like trusting Pharma to test its own drugs. Bottom line, the preponderance of data to date shows that if you have metabolic disease or a tendency toward it (like more than 50% of the adults in the American culture), eating a diet high in carbohydrate will worsen it. As a whole food vegan who developed type II during my 2 years in that unfortunate mistake where chick peas were a big part of my diet, I don’t need a blog post to try and convince me otherwise– I’m living proof. =)

      Plus, a Taiwanese cohort showed that vegans were no less likely to develop metabolic disease than vegetarians or omnis.

      Asia Pac J Clin Nutr. 2011;20(3):404-10 “[T]he vegan diets did not decrease the risk of metabolic syndrome compared with pescovegetarian, lactovegetarian and nonvegetarian diets”

      • Dan Lundeen

        It’s not about you. Even in a population such as Taiwan with a very low incidence of ms to begin with the veg lactoveg and pescoveg cohorts in the study you cite still did better than the nonveg although not statistically significantly in the author’s opinion. This doesn’t refute numerous studies referenced on this site to the contrary. These are statistical data that will serve most readers well rather than to think that they are another exception fallacy.

        Have you looked into the possibility that you may have a gut dysbiosis? There is too much genetic diversity in the gut microbiome to find that particular nutrients or foods will have universal effects on all people across cultures. The second meal effect from beans.for example will depend on the presnce of the right bacteria in your gut to make the proprionates and butyrates. It’s way too complicated to say that wfpb fails because it didn’t work for one person with an unusual enterotype or other unusual medical condition.

        • Paleo Huntress

          It’s not about you.

          Given that you were criticizing the meat eaters in this thread, it very much IS about me. And FWIW, there are no “carnivores” here. That is yet another disingenuous inflammatory vegan label. A carnivore eats ONLY meat. My cat is a carnivore. I’m an evolutionary omnivore, as are you.

          “a population such as Taiwan with a very low incidence of ms to begin with”

          What is your evidence of this claim? In this study of over 6000 Taiwanese, researchers found, “a high prevalence of obesity and MS in Taiwan. The definitions of MS by the modified ATP III and MS-TW criteria were better able to detect high CVD risk than the MS-IDF(C) criteria.” Prevalence of obesity and metabolic syndrome in Taiwan | J Formos Med Assoc. 2006 Aug;105(8):626-35

          “although not statistically significant”

          There is a reason the term “statistical significance’ was created. it was to keep folks like you from attempting to redefine the data.

          “This doesn’t refute numerous studies referenced on this site to the contrary.”

          It does actually. Because these studiues aren’t done in cultures where health is NOT a factor for eating a vegan diet.

          “These are statistical data that will serve most readers well rather than to think that they are another exception fallacy.”

          Only those more interested in shoring up their religion than in learning the truth. You have to pay attention to the confounders… you just do.

          “Have you looked into the possibility that you may have a gut dysbiosis?

          Yes. Are you familiar with what a functional medicine doc does? Anyway… let’s just look at this for a moment logically. I am eating the SAME foods now. The VERY SAME FOODS, with the addition of pastured animal food. What are the chances that the dysbiosis would magically disappear because of that? That would suggest that animal foods correct gut dysbiosis. Hmmmm…

          “There is too much genetic diversity in the gut microbiome to find that particular nutrients or foods will have universal effects on all people across cultures.”

          Ding ding ding! Funny how vegans can only apply that logic when it comes to defending their religion but it magically disappears when looking at omni diets.

          “It’s way too complicated to say that wfpb fails because it didn’t work for one person with an unusual enterotype or other unusual medical condition.”

          First, I didn’t have an unusual medical condition, I had a very COMMON one, it’s called metabolic syndrome (more than 50% of American adults have some level of it). Second, please cite me making this claim–> “wfpb fails because it didn’t work for one person” If you can’t, it’s time to withdraw it, spend a few introspective minutes considering your bias and as such, your inability to read what is written, and then offer an apology for yet another straw man.

    • DNAistech

      I would contend there is no gratuitous assertion going on here. The simple reality is 70% of the population are hypo responders to cholesterol and the old data this video is based on simply is not relevant based on new research. See below. It’s easy to verify in numerous RECENT studies . I am neither a Paleo lover or a meat industry troll. The facts are the facts. The data simply does not support the “meat is bad, eggs are bad” contention. Most interesting, of the 13 dietary studies that have been done on indigenous populations, the net of all those studies is the diets of indigenous peoples is 64% red meat from grass fed animals, 33% carbohydrate from tubers, and the rest from nuts and plants. And these are some of the healthiest people in the world.

      Research on hypo/hyper responders here.

      A review of scientific research and recommendations regarding eggs.
      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15640512

      Effects of eggs on plasma lipoproteins in healthy populations
      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21776466

      Exploring the factors that affect blood cholesterol and heart disease risk: is dietary cholesterol as bad for you as history leads us to believe?
      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22983850

      Dietary cholesterol provided by eggs and plasma lipoproteins in healthy populations.
      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16340654

      Men classified as hypo- or hyperresponders to dietary cholesterol feeding exhibit differences in lipoprotein metabolism.
      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12672915

      • Paleo Huntress

        DNAistech,

        The data you shared is comprehensive but they simply don’t care. They follow religion, not science, and reading real data is heresy, and we are the blasphemers. Dr. Greger may “scour the research”, but he picks and chooses what he shares with his flock, ie: the stuff that supports his first passion, animal rights activism and the humane society.

        The upside is that for anyone who visits who’s still on the fence, the data you shared is likely to push them back into a place of common sense. The others will just have to wait until they become ill, to consider the full body of data, and in many cases, they’ll continue to destroy their health even after becoming ill because religion can’t be wrong.

        • Toxins

          I know of no evidence concluding that whole foods plant based vegans who supplement vitamin b12 and vitamin D become ill due to the quality of their diet. What part of the diet will cause ill effects? The deadly beans, whole grains and potatoes? The deadly cruciferous greens, and array of veggies? The deadly apples, berries and peaches? Or could it be the lack of empty calories from oils, or lack of the inflammatory and IGF-1 promoting animal products. Get over yourself paleo huntress.

        • DNAistech

          Well said. And that is really the heart of the issue – personal preferences cloaked as empiricism. In fact I don’t have any issue with people who have a preference for being vegans, I understand their reasons, and there are some valid research points supporting veganism over the typical western diet, but dressing up personal preferences as science and refusing to acknowledge any data to the contrary while using the authority of credentials to silence discussion is a wide spread issue that affects many sciences today and I have a problem with that.

      • Annoyed by Paleofraud

        Wow! Prevent and reverse heart disease just by eating eggs! Thanks for the info. Oh wait I have to get tested to see if their cholesterol is bad for me? And what about arachidonic acid, TMAO, methionine, pathogens etc?

  • DNAistech

    This is really dinosaur information of yesteryear. Recent research since about 2006 clearly shows that the issue with egg consumption has to do with cholesterol hypo responders and not the population in general. I notice all that data is conveniently left out. There is now abundant research demonstrating this fact and I don’t see any of that mentioned in the video. Doctors, hmm. how many hours of nutrition training do these guys get?

    • Paleo Huntress

      Not much…

      “[A] vast majority of medical schools still fail to meet the minimum recommended 25 hours of instruction.”

      Nutrition Education in U.S. Medical Schools: Latest Update of a National Survey | Academic Medicine: September 2010 – Volume 85 – Issue 9 – pp 1537-1542

      25 hours? 25 HOURS of education makes one an expert? Not hardly.

  • Veganrunner

    It’s amazing how passionate people are about their eggs! Thanks for the entertaining comment section.

  • Fred

    What about the consumption of egg whites alone?

    • Paleo Huntress

      Fred,

      Contrary to popular opinion over the last few decades, whole eggs are actually BETTER for us than egg whites. Not only is the lutein 200-300% more bioavailable than that found in greens or supplements (J. Nutr. August 1, 2004 vol. 134no. 8 1887-1893), but a study last year found that when eaten by people with metabolic syndrome, their cholesterol profiles and insulin sensitivity were significantly better than those who ate egg whites instead. (Metabolism | Volume 62, Issue 3 , Pages 400-410, March 2013)

      • Mike Quinoa

        Even if the lutein is 200-300% more bioavailable in eggs than that found in greens, greens contain astronomically more lutein. An egg has 353 micrograms per hundred grams, while raw kale has 39,550 micrograms per hundred grams. The kale wins out handily.

        • Paleo Huntress

          If you’d bothered to read the data in the study I cited, you’d see that clearly that didn’t matter as the folks eating the spinach (12,000 mcg/100 gram serving)– that’s 3 CUPS btw, and 12 TIMES as much lutein by measure) DIDN’T improve their serum lutein levels as much as those eating the eggs- in fact, only 1/3 as much.

          So to paraphrase, even though the spinach contains 12 times the amount of lutein as the eggs, eating the spinach only increased serum lutein 1/3 as much as the eggs.

          Eggs rule. =)

          • Mike Quinoa

            Your quoted study used eggs from chickens that were fed a lutein-enriched diet containing 5 times the amount of lutein found in conventional eggs. As well, raw kale contains 3 times as much lutein as raw spinach.
            All things being equal, if you pitted conventional kale against conventional eggs, then according to your paraphrased conclusion, kale would provide better lutein bioavailability.

          • Real World Vegan

            excuse the nit picking, but the amount contained has nothing to do with its bio availability. you could increase the content 100 fold and that wont change the bio availability at all.

            and maybe im different from other vegans but i cant eat kale. i like it and ive tried it prepared in every way imaginable and it just ravages my guts. i eat all other greens, just not kale. my wife cant eat it either and they stopped serving it at our monthly vegan meet and greet because it turned out that lots of people attending couldnt eat it without discomfort and it was being thrown out. obviously im not going to eat eggs, but for those who do, it seems they are far less upsetting to the digestion than kale may be.

          • Paleo Huntress

            RWV,

            Were we in a forum talking about kale once before?  I’d swear we were. I can’t usually eat it either even though I LOVE it. But not too long ago a paleo friend convinced me to try kale chips and it turned out that I have no issues with it that way. I coat it with rendered pastured bacon fat, but I’ll bet coconut oil would work really well too. I just wash, spin dry, toss well with a little of the fat, season and bake in a single layer at 300° until crisp. The finished chips are super thin and really delicious. Maybe this method could work for you too?

          • BPCveg

            Perhaps you and your new boyfriend, RWV, can share your preposterous version of the “truth” elsewhere. Happy trails..

          • Real World Vegan

            huntress, my wife and i tried your recipe for kale chips using coconut oil, garlic powder and a sprinkling of sea salt and they were phenom! no gut issues after eating them, tho it took 2 batches to get the cooking time right and you have to brush your teeth after eating them cuz the little particles get caught everywhere. still a major win for us. thanks.

          • Paleo Huntress

            lol I should have mentioned the particles! My boys say it’s like eating fish food because the finished chips are tissue paper thin like those flakes you feed fish. I’m glad they worked out.

          • Mike Quinoa

            “Excuse the nit picking, but the amount contained has nothing to do with its bio availability. you could increase the content 100 fold and that wont change the bio availability at all.”

            No, it won’t change the bio availability percentage, but when you initially have a lot more of something, it will definitely change the net amount absorbed (in other words, you will in fact get more of the nutrient in question).

          • Paleo Huntress

            While it’s reasonable to believe it may, there is no evidence that it does. For example, dairy contains significantly more calcium than most anything else and yet we know that extra dairy consumption doesn’t necessarily mean better calcium levels. There are many factors involved, bioavailability being one really significant one.

          • Mike Quinoa

            I like my kale raw, but apparently if you cook the kale on low heat, and then eat it with some fat, bioavailability is increased.

          • Paleo Huntress

            You are correct that when the greens are cooked that the lutien is more bioavailable. However, the greens were cooked in the study and it didn’t appear to change much, and they cooked both with and without oil. And I’m all for adding some fat, but for the wf/pb-no added fat/oils vegan, I don’t see that happening often.

            Eggs are actually better raw and already contain the necessary fat for absorption.

            It does make one wonder how primitive man got his lutein if he was plant-based, raw and added-fat-free. It wouldn’t make sense for him to bypass the perfect little egg powerhouse for more leaves. But a little mythology goes a long way.

          • Mike Quinoa

            Yeah, but in your quoted study the eggs were not even conventional eggs—they were lutein-enriched. There is sufficient native lutein, and zeaxanthin, found in greens. Primitive man would have done all right.
            A few nuts will provide the requisite fat to improve bioavailability.

          • Real World Vegan

            like i pointed out a few days ago, bio-availability has nothing to do with content. and it was only improved in the study when the greens were cooked with the fat. i guess you could grind nuts up and throw them in the cooking pot.

          • Mike Quinoa

            “like i pointed out a few days ago, bio-availability has nothing to do with content.”
            Percentage bio availibility, true; net nutrient absorption, not true.
            “No, it won’t change the bio availability percentage, but when you initially have a lot more of something, it will definitely change the net amount absorbed (in other words, you will in fact get more of the nutrient in question).”

      • Toxins

        Because something is high in calcium or is a high “complete” protein does not necessarily make this product a healthy food. This same example can be seen with eggs.

        Eggs are considered good sources of lutein and omega 3 as well as an excellent source of protein. For these reasons, they are considered health foods. Looking
        at these claims in detail, chickens have lutein due to the fact that they have a varietized feed, these nutrients are not inherent of eggs. Based on the nutrient data found on the USDA database, 10 grams of spinach has approximately 12 times more lutein then 10 grams of an egg. We cannot really consider eggs an appropriate source of this nutrient.

        https://www.ars.usda.gov/SP2UserFiles/Place/12354500/Data/SR25/nutrlist/sr25a338.pdf

        Regarding Omega 3, current levels of omega 3 in eggs are highly inadequate and one must consume around 30 eggs to reach an acceptable level of omega 3 for the day. A male needs around 1.6 grams of omega 3 per day, a
        female needs around 1.1 grams a day. A large egg contains about .037 grams of omega 3. Omega 3 in the ALA form processes to EPA which is also processed to DHA. These fats are anti-inflammatory. Omega 6
        processes down to arachadonic acid which is highly inflammatory. According to the National Cancer Institute, eggs are the number 2 top contributor of arachidonic acid in the American Diet.

        http://riskfactor.cancer.gov/diet/foodsources/fatty_acids/table4.html

        Based on this as well as the low omega 3 content of eggs, the benefits received from omega 3 are masked by the high quantity of preformed Arachidonic Acid. High intake of arachadonic acid is linked to autoimmune diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis, ulcerative colitis,
        as well as a clear link with cancer development.

        http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=20950616uid

        http://img2.tapuz.co.il/forums/1_156375095.pdf

        http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21139128

        Eggs have been associated with heart failure as noted here. “After 13.3 years of follow-up in this cohort of approximately 14,000 white and African-American men and women, greater intake of eggs and of high-fat
        dairy foods were both associated with greater risk of incident HF, whereas greater intake of whole-grain foods was associated with lower risk of incident HF. These associations were independent of demographic characteristics, lifestyle factors, prevalent CVD, diabetes,
        hypertension, and other food groups.”

        http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2650810/

        As well as an association type 2 diabetes with egg consumption of 1 egg a day. “Overall, the observed increased risk of type 2 diabetes with daily consumption of eggs in the current study raises the possibility
        of undesirable health effects with high rates of egg consumption and may help explain previously reported increased risk of CHD that was restricted to individuals with type 2 diabetes in the Health Professional Follow-up Study”

        http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2628696/?tool=pubmed

        In the Canadian Journal of Cardiology, David Spence (director of the stroke prevention/atherosclerosis research center and one of the worlds leading stroke experts), David Jenkins (the inventor of the glycemic
        index) and Jean Davignon (director of atherosclerosis research group) posted a review on eggs claiming that the egg industry has been downplaying the health risks of eggs through misleading advertisements.As soon as you eat one egg, you expose your body to several hours
        worth of oxidative stress, inflammation of ones arteries, endothelieum impairment (what keeps you blood running smoothly) and increases the susceptibility of LDL cholesterol to oxidize (beginning stages of heart
        disease). The authors go into great detail regarding dietary cholesterol and it is a very fascinating read indeed. The author’s final words “In our opinion, stopping egg consumption after a myocardial infarction or stroke would be like quitting smoking after lung cancer is diagnosed: a necessary act, but late.”

        http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2989358/

        http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9001684

        The egg industry has claimed that cholesterol from eggs is not important and does not raise cholesterol levels. The fundamental flaw in the study the egg industry has used to make this claim is that they measured fasting lipid levels at night and not levels through out the day after
        egg consumption. “Diet is not all about fasting lipids; it is mainly about the three-quarters of the day that we are in the nonfasting state.Fasting lipids can be thought of as a baseline; they show what the endothelium was exposed to for the last few hours of the night.”

        http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2989358/?tool=pubmed

        A single egg yolk contains approximately 215 to 275 mg of cholesterol. A safe upper limit can be capped at 200 mg if one is looking to prevent heart disease as recommended by the CDC as one of their nutritional recommendations as seen on page 92. One egg far exceeds this daily upper limit.

        http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hp2000/hp2k01.pdf

        The balance of science is clearly against even moderate egg consumption as this food is a packaged deal. We do not get the nutrients found in eggs without getting the cholesterol and saturated fat, arachidonic acid and other inflammatory factors. This similarity can be seen with chicken in terms of cholesterol and arachidonic acid

        http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/poultry-products/703/2

        as well as even the leanest beef containing an undesirable quantity of saturated fat as well as cholesterol and trans fat.

        http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/beef-products/3820/2

        “Tolerable upper intake levels (ULs) set by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) are important, in part because they are used for estimating the percentage of the population at potential risk of adverse effects from excessive nutrient intake. The IOM did not set ULs for trans fat, saturated fat, and cholesterol because any intake level above 0% of energy increased LDL cholesterol concentration and these three food components are unavoidable in ordinary diets.”

        http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21521229

        In terms of saturated fat, the link below displays the top food sources of cholesterol raising fat.

        http://riskfactor.cancer.gov/diet/foodsources/sat_fat/crf.html

        • Paleo Huntress

          I get the bulk of my O-3s from cold water fish. Why do I care about the O3 in eggs? The 03 in plant foods converts at about 10% efficiency. If your diet is very low fat, you quite literally cannot consume enough fat to convert adequate ideal O3 fatty acids. And since you mention it, the remainder of the vegetable sourced fat is mostly the inflammatory O6s. A diet without grains and legumes and WITH animal food removes the bulk of the O6s and provides superior O3 fatty acids.

          According to T. Colin Campbell, saturated animal fat is NOT associated with inflammation and disease, and plant fat is. I guess it all depends on your guru.

          And bottom line, people eat lots of eggs WITHOUT developing hypercholesterolemia, WITHOUT developing inflammation, WITHOUT developing disease. If eggs were the cause of these things, that would not be possible.

          • Toxins

            Many whole plant foods that are not nut sources (other than walnuts, flax and chia) have near 1:1 ratios of omega 3 and 6. Low fat does not equate to no fat. Whole plant foods have naturally occurring fat.

            The National Academy of Sciences does not recognize EPA and DHA as essential. This means there is enough evidence for them to conclude that we can make enough of it without eating it in its preformed state.

            “Interest in the cardiovascular protective effects of n–3 (omega-3) fatty acids has continued to evolve during the past 35 y since the original research describing the low cardiovascular event rate in Greenland Inuit was published by Dyerberg et al. Numerous in vitro experiments have shown that n–3 fatty acids may confer this benefit by several mechanisms: they are antiinflammatory, antithrombotic, and antiarrhythmic. The n–3 fatty acids that have received the most attention are those that are derived from a fish source; namely the longer-chain n–3 fatty acids eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA; 20:5n–3) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA; 22:6n–3). More limited data are available on the cardiovascular effects of n–3 fatty acids derived from plants such as a-linolenic acid (ALA; 18:3n–3). Observational data suggest that
            diets rich in EPA, DHA, or ALA do reduce cardiovascular events, including myocardial infarction and sudden cardiac death; however,
            randomized controlled trial data are somewhat less clear. Several recent meta-analyses have suggested that dietary supplementation with EPA and DHA does not provide additive cardiovascular protection beyond standard care, but the heterogeneity of included studies may reduce the
            validity of their conclusions. No data exist on the potential therapeutic benefit of EPA, DHA, or ALA supplementation on those individuals who already consume a vegetarian diet. Overall, there is
            insufficient evidence to recommend n–3 fatty acid supplementation for the purposes of cardiovascular protection; however, ongoing studies such as the Alpha Omega Trial may provide further information.

            Combined with the lack of convincing clinical data in favor of n–3 fatty acid supplementation for cardiovascular endpoints and the lack of data in those that consume a vegetarian diet, it is difficult to make the recommendation that vegetarians should consume fish to optimize their cardiovascular mortality.”

            http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/89/5/1597S.long

            Omega 3 sources from fish does not reduce inflammatory markers. This 12-week randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled intervention trial did not show that 1.5 g/day n-3 PUFA (fish oil) significantly affected the serum inflammatory response in healthy individuals, nor did patterns of inflammatory markers. Thus, a healthy middle-aged population may not benefit from fish oil as an anti-inflammatory agent.

            “If anything, there was a trend that allserum inflammatory markers tended to increase after fish oil supplementation, but this was not statistically significant. No marked differences in patterns of serum inflammatory markers between
            treatment groups were observed. Our results contribute to the body of evidence that, in studies with healthy individuals, generally no effects of n-3 PUFA supplementation on inflammatory markers were observed”

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19623203

            The inflammatory benefits may be nulled because of the PCB’s which contribute to negative cardiovascular events

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2430232/

            In fact, you cant even find pollutant free fish oil, as the distilling process does not even work. Similar levels of pcb’s were observed with distilled free fish oil as regular. Seeing that these pollutants accumulate in fat, and fish oil is 100% fat, you are basically drinking these toxins.

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19265383

            Since fish and fish oil are the top sources of DDT (a banned pesticide) and PCB’s i do not see the logic in claiming that getting omega 3 from fish is healthful

            http://www.efsa.europa.eu/de/scdocs/doc/1701.pdf

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19200125

            This recent study showed that the conversion rate in Vegans is 2x that of a fish-eater.

            “Comparison of the PLLC n23 PUFAs:DALA ratio between dietary-habit groups showed that it was 209% higher in vegan men and 184% higher in vegan women than in fish-eaters, was 14% higher in vegetarian men and 6% higher in vegetarian women than in fish-eaters, and was 17% and 18% higher in male and female meat-eaters, respectively, than in fish-eaters This suggests that the statistically estimated conversion may be higher in non-fish-eaters than in fish-eaters.”

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20861171

            In addition, another study showed that despise this “theoretical” low conversion rate, there is no evidence of any harm so, the problem may not be in the conversion rate, but in the assumption that it is low.

            “There is no evidence of adverse effects on health or cognitive function with lower DHA intake in vegetarians”

            “In the absence of convincing evidence for the deleterious effects resulting from the lack of DHA from the diet of vegetarians, it must be concluded that needs for omega-3 fatty acids can be met by dietary ALA. ”

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19500961

            Furthermore, I have no interest in the opinions of doctors, including Campbell if we do not have the evidence to back up these claims.

            You have a lack of understanding from what is termed “inflammation”. Inflammation does not refer to swelling of the body, it is low grade inflammation which can be attributed to every chronic disease and can be tracked by impaired arterial blood flow. Indeed, eggs as well as saturated fat from animal sources increase this low grade inflammation as the following evidence will show.

            Chronic low grade inflammation has been implicated in the development of chornic illnessess and diet is the primary cause of this inflammation. “Inflammation is a pathological condition underlying a number of diseases including cardiovascular diseases, cancer, and chronic inflammatory diseases. In addition, healthy, obese subjects also express markers of inflammation in their blood. Diet provides a variety of nutrients as well as non-nutritive bioactive constituents which modulate immunomodulatory and inflammatory processes. Epidemiological data suggest that dietary patterns strongly affect inflammatory processes.” Phytonutrients found in plants can regulate inflammitory markers in humans as explained in great detail here.

            http://193.146.160.29/gtb/sod/usu/$UBUG/repositorio/10300435_Watzl.pdf

            The effect of a single high fat meal has been known to impair endothelial function in ones artieries, possibly causing ones risk of LDL cholesterol to oxidize to increase significantly. “The high-fat meal (900 calories, 50 g of fat, 14 g of saturated fat, and 255 mg of cholesterol) consisted of an Egg McMuffin®, Sausage McMuffin®, 2 hash brown patties, and a noncaffeinated beverage (McDonald’s Corporation). The isocaloric low-fat meal (0 g of fat, 13 mg of cholesterol) consisted of Frosted Flakes® (Kellogg Company, Battle Creek, Michigan), skimmed milk, and orange juice. Lipoprotein and glucose determinations were repeated 2 and 4 hours after eating.” The effect of inflammation can be seen below, and lasts for several hours following ingestion. This amount of fat is not that uncommon for a meal in the current American diet, and constant consumption of eating these high fat foods results in chronic inflammation.

            http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002914996007606

            This inflammation can also be seen to occur in our lungs after a high fat meal. “These results demonstrate that a HFM, which leads to significant increases in total cholesterol, and especially triglycerides, increases exhaled NO. This suggests that a high-fat diet may contribute to chronic inflammatory diseases of the airway and lung.”

            Why is it that our body reacts in this way after a meal high in fat? It is an immune response to a percieved threat. It has been hypothesized that it is the animal protein itself that causes the body to become inflamed as theorized with Rheumatoid Arthritis in this case report of a women who ceased animal protein intake and recovered from her RA outbreaks.

            http://ncp.sagepub.com/content/25/1/90.extract

            Whipped cream caused a similar effect in inflammation. It was discovered that pre and post meal, endotoxins were found in the blood stream. Endotoxins are bacterial toxins that can trigger our immune system to become inflamed. This spike can be seen below after consumption of whipped cream.

            The question now is where are the endotoxins coming from. It was hypothesized that the bacteria from the gut was causing the endotoxemia.The saturated fat found in these animal products were acting as a pathway for the endotoxins to enter our blood stream. “Because the human gut is host to 100 trillion commensal organisms, which together contribute to an enteric reservoir of 1 g LPS (8), we hypothesized that most of the circulating endotoxin may derive from the gut and that a small amount of commensally derived LPS maycotransit with dietary fat from the gut after a high-fat meal, which thereby increases plasma endotoxin concentrations postprandially” This idea that saturated fat acts as a pathway out of our intestines is known as a leaky gut, as in the permeability of our intestines is increased after a high fat meal. “saturated fats also appear to increase the permeability of intestinal epithelium and contribute to the breakdown of the intestinal barrier.”

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2858203/pdf/zdc991.pdf

            http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/86/5/1286.full.pdf

            As seen in this study, “Subjects from the first group…were asked to ingest a 910-calorie HFHC meal (egg muffin and sausage muffin sandwiches and two hash browns, which contain 88 g carbohydrates, 51 g fat [33% saturated] and 34 g protein [carbohydrates 41%, protein 17%, and fat 42%]), while subjects from the second group (six males, BMI 22.8 0.6 kg/m2, mean age 31.2 1.1 years) were given an isocaloric meal rich in fruit and fiber consisting of oatmeal, milk, orange juice, raisins, peanut butter, and English muffin (carbohydrates 58%, protein 15%, and fat 27%)”

            After the high fat meal, endotoxin level significantly increased as seen below

            If the hypothesis that our own gut flora is
            causing the inflammation is correct, then we should see the spike in inflammation several hours later, as the large intestine is where the
            bacteria lie. A new hypothesis must come from this, as our own gut flora cannot be causing this inflammation. One might hypothesize that the endotoxins are coming from the food itself, and this is what we indeed find. “We therefore aimed to determine whether common foodstuffs may
            contain appreciable quantities of endotoxin or other similar agents that may be capable of eliciting innate immune activation of human monocytes….Forty extracts were therefore prepared from twenty-seven foodstuffs common to the Western diet, and the capacity of each to
            induce the secretion of IL-6 and TNF-α from human monocytes was measured and compared ” The capacity of these foods to cause white blood cells to secrete inflammatory signals was measured. The results are shown below.

            “These findings therefore suggest that apparently unspoiled foodstuffs may nevertheless contain at some point in their preparation or processing a sufficient microbial load to release TLR2 and TLR4 stimulants into their growth environment. This notion is supported by many previous studies showing that certain commonly consumed foodstuffs can contain a high bacterial load before cooking, such as fresh beef mince which has often been shown to contain approximately 105–107 colony forming units/g” It appears as though that the food itself contains the endotoxins, and any food exposed to bacteria, such as with fermentation, will have endotoxins. These endotoxins are resistant to heat as well as changes in ph typically found in the body as the bacteria no longer have to be alive for endotoxins to be present. ” LPS and BLP were found to be highly resistant to typical cooking times and temperatures, low pH and protease treatment. In conclusion, apparently unspoiled foodstuffs can contain large quantities of stimulants of TLR2 and TLR4, both of which may regulate their capacity to stimulate inflammatory signalling.” the authors finishing statements “Thus, it is tempting to speculate that the occasional ingestion of meals high in LPS and/or BLP could promote transient, mild, systemic inflammatory episodes that predispose subjects to the development of atherosclerosis and insulin resistance”

            http://journals.cambridge.org/action//displayFulltext?fromPage=online&type=6&fid=S0007114510003193&aid=7948514&next=true&jid=BJN&volumeId=105&issueId=01&next=Y#cjofig_fig4

            Citing again from the study previously mentioned titled Differential Effects of Cream, Glucose, and Orange Juice on Inflammation, Endotoxin, and the Expression of Toll-Like Receptor-4 and Suppressor of Cytokine Signaling-3 “Thus, saturated fats may have a more profound role in the pathogenesis of postprandial inflammation, as they may also perpetuate inflammation through the increases in LPS and TLR-4.”

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2858203/pdf/zdc991.pdf

            “The combined importance of dietary lipids and LPS in determining inflammatory risk may arise, since endotoxin has a strong affinity for chylomicrons (lipoproteins that transport dietary long-chain saturated fatty acids [SFAs] through the gut wall) as endotoxin crosses the gastrointestinal mucosa (23–25). As such, atherogenic and inflammatory risk may arise through a combination of dietary lipoprotein patterns and an increase in circulating endotoxin, exacerbated by feeding patterns (26,27). Therefore, altering the lipid profile through dietary intervention may reduce endotoxin and the arising inflammatory response…. Finally, while the most obvious solution to metabolic endotoxinemia appears to be to reduce saturated fat intake, the Western diet is not conducive to this mode of action, and it is difficult for patients to comply with this request”

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3263907/

            Saturated fat from animal products cause this inflammation and yes, eggs do indeed cause inflammation as well.

          • Paleo Huntress

            Whew! That was some INTENSE copying and pasting you did! (You know it’s plagiarism to pass someone else’s words off as your own, right?)

            For those that you credited, good on you for linking the source– but one has to wonder if you have any arguments of your OWN or if you’re just another repeater.

            Before I go to the trouble of shredding your evidence, do you have any that includes WHOLE FOOD? I see fish OIL supplements, I see fruit JUICE, I see Frosted Flakes <–(WTF?!)… but I don't see any whole food. I also don't count opinion articles as scientific "evidence", however if you wish to cite the original data the opinions are based on, and then use some of your own words to build an argument, that'll work.

            I have better things to do than debate with someone's Google-Fu.

          • Toxins

            The above is indeed copied and pasted, but only from a write up I did to keep this information handy. You will see the same information regarding eggs posted elsewhere on the website because yes, I have all of this information already written up privately for easy access. Most of the information regarding inflammation is available on this website. I don’t see how quoting studies counts as plagiarism. Using this as an argument is quite pathetic. You clearly have little understanding of nutrition and I assume you get your information from some book you read or a prized blogger. Your responses are also filled with degrading, “clever” remarks that show your immaturity and further reduces your credibility. You have not presented a shred of evidence that proves any of your points, and what you have shared has not been applicable or shares only half the story. Your evidence has continually been “this diet was not good for me, so it must be terrible for everyone”, that’s not how science works or is conducted. I will leave it up to the neutral visitors to decide who’s point is more valid. As for this “discussion” I have had with you if you wish to call it what, it has not gotten us anywhere. No new applicable information has been shared that I have not already seen before so I must go where the science goes and conclude that a whole foods plant based diet is indeed the most healthful diet currently.

          • Paleo Huntress

            “The above is indeed copied and pasted”

            Clearly. Heaven forbid you continue to think when you can rubber stamp the same static thought into different forums with no opportunity for growth or an open mind- and considering its you who is depending on a previously written text, something far more indicative of dependence on a blogger (like Dr. Greger), with no discernible ability to discus the topic fluidly, it is YOUR understanding of nutrition far more than mine that that reflects on.

            “but only from a write up I did to keep this information handy”

            Actually, THAT is a lie. There are also several uncredited segments without quotes that are copied and pasted word for word from other websites, not from study publications, but from opinion articles, including Dr. Greger’s, where you are passing off his words as your own but only only crediting the data and not him. This is easy to see when you paste them into google in quotes and the true source comes up strangely not “the Toxins”. Passing off someone else’s work as your own is pretty darn small but I hope you have sufficiently thanked him for putting into words the ideas that you clearly cannot form on your own.

            So is it safe to assume you don’t have any actual studies using whole food? The fact that you think that a McDonald’s meal evidentiates your claims about high fat meals is certainly in line with your seeming inability to differentiate between whole and processed foods. I’d hate to have to shred twice, so if you have any data on whole food, this is the time to flaunt it– because at the moment, I’m seriously underwhelmed by your schooling.

          • Real World Vegan

            ‘Many whole plant foods that are not nut sources have near 1:1 ratios of omega 3 and 6.’

            would you name some of the many? if you’re talking about greens and veggies, im with ya cuz thats what i eat. but if youre talking about whole grains and legumes, the staples of my former whole food vegan diet and what most of my vegan friends are eating, they have no ratios like that. brown rice has a ratio of 22:1 (O6:O3), whole wheat is 20:1, buckwheat is 12:1, tempeh is 21:1, tofu is 7:1, potatoes are 3:1, lima beans are 3:1, black beans 2:1.

            bear with me, my wife is contributing too. sockeye salmon has a ratio of 1:3.

            an egg and a cup of brown rice have the -same- fatty acid content and ratio but the rice has a little less protein. a person who cuts out grains and legumes from their omni diet is probably getting a similar fatty acid profile to a wfpb vegan who eats them.

          • Toxins

            Fruits and veggies are a different matter, and this is what I am referring to. The greens in particular are an especially rich source. Even so, adding a tablespoon of flaxseeds or a 1/4 cup of walnuts would suffice.

            Eggs are too rich in pre formed arachidonic acid to be used as a source of omega 3.

          • Real World Vegan

            didn’t huntress say she doesn’t eat eggs for O3?

            ‘I get the bulk of my O-3s from cold water fish. Why do I care about the O3 in eggs?’ ~paleo huntress

            i don’t think its about getting in enough O3 anyway, its about keeping O6 low. if youre gonna eat flax and walnuts instead of grains and beans that could work, but if youre still eating grains and beans it really doesn’t change anything to add flax and walnuts.

          • Susan

            I get the bulk of my Omega 3′s from plant foods –walnuts, blueberries and other yummy foods which I much prefer over animal proteins including cold water fish. My chosen omega 3′s do not contribute to inflammation and pain in my body. Eating wild salmon and cod, did and it raised by bad cholesterol just like eggs and the flesh of “grass fed” livestock.

    • Susan

      Eating egg whites kept my bad cholesterol high. Reducing inflammation and bad cholesterol is as simple as eating more healthy vegetables and a plant based diet with plant proteins. It worked for me.

      My brother is on drugs and his a stint because he could not keep clean and kept purchasing the toxic foods he grew up eating. I’ve changed my diet to vegan and have none of the health problems that plague him. I avoid all animal protein from dairy, eggs, fish and other meats.

      • Phaedra

        There are fat vegans, vegan drug addicts, vegans with high cholesterol, vegan diabetics, vegans with heart disease… the number of people with mental and emotional issues is higher in the vegan community than the omni community as well. How do you explain that?

        • beccadoggie10

          There are fatter meat and egg eaters, meat and egg drug addicts, meat and egg eaters with higher cholesterol who are also on drugs and have stints like my brother, and a myriad of people with mental and emotional issues in the animal eating community.

          I ate meat, dairy, though rarely eggs for 71 years was never a drug addict then or now. But I had high cholesterol. I did not have mental or emotional issues. After fracturing my spine due to osteoporosis, I chose to go vegan to reduce pain and inflammation rather than be injected with corticoid steroids every few months to reduce pain.
          Eating a healthy plant based diet worked. I lost 65 pounds, my bad cholesterol dropped from 300 to 100, other than having osteoporosis and continually fracturing bones, I feel great. I have no emotional and mental health issues.
          I can only speak for myself and those close to me.

          I would like to see the citations and studies that suggest what you have opinioned,

          If you are not interested in the plant based life style, why are you on this list?

        • Becca

          Show me your scientific studies or documentation!
          Not that I would change. I feel better avoiding eggs, and all my pain returned to my total knee and hip replacement and spinal injuries when I tried to eat meat. My body is telling me that although my mind misses the taste of eggs or meat. I don’t eat baked “goods” at home or outside the house.
          Now what don’t you know about how I choose to eat. I eat to AVOID PAIN AND INFLAMMATION avoiding deadly eggs prepared in any and all ways, and avoiding meat even though I have to prepare it for my helpless husband who even eats GMO ice cream instead of healthy food.
          I do not have heart disease, diabetes, hope my bad cholesterol has returned to 100. I have NO mental or emotional issues OTHER THAN YOU, who likes to read your own garbage.

  • Kocho

    What about egg white only?

  • Mark Shields

    What a load of chickenshit…to demonize one of the most healthy foods on the planet is absurd.

  • Real World Vegan

    i was pointed to the below trial in a comment at another forum and it seemed like this group could benefit from it as well. my bad if its already been posted and i missed it.

    researchers found that people who ate 3 whole eggs a day for 12 weeks dropped their small-LDL levels by 18% on average.

    High intake of cholesterol results in less atherogenic low-density lipoprotein particles in men and women independent of response classification. | Metabolism. 2004 Jun;53(6):823-30

  • dnunz619
    • Paleo Huntress

      Shhhhh… what does a PhD in Dietetics know about such things?!

  • M8

    Does anyone know what the health effects of egg whites? Are they as unhealthy as the whole egg?

  • Robert Bowen

    Hi Dr Michael Greger. I am registered with Discus on your Forum as BallyIrish.

    Whilst viewing your video on eggs, in the tobacco section, my AV screamed, and a huge banner saying B******t spread across your presentation! I am just mentioning it so you know that your site may be compromised.

    My Dad and Mom died of natural causes at 93, and 99 respectively, and as a child we five siblings (all still alive and old now) ate home-grown eggs almost every night, and very often we had boiled eggs for supper.

    These were eggs from hens who had 3 acres to roam about it in, and were fed on whole mealies (corn) every afternoon, when they all assembled at the fowl-run gate for their supper! These were pucker FREE RANGE EGGS. We also ate FREE RANGE chicken often, skin and all.

    I am 76 and have eaten eggs and chicken all my life, but only those sold as “free range.”

    Eggs have an astonishing amount of vitamins, but – here comes the buut: the way hens spend their lives in these highly intensive egg-producing wire cages disgusts me – hens too, are what they eat and how they live. It’s shamefully cruel and unhealthy. And what for? Filthy lucre. Eggs and chicken mass-produced in this way, I refuse to eat. (Of course, all our vegetables were home grown as well.)
    I agree with your video, in that consumers in general are in fact eating inferior eggs and chicken, that can only be unhealthy food the way they are produced.
    Best regards. BallyIrish

  • Melanie

    Hi Dr. Greger,

    I would like to know your insights about this meta-analysis release in january 2013? I’m a little bit confuse about this new information? Thanks

    http://www.bmj.com/content/346/bmj.e8539

    Egg consumption and risk of coronary heart disease and stroke: dose-response meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies
    BMJ 2013;346doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.e8539(Published 7 January 2013)Cite this as:BMJ2013;346:e8539

    • Toxins

      This video would benefit you greatly and clears up the confusion with studies like these.
      http://www.plantpositive.com/23-cholesterol-confusion-6-die/

    • Paleo Huntress

      That is one of the many studies Greger missed while “scouring the world’s nutrition research”. Don’t bother with the link offered, it is an opinion piece that goes after the opinions of others. As a thoughtful person you can understand the data yourself, unlike those who merely copy and paste.

      • Toxins

        And you understand the data yourself Laura? Lets not pretend that is true. All you have to share are off hand quotes.

        • Paleo Huntress

          I don’t know what Laura knows… but I DO know who spends his days posting links in blogs to other blogs posts. He does it so often that he saves time by saving the more lengthy compilations in Word, where he fails to credit the real authors, and then copies and pastes them into blog after blog.

          • Toxins

            Your credibility is infamous at nutritionfacts.org. I see you know your stuff. Creating 2 other false accounts of a vegan male body builder and an overweight freshman girl in college is something to be quite proud of.

          • Paleo Huntress

            Yeah, according to tech support at Disqus, for people who respond from email, there will be literally thousands of posts with the same IP address. When it comes to credibility, the mod who is publicly posting member’s IP addresses and personal email addresses really shouldn’t be throwing any stones.
            Bottom line though, Melanie… ignore the non sequitur BS here because it isn’t relevant to your question. if you stick to the data and avoid the opinion pieces, you’ll be golden. =)

    • http://nutritionfacts.org/ Michael Greger M.D.
      • Paleo Huntress

        How does this translate to a significantly increased risk for the general population?

        CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis suggests that egg consumption is not associated with the risk of CVD and cardiac mortality in the general population. However, egg consumption may be associated with an increased incidence of type 2 diabetes among the general population and CVD comorbidity among diabetic patients.

        It’s disingenuous to suggest this applies across the board rather than to a population that already has metabolic disease. This meta-analysis actually corroborates the one that Melanie cited.

  • Guy Zvi

    Hi, Is work out and hard work (for example as a construction worker) are “cleaning” the LDL etc? Are those poeple in less risk after having eggs and other cholesterol products?
    Thanks

  • Myro

    I am posting this as a serious question. If I ea

  • Veganwannabe

    Help! Just as I’m about to give up on eggs, an acquaintance who has
    kept up with dietary information through the years in order to feed her
    family in the healthiest possible way, claims that the whole cholesterol
    issue disappears if you take the eggs raw. For instance, she used to
    put raw eggs in a bowl and have her kids dip their pieces of uncooked
    broccoli. I have serious reservations on her position but would appreciate some backing…

    • Thea

      Veganwannabe: It’s my understanding that eating raw eggs is extremely dangerous from a food safety/salmonella, etc perspective. And since you can get all the nutrition you need without eating any egg (cooked or otherwise), why do it?

      Here is a summary of some of the known problems with eating eggs. The links take you to more of the videos about eggs on NutritionFacts.

      http://nutritionfacts.org/topics/eggs/

      You might also want to check out a great summary that takes up a good portion of this video:

      http://nutritionfacts.org/video/more-than-an-apple-a-day-preventing-our-most-common-diseases/

      That should give you all the backing you need! Good luck.

      • Paleo Huntress

        There isn’t a single documented occurrence of food-borne illness caused by eating a raw egg at home. ALL instances involve food-service and restaurants where contaminated food sits around in warmers for hours. The ideal way to eat your eggs is with the white cooked and the yolk mostly raw as in over easy or over medium, poached or soft boiled. This way, the white is most digestible and the lutein and b12 are most bio available and the cholesterol in the yolk is protected from oxidation.
        Skip Greger’s videos and review his source list. Note the conspicuous absence of whole food data.

  • Annie

    I found no evidence against eggs, with the exception of the AMA info, in this video. Am disappointed. I continue to be confused by the dietary cholesterol issue. There is research that indicates that dietary cholesterol intake is not the culprit, but high triglycerides and inflammation caused by foods like sugar, flours, etc. are the real problem. Seems Many people are eliminating these foods from their diet and so can’t they enjoy an egg or two for breakfast? I eat one or two for breakfast ( have my own chickens ) and my triglycerides are very low. I do not eat wheat, have only occasional whole grains, and very little to no added sugar in my diet. I do not avoid foods with cholesterol ( meat ) and eat plenty of vegetables and fruit every day.

    • Susan

      And who put that information out? The meat and egg industries?

      When I ate cold water wild fish as my only “meat” source, my cholesterol was still very high. The only way I could lower my cholesterol with diet was eating vegan. At the same time, I’m lowering the PCBs, dioxins, organochlorines pesticides and other chemicals that have built up at the top of the food chain.

      I’ve found that while I miss eating certain animal proteins, I don’t miss the pain from my spinal fractures which come back when I consume those foods.

      I began eating an anti-inflammation diet over 2 years ago to reduce the pain and inflammation in my body. And it works as long as I eat whole foods and healthy vegan.

  • Kar

    Anyone who seeks information on nutrition and health topics, opens a
    site on the internet and finds an expert who speaks .Just like in here.
    But there are many other sites on the internet in which, other doctors
    and experts speak often about the SAME topic but take the exact opposite
    position.On the one hand you have(for instance here) Dr.Gregger talking
    about eggs being very bad for your health and on the other hand you
    have an other doctorexpertscientist ,assurring you that eggs are GREAT
    for you. They are both doctors,experts, and they both refer to STUDIES
    to support what they say. WHAT on EARTH should you believe?
    You
    have 2 doctors,2 experts,1 topic and 2 contadictory positions.I don`t
    care who is who and obviously this is not a matter of preference “whom
    to believe“ ,just like it is in the case of “which football team to
    support“ ,but the above simple fact may make it difficult to decide
    what to do. ( specifically about eggs,I`ve seen at least 3 doctors
    speaking in favor of eggs, on you tube .It`d be useful to listen to each
    other`s take on the arguements of the other. )
    Maybe we could play
    the game “fact or fiction“ or put the names of the contradicting
    experts on a graph .Kidding of course :D .
    I`d like to read any commentsanswers on how to handle this dilemma and information.Thanks.

  • What?

    People have been eating eggs since the beginning of time … now all of a sudden they are bad for you?

  • Susan

    My father had cardiovascular disease due to something in his diet. And, looking back some 68 years, my mother, who did not eat eggs did not die from heart problems. Although, she pushed eggs on me. I gagged when forced to eat eggs sunny side up. And, once I my own, never ate eggs again.

    Recently, I had blood work for everything including cholesterol. My bad cholesterol was very low. The doctor was amazed, but said, I don’t know what you are doing, but keep doing it.

    My secret: Eating vegan–avoiding meat, dairy, and EGGS. My fingers tell me if I’ve eaten them because they become numb, which I attribute to the cholesterol, and the other poisons that have accumulated in animals products. In fact, with fractures from osteoporosis, which normally would cause a great deal of pain, are reasonably low pain as long as I don’t eat foods from animals. If I do, all the pain comes rushing back.

    • Phaedra

      When you stopped eating eggs, does that mean you stopped eating all baked goods that contain eggs as well? You stopped eating birthday cake, cheesecake, breakfast danish, French toast, ice cream, cookies, etc?  I’m guessing that the answer is no, which would mean you were still eating eggs, just not eggs alone.

      GAPS diet significantly lowers cholesterol and improves FMS- whole food, removes sugar, wheat and dairy, but contains meat, fish and eggs

      Paleo diet significantly lowers cholesterol and improves FMS- whole food, removes sugar, wheat and dairy, but contains meat, fish and eggs

      Alkaline Diet significantly lowers cholesterol and improves FMS- whole food, removes sugar, most wheat and dairy, but contains meat, fish and eggs

      Primal Diet significantly lowers cholesterol and improves FMS- whole food, removes sugar, wheat and dairy, but contains meat, fish and eggs

      AntiInflammatory Diet lowers cholesterol and improves FMS- whole food, removes sugar, most wheat and dairy, but contains meat, fish and eggs

      Do you notice any pattern here?

      Considering so many people lower their cholesterol and get relief from FMS while eating meat, fish and eggs, but when removing sugar, wheat and dairy, it would appear that it is the sugar wheat and dairy that are the common denominator and that your meat, fish and egg removal is merely incidental. The exception would be if you were particularly sensitive to sulfur, particular meats or types of fish, or if you are a cholesterol hyper-responder– in which case your dietary changes would help YOU, but wouldn’t apply to the population in general.  

      • Annoyed by Paleofraud
        • Phaedra

          You certainly can– obsessive veganism being one as well.

          But then, people eating the diets listed don’t just lose weight and lower cholesterol, they see reversal of disease and disease markers across the board. Your suggestions that any of the whole food diets listed are innately unhealthy is patently false.

          I’m not interested in “today’s vid”. Too many idealists building misconception on top of misconception because they quote someone, who quotes someone, who quotes someone else… and so on. If there are peer-reviewed RCTs, just cite them directly.

          • Annoyed by Paleofraud

            “Obsessive”? Implies bias. While there are unhealthy vegan diets this site advocates whole food plant based diets – its common sense to avoid the chronic poisons meat fish dairy eggs which have no nutrients you cant get from a healthier source without cruelty in an environmentally responsible way.
            Dr. Greger cites the latest research papers not from the paleobubble. There is a tab for the references.

          • Phaedra

            Annoyed by Paleofraud,

            What is the “paleobubble”?

            “Dr. Greger cites the latest research papers not from the paleobubble”

          • Annoyed by Paleofraud

            I take that back he does rip the paleo bubble a new one every now and again http://nutritionfacts.org/video/debunking-egg-industry-myths/

        • Phaedra

          What gives with the ID? You are so invested in expressing your disagreement with a diet that you make your whole identity here about that? Seems a little obsessive to me

          • Tommasina

            Phaedra, I think you already know that we don’t tolerate insults here. We’d love for this to be a safe, respectful place for everyone. Please take this into consideration when posting or we will have to delete your comments and/or ban you from commenting. Thanks!

          • Phaedra

            Fair enough, Tommasina, though in my defense, using “annoyed by paleo fraud” as your ID doesn’t seem like a very respectful action. It seems like a standing insult (it looks like he changed it from Dan Lundeen in mid-conversation specifically to insult a paleo member) and your forum appeared to tolerate that pretty well. I think the members of this forum would find it disrespectful and insulting if I chose. “Annoyed by vegan fraud” as an ID, and that calling someone a fraud trumps calling them obsessive, don’t you? Or does the insult not matter if the person originally being insulted has left the forum? If that’s the case, it doesn’t seem like a safe and respectful space at all.

      • beccadoggie10

        I STOPPED EATING PROCESSED FOODS YEARS AGO, including certified organic eggs. After 1996, and seeing what soy did to my daughter, I stopped purchasing soy ice cream, even when it claimed to be organic. About the same time, I stopped eating all forms of sugar, partially because I have had a weight problem, and partially because my blood cholesterol was very high and I did not want toxic drugs to wreck havoc on my body. So, I began eating beans and greens, which helped reduce my blood cholesterol as well as pain and inflammation in my body.

        In 2012, I fractured my spine for the first, but not the last time.. Not only did I avoid sugar, meat, fish, and eggs, wheat and dairy, but all corn products. I began following recommendations in the book by Neal Barnard, M.D., entitled Foods That Fight Pain. And, the pain just went away. Also, high cholesterol levels, my heart murmur disappeared and all the blood tests came out in the amazingly good to great range. But, I have a long way to go before I get fit with severe osteoporosis. I eat lots of veggies, fruit, some quinoa, and oats, a tiny bit of organic soy milk. My biggest problem is creating a colorful plate because I cannot stand long enough before all pain returns.
        My brother on the other hand, after returning from climbing the highest peaks on all the continents, including Mt Everest, reverted back to the heart damaging diet of his youth and was on the way to diabetes and heart disease. He crash dieted for climbing but did not change the way he ate and ended up with stints. My father had heart problems, but died of a rare brain cancer at age 56. My mother pushed my brother and I to eat eggs, liver, and other animal foods, but avoided them herself, feeding her portion to our dog, who also had similar health problems. My mother died of a dementia like disease, perhaps because she ignored my advice to her about pesticides. She lived on a golf course.
        I was very active my entire life until we moved to Louisiana in 1976. Now, my goal is to eat healthy in order to reduce pain and inflammation in my body, and to further reduce my girth without crashing. Eating healthy vegan is easier than reducing portion size of the wrong foods. And, I find that I love the taste of veggies without oils, but prepared with garlic, red onions, and other nourishing ingredients.

      • beccadoggie10

        I never ate most of the processed foods that you cite. For my entire married life, I always have cooked from scratch, have always been on a diet free of sugar, white flour, and other junk foods. And since the 1980′s, have eaten totally certified organic or lived without.

        As cited elsewhere, I became vegan when looking for and finding ways to reduce pain and inflammation caused by osteoporosis and several spinal fractures. Eating vegan without wheat, corn, eggs, dairy, fish, and other meat sources worked for me. And, while I have certified organic sugar in the house that was purchase 5 years ago, it has not been opened or used.
        I am now consuming sulfur because I eat one red onion per day, but I do not eat sugar of any form, wheat, or dairy, meat, fish (which is meat) or eggs in any way shape of form.
        I eat lots of dark leafy greens, broccoli, and a wide variety of certified organic healthy vegetables. The only potatoes I eat are sweet potatoes, once a week. Occasionally, I eat certified organic long grain brown rice with my beans, that I’ve stored in the freezer. But, I’m trying to eat an alkaline diet.
        I never ate sulfur rich foods prior to this year, but after trying to follow the diet by Joel Fuhrman, M.D., they are now becoming part of my life.

        • Phaedra

          Becca,

          What I’m trying to ascertaine is whether you’ve ever eaten the same diet WITH animal foods. It sounds like you cut out nightshades, grains and corn especially at the same time. (Like a vegetarian Paleolithic diet)

          • beccadoggie10

            I had eaten both organic and pesticide raised eggs. And both caused my bad cholesterol to rise significantly. The pesticide eggs were eaten from age 5 or 6 until age 54, when while in the hospital for a fractured hip, the hospital physician had my blood tested for the bad and total cholesterol levels. It was something like 300. He insisted that I take cholesterol lowering drugs immediately. I refused and instead opted to eat beans rather than fried chicken. The latter of which I did not eat anyway. Let me tell you, hospital food is horrible and unhealthy even if one makes requests. I requested fresh broccoli, steamed and received pressure cooked and mushy broccoli grown with toxic pesticides. It was inedible. So I had my husband bring my own which I steamed in the microwave in a glass casserole. It was just fork tender, still contained toxic economic poisons, but was edible after a fashion. The plain beans were gross. They needed onions, garlic, cumin and perhaps some hot peppers, as well as a tab bit of salt.
            Eating meat back in 2005-2011 made my joints hurt as well as my fingers, but I did not know the reason. Reading the book, Foods That Fight Pain by Neal Barnard, M.D. helped me enormously in 2012 after I fractured my lumbar spine the first time. I lost 65 pounds and the pain and inflammation just went away.
            There is nothing like being in severe pain to make someone stay with the diet. The neurosurgeon to whom I was sent wanted to inject the nerves in my spine with corticoid steroids every four months. I refused. That’s when I found Neal Barnard, M.D., and his book changed my life and way of eating.
            Whenever I think it’s been long enough and I try to eat meat again, all the pain comes rushing back within 8 hours just to reinforce that eating animal protein causing pain! I never knew I was allergic or sensitive to animal foods before, but a spinal fracture changed everything.
            Eat whatever you want, but let me warn you. All animal proteins cause pain and inflammation. All animals may drink water sprayed (drift) with Roundup and 2,4-D, as well as other highly poisonous herbicides and other pesticides, and receive fallout from other industrial chemicals and chemical bi-products like dioxins. They collect in the lipids (fat)of fish, the yolks of egg and other animal fats, and are concentrated in human infants from their mother’s (and perhaps father’s) diet, Perhaps, that is the reason some children are born with cancers.
            I trued cutting night shades, but they did not help as much as cutting out animal proteins! I never knew I was allergic to grains, but today with GMO grains and GMO field corn and some gmo fresh corn, I no longer eat corn. Organic corn was always hard to find, now it’s almost impossible because the Obama USDA allowed gmo corn and soy to be planted in National Wildlife Refuges across the USA. Where I live, I could not find anyone to help me locate and pull out the crops. They did not want to get involved. That’s why Louisiana is the dumping ground for the nation! Ignorance and apathy!

  • beccadoggie10

    ALL MEAT including wild fish, DAIRY, and EGGS have cholesterol, whether or not they are free range, pastured, and fed GMO corn and soy. The GMO corn and soy are fed to all livestock in the USA unless they were pasture raised. ALL FARMED FISH receive GMO corn and soy. In fact, even Memory Foam mattresses are made from herbicide intensive GMO soy, as well as some plastics, printing ink, and newspaper/magazine inks, which means they are just as toxic as those made from other petrochemical solvents!
    The plans are apparently to change the dna of everything on the planet so everyone and every animal will be unable to reproduce, the population will be greatly diminished, and cancers and other health damage greatly increased.
    If you think genetically modified foods are a good thing, read the clinical effects and side effects of genetically engineered biologics in pharmaceuticals.
    II refuse to go there, even though my osteoporosis is worsening. At least, the rest of my health is good.

  • JacquieRN

    It has come to our attention there are many statements in this post that are not in keeping with the desire for this community. Dr. Greger is kind enough to allow comments on all his posts so that we can continue our learning from each other. To keep this going, please read and follow his request:

    Per Dr. Greger: “We welcome vigorous debate of the science, but to make NutritionFacts.org a place where people feel comfortable posting without feeling attacked, we have no tolerance for ad hominem attacks or comments that are racist/misogynist/homophobic/vulgar or otherwise inappropriate. I’ve gotten sensitive to this after a physician who graciously donated his time to answer people’s questions stopped contributing because of the acrid atmosphere. So please, for everyone’s benefit, help me foster a community of mutual respect.” (Effective Feb 2104).

    At the time (Feb 2014) Dr. Greger did delete several comments as well as ban some users. Some of which previously commented below in this post.

    Due a change in the comment functionality software we can’t currently go back to last year to delete inappropriate comments.

    • Phaedra

      Fair enough, I can’t see them all, but with my first comment, I start getting a copy of every comment after that in my email so I see a lot of them, and I see what is allowed to remain.

      It is understandable that some of the old comments cannot be deleted, but surely Dr. Greger’s moderators have the ability to edit or delete their own comments? Discus allows even years-old comments to be edited or deleted by the author. If the policy has changed and those comments have been called out, should they not then be edited to reflect good faith?  It doesn’t give your “be nice” policy much tooth when the site’s own moderators have posted comments that are rude and/or disrespectful and let them stand even though they do have the ability to modify or delete them as users.

    • Annoyed by Paleofraud

      What if the banned user figures out how to just set up further Disqus aliases and return with the same drivel all over again?

  • JR

    Hi Doctor – You have me interersted in food science, and I am currently participating in an EdX course called Food For Thought Chem181x. In their section on Food and Heart Disease, the professors discussed eggs. They cited this article: http://journals.lww.com/co-clinicalnutrition/pages/articleviewer.aspx?year=2006&issue=01000&article=00004&type=abstract. They make the point that egg intake does not change blood cholesterol, and if it does, both HDL and LDL go up. What are your thoughts? Thanks.

  • olhg1

    It really is painful to see my wife and friends eat eggs and sausage gravy with buttered waffles every morning. No amount of reasoning seems to get to them, so I keep quiet and eat my oatmeal seasoned with piquante sauce, topped off with a banana.

    • JacquieRN

      That’s all you can do!

    • http://www.DonForresterMD.com/ Don Forrester MD

      It is painful to watch friends and family consuming unhealthy diets. The best way to support them is to lead by example. As Medical Director for EarthSave’s Meals for Health program it is not unusual for folks to start asking participants what they are doing when they are successful at reversing chronic conditions and losing weight. The best answer is to refer them to commercial free websites like NutritionFacts.org or websites by PCRM or Dr. John McDougall. At least those are the three that I find to be most helpful and reliable.

  • Eric Jackson

    I’m eager to find the valuable information and for me this is the right place to get the good stuff.medical negligence lawyer

  • Mary

    I don’t get it the heart foundation not the egg industry looked at long term studies on populations and found no link to heart disease hence the eggs are ok message. Nothing to do with egg marketers. I eat them every day we have our own chooks. I am healthy according to my doc, follow a meat eating no dairy no grain no legume eating regime. Cholesterol in the diet is irrelevant unless u have genetic cholesterodemia (sorry spelling) According to my nutritional biochemistry bible.

    • herbalist

      Wow what a rant this thread was.
      As a person who used to eat eggs regularly at one time all I can say is that extra cholesterol is not required by the human body. This extra cholesterol is required to be removed or it will become a problem. Cholesterol does form plaque build up in arterial walls in conjunction with sugar consumption.
      Since the vast majority of those eating the SAD diet consume enormous amounts of sugar they are all at serious risk. In addition, those consuming the paleo diet may consume sugar, white four products and so forth and are at risk.
      Furthermore, the body has ways of removing that extra cholesterol and forming gallstones are one such way that the body attempts to remove it.
      Thus eating extra cholesterol is not the best idea as it does come with a cost and that cost is your health. Cholesterol causes problems there is no question and it is relevant.
      As far as protein is concerned the USRDA is about 50 for men. Plant foods can easily make up this amount. Though because meat is devoid of many nutrients and are not a symbiotic package like plants are it is much more difficult for the human body to utilise the nutrients that are contained inside. Forget the difference between the two types of nutrients for now and the imbalanced state that they are found in. I fail to understand the point of arguing how much protein is in any such food since the idea is that variety of foods can supply the required amount.
      Plants contain various phytonutrients unlike meat and they assist each other by helping them be assimilated and utilised properly by the human body. Therefore because of this symbiotic relationship within plants and within the human body more nutrients are absorbed and they are more potent because of this relationship. In addition, to the relationship between various plants themselves.
      As such, plants contain a myriad of chemicals that have innumerable properties. These properties include; antioxidants, antiviral, antineoplastic and so forth. It is these properties that are contained within plants that protect one from the harmful individual components in the plant itself and from outside damage from toxins, water, air, junk foods, and even the damage associated with consumption of animal foods. Thus comparing plants to animal foods there is no contest.
      One type of food promotes health while preventing disease and the other requires more nutrition(plants) in order to offset the problems associated with its consumption.
      Ps the result of eating eggs daily for a few years resulted in gallstones for me and I do not suggest eating them on a regular basis as they are not a necessary for consumption. There is nothing in eggs that cannot be found in plant foods which are far superior. Now everyone is different and has different constitutions thus is may take longer for someone else to develop the same condition or it may take them less. Though extra cholesterol(more than what our body produces) is not required just like too much protein, grains, fats and so forth.

  • Lucy gray

    Waooow!!! Really very cool site of blogs. You can imagine what you have done for me.

    click here – ppiclaimshandler.org.uk

  • Le Sir

    eat the egg, wait for science to catch up. eat normal food, lift hard, learn to relax. you can’t do better. scienctists mostly study sick people, by sick I mean people who do not eat normal, lift hard, and learn to relax. Lets see what makes those people sick. It sure isn’t an egg.

    • Le Sir

      when i say normal I mean real foods, not food like products. eat happy animals that see sunshine and eat their natural diets. eat lots of vegetables. don’t overdo the carbs. keep away from as much artificial stuff as possible. eat fat, eat a lot. Take vitamin D. Pre world war two generations lived a long time eating meat greens and lard.

      I am not a doctor. But there are plenty of unhealthy people eating these “healthy” diets. Are they any better off?

  • JH

    I’m really frustrated right now. I openend scholar.google.nl to seek for “eggs and heart”. And I continue seeing studies with conclusions like:

    - “Higher consumption of eggs (up to one egg per day) is not associated with increased risk of coronary heart disease or stroke.” http://www.bmj.com/content/346/bmj.e8539.full

    - Conclusions We did not find a significant positive association between egg consumption and increased risk of mortality from CHD or stroke in the US population. These results corroborate the findings of previous studies. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1368980010001874

    - “Conclusions: No association between egg consumption and the incidence of CVD was found in this Mediterranean cohort.”
    http://www.nature.com/ejcn/journal/v65/n6/abs/ejcn201130a.html

    I’m not an egg advocate or something but feel frustrated about conflicting messages. I don’t have the authority at this point to judge all this information. I’m just left feeling frustrated about this. One party says: avoid eggs like the pest. The other says: eggs are ok. Can the true egg-conclusion please stand up.

    • Toxins

      I think these videos are most relevant to you.
      http://nutritionfacts.org/video/when-low-risk-means-high-risk/

      Also
      http://nutritionfacts.org/video/how-the-egg-board-designs-misleading-studies/
      http://nutritionfacts.org/video/eggs-and-arterial-function/

      And there are others. The studies you cited used food frequency questionnaires which are helpful, it must be stated though that it is not the most powerful assess of study. Several interventional studies as the two above have shown just exactly what eggs do to our arterial health. I think this would also be of interest to you
      http://plantpositive.com/23-cholesterol-confusion-6-die

      • https://disqus.com/disqus_NN9V6kLmhJ/ disqus_NN9V6kLmhJ

        Thanks Toxins. interesting stuff! I’ll look into that more. My username has changed in something weird… but I’m the “JH” who asked the question.

      • https://disqus.com/disqus_NN9V6kLmhJ/ disqus_NN9V6kLmhJ

        Ok nice points. I learned that measuring cholestrol levels of people who are already on a cholelestrol boosting diet, is not good way to conclude “eggs are ok”.

        However… people in a mediterranean cohort are not people with a high cholestrol and saturated fat intake? I don’t have access to http://www.nature.com/ejcn/journal/v65/n6/abs/ejcn201130a.html . So I’m not sure about that experiment mediterranean cohort study. But mediterranean diet does contain a lot of plants/fiber that could compensate for the cholestrol intake?

        • Toxins

          I don’t have access to the full text to really know. Keep in mind the current MED diet is not what it used to be. Regardless, the larger body of evidence points away from egg consumption, so despite a couple studies showing that eggs are neutral, the majority do not. Thus we must conclude that eggs are not healthful. As I stated before, we understand the mechanisms, and know what eggs do. We don’t need a food frequency questionnaire to determine the health of eggs. If you see the plant positive video in my last post to you (the last one) it discuses eggs in further detail and shows why some studies may show this.