Behind the Scenes at NutritionFacts.org

Behind the Scenes at NutritionFacts.org
5 (100%) 8 votes

How does Dr. Greger come up with his videos?

Discuss
Republish

Below is an approximation of this video’s audio content. To see any graphs, charts, graphics, images, and quotes to which Dr. Greger may be referring, watch the above video.

I’m often asked how long it takes me to come up with one of my daily videos.

Once the script is done, it doesn’t take more than like ten hours to create and record. It’s the research phase that takes the most time. I don’t think people understand how much work that takes; so, I wanted to kind of pull back the curtain, and give everyone a little sneak peek.

If you go to pubmed.gov, where you can access the database of the National Library of Medicine—the largest medical library in the world—you can search for topics like diet or nutrition, you’ll see that there’s about 100,000 papers published every year in the field of nutrition in the scientific medical literature. That’s more than 200 studies a day. I can’t read 200 studies a day, but 20 people could read 200 studies a day. That’s why I hired 19 researchers to help me plow through the literature—so you don’t have to. And, that’s in addition to an army of volunteers downloading and categorizing nearly 2,000 articles a week. I don’t want to miss a single important paper.

Then, the next step is to look for what I call anchor articles. These are the new studies around which I construct the videos. I’m looking for novelty, practicality, and engagement. Is it groundbreaking? If it’s just another study showing broccoli is good for you, unless there’s some new insight, it probably won’t make the cut.

Is it practical? I mean, is there some actionable information that can be used to make real world kitchen or grocery store decisions, right? Who cares if there’s some new whortleberry with medicinal properties, if it can only be foraged wild in the Siberian tundra or something?

And, finally, is there a way to make it interesting? That’s actually probably the greatest limiting factor. There’s lots of trailblazing new science, with hands-on implications—but, unless I can find a way to make it captivating, to add humor or intrigue, or solve some mystery, sadly, it just kind of goes by the wayside. That’s why we need like ten different sites like this; so, you know, I can just pass those papers along, and be like, “You try to make that interesting.”

Once I have the anchor, then the real work begins. I mean, just because something is published in the peer-reviewed medical literature doesn’t mean it’s true. There are studies funded by the National Confectioners Association that find that candy is just dandy. Studies covertly funded by Coca-Cola, or the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association. That doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a flawed study, but you have to give it that extra level of scrutiny. You always have to follow the money.

Then, you have to put the study in context. For all I know, that new study is some outlier or fluke. Maybe there’s ten other studies out there that showed the exact opposite. How else can we make life-or-death decisions for ourselves and our families, but by the best available balance of evidence? That’s why every new study needs to be placed into context. Easier said than done.

For example, let’s say this paper lands in my inbox, arguing that fish oil increases the risk of cancer. Now, I could just make a video about it, just laying out the facts: there was this paper published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal that presented evidence that taking fish oil increases the risk of cancer. Here’s the paper; here’s the link to download the paper; here’s all the evidence they present, in black and white, right in front of you; here’s their reasoning, their graphs, their charts, their diagrams. This is the peer-reviewed medical literature, people. Done.

No. That’s not good enough. That doesn’t answer the most important question of all: is it actually true? For all you know, we are just cherry picking studies to fit some agenda. It’s not enough for us to just stick to the peer-reviewed science. I want everything on NutritionFacts.org to reflect the best available balance of evidence.

Okay, so, how do I figure that out? Well, even if the arguments make sense, based on the evidence we’ve provided, we have to make sure we’re interpreting the evidence we cite correctly. To do that, we have to pull all the 76 sources we cite, to make sure we’re not misquoting anything. And, what if each of those 76 papers cite 76 other papers? And, even if we correctly cited those 76 papers, what about all the papers we didn’t cite? There have been more than 2,000 papers published on fish oil and cancer. And look, this paper was published back in 2013. What about the papers that have been published subsequently that cited this particular paper? And that’s just one paper, for one video, right?

You’ll be glad you did do your due diligence though, because then you’d realize: hey, that fish oil paper got retracted. Why? Because the researcher evidently failed to disclose he owned his own supplement company, which sold a competing oil supplement. Again, that doesn’t necessarily mean something’s amiss, but definitely requires additional scrutiny.

So, anyway, bottom line: ideally, we do a comprehensive search of available literature to place any particular paper in context—while also going backwards and forwards in time, checking all the sources they cite, and all the sources that cited them. And, we’d do that anytime a paper is published on nutrition, which, again, happens a mere hundred thousand times a year.  Now, hopefully, you can appreciate why we had to bring on 19 researchers.

How can we afford to do that, though?  I don’t take any salary or compensation. We have nearly 200 active volunteers who also donate their time, but we also have seven paid operations staff—tech, design, development, social media, volunteer coordination. How can we afford to pay two dozen salaries, plus the server costs, and everything else?  You!

NutritionFacts.org is a 501c3 nonprofit charity that exists exclusively on donations from individuals like you. It’s like a Wikipedia model of just accepting donations from users who appreciate the content, who appreciate what we’re doing.

We reach so many millions of people that if one in a thousand makes a small contribution, we’re able to continue to thrive. So, if you feel like my work has enriched your life, please consider supporting us by making a tax-deductible one-time—or, even better—monthly donation.

Regardless, even if you never give a penny, everything on the website is and will always be free, for all, for all time. There’s no members-only area where you can get additional lifesaving information—for a price. There are no advertisements of any kind. We don’t accept corporate sponsorships. The site is strictly non-commercial. There’s no line of Dr. Greger’s Brand Snake Oil Wonder Supplements. Even all the money I get from my books and DVDs all goes straight back into the site. It’s just a public service, for those hungry for evidence-based nutrition.

Please consider volunteering to help out on the site.

Videography courtesy of Grant Peacock

Below is an approximation of this video’s audio content. To see any graphs, charts, graphics, images, and quotes to which Dr. Greger may be referring, watch the above video.

I’m often asked how long it takes me to come up with one of my daily videos.

Once the script is done, it doesn’t take more than like ten hours to create and record. It’s the research phase that takes the most time. I don’t think people understand how much work that takes; so, I wanted to kind of pull back the curtain, and give everyone a little sneak peek.

If you go to pubmed.gov, where you can access the database of the National Library of Medicine—the largest medical library in the world—you can search for topics like diet or nutrition, you’ll see that there’s about 100,000 papers published every year in the field of nutrition in the scientific medical literature. That’s more than 200 studies a day. I can’t read 200 studies a day, but 20 people could read 200 studies a day. That’s why I hired 19 researchers to help me plow through the literature—so you don’t have to. And, that’s in addition to an army of volunteers downloading and categorizing nearly 2,000 articles a week. I don’t want to miss a single important paper.

Then, the next step is to look for what I call anchor articles. These are the new studies around which I construct the videos. I’m looking for novelty, practicality, and engagement. Is it groundbreaking? If it’s just another study showing broccoli is good for you, unless there’s some new insight, it probably won’t make the cut.

Is it practical? I mean, is there some actionable information that can be used to make real world kitchen or grocery store decisions, right? Who cares if there’s some new whortleberry with medicinal properties, if it can only be foraged wild in the Siberian tundra or something?

And, finally, is there a way to make it interesting? That’s actually probably the greatest limiting factor. There’s lots of trailblazing new science, with hands-on implications—but, unless I can find a way to make it captivating, to add humor or intrigue, or solve some mystery, sadly, it just kind of goes by the wayside. That’s why we need like ten different sites like this; so, you know, I can just pass those papers along, and be like, “You try to make that interesting.”

Once I have the anchor, then the real work begins. I mean, just because something is published in the peer-reviewed medical literature doesn’t mean it’s true. There are studies funded by the National Confectioners Association that find that candy is just dandy. Studies covertly funded by Coca-Cola, or the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association. That doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a flawed study, but you have to give it that extra level of scrutiny. You always have to follow the money.

Then, you have to put the study in context. For all I know, that new study is some outlier or fluke. Maybe there’s ten other studies out there that showed the exact opposite. How else can we make life-or-death decisions for ourselves and our families, but by the best available balance of evidence? That’s why every new study needs to be placed into context. Easier said than done.

For example, let’s say this paper lands in my inbox, arguing that fish oil increases the risk of cancer. Now, I could just make a video about it, just laying out the facts: there was this paper published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal that presented evidence that taking fish oil increases the risk of cancer. Here’s the paper; here’s the link to download the paper; here’s all the evidence they present, in black and white, right in front of you; here’s their reasoning, their graphs, their charts, their diagrams. This is the peer-reviewed medical literature, people. Done.

No. That’s not good enough. That doesn’t answer the most important question of all: is it actually true? For all you know, we are just cherry picking studies to fit some agenda. It’s not enough for us to just stick to the peer-reviewed science. I want everything on NutritionFacts.org to reflect the best available balance of evidence.

Okay, so, how do I figure that out? Well, even if the arguments make sense, based on the evidence we’ve provided, we have to make sure we’re interpreting the evidence we cite correctly. To do that, we have to pull all the 76 sources we cite, to make sure we’re not misquoting anything. And, what if each of those 76 papers cite 76 other papers? And, even if we correctly cited those 76 papers, what about all the papers we didn’t cite? There have been more than 2,000 papers published on fish oil and cancer. And look, this paper was published back in 2013. What about the papers that have been published subsequently that cited this particular paper? And that’s just one paper, for one video, right?

You’ll be glad you did do your due diligence though, because then you’d realize: hey, that fish oil paper got retracted. Why? Because the researcher evidently failed to disclose he owned his own supplement company, which sold a competing oil supplement. Again, that doesn’t necessarily mean something’s amiss, but definitely requires additional scrutiny.

So, anyway, bottom line: ideally, we do a comprehensive search of available literature to place any particular paper in context—while also going backwards and forwards in time, checking all the sources they cite, and all the sources that cited them. And, we’d do that anytime a paper is published on nutrition, which, again, happens a mere hundred thousand times a year.  Now, hopefully, you can appreciate why we had to bring on 19 researchers.

How can we afford to do that, though?  I don’t take any salary or compensation. We have nearly 200 active volunteers who also donate their time, but we also have seven paid operations staff—tech, design, development, social media, volunteer coordination. How can we afford to pay two dozen salaries, plus the server costs, and everything else?  You!

NutritionFacts.org is a 501c3 nonprofit charity that exists exclusively on donations from individuals like you. It’s like a Wikipedia model of just accepting donations from users who appreciate the content, who appreciate what we’re doing.

We reach so many millions of people that if one in a thousand makes a small contribution, we’re able to continue to thrive. So, if you feel like my work has enriched your life, please consider supporting us by making a tax-deductible one-time—or, even better—monthly donation.

Regardless, even if you never give a penny, everything on the website is and will always be free, for all, for all time. There’s no members-only area where you can get additional lifesaving information—for a price. There are no advertisements of any kind. We don’t accept corporate sponsorships. The site is strictly non-commercial. There’s no line of Dr. Greger’s Brand Snake Oil Wonder Supplements. Even all the money I get from my books and DVDs all goes straight back into the site. It’s just a public service, for those hungry for evidence-based nutrition.

Please consider volunteering to help out on the site.

Videography courtesy of Grant Peacock

Doctor's Note

If NutritionFacts.org has helped your or your family in any way, and you’d like to do your part to keep the site going strong, please consider joining the thousands of individuals who support this important work, and make a donation.

This video is part of an experiment to find ways to appeal to those new to the site. So much of what I do is targeted towards those who already know the basics, but in the user survey about a thousand of you filled out a few weeks ago, many of you asked for me to take a step back, and do some videos targeted more towards those new to evidence-based nutrition.

So, with the volunteer help of videographer Grant Peacock, I came up with ten introductory and overview-type videos for both new users to orient themselves, and for long-time users to use, to introduce people to the site.

The first four are already up:

Stay tuned for:

What we’re going to do is alternate between these broader overview-type videos, and the regularly scheduled content—so as not to bore those who just crave the latest science.

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

181 responses to “Behind the Scenes at NutritionFacts.org

Commenting Etiquette

The intention of the comment section under each video and blog post is to allow all members to share their stories, questions, and feedback with others in a welcoming, engaging, and respectful environment. Off-topic comments are permitted, in hopes more experienced users may be able to point them to more relevant videos that may answer their questions. Vigorous debate of science is welcome so long as participants can disagree respectfully. Advertising products or services is not permitted.

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. Please help us to foster a community of mutual respect. Enforcement of these rules is done to the best of our ability on a case-by-case basis.

  1. Danke!!!! Ein wichtiges Video! Ich habe schon oft nutritionfacts.org an Freunde empfohlen. Die Rückfrage war immer: Ist denn das Seriös? Endlich kann ich meine Freunde auf ein Video verweisen das zeigt: 100%ig seriös! +lebensrettend + wichtig + aufklärend =)))) DANKE! <3<3<3<3<3<3 Und ja, ich habe auch etwas gespendet. Leider ist es nicht viel aber es ist mir wichtig. – Sorry, with translator: Thank you!!!! An important video! I have often nutritionfacts.org recommended to friends. The inquiry has always been: Is there the serious? I can finally my friends refer to a video that shows: 100% trustworthy! + Lifesaving + important + enlightening =)))) THANK YOU! <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 And yes, I also make a Donation. Unfortunately, it's not much but it is important to me to give something back




    1



    0
    1. Hallo Ina,PBWF
      Ich bin ebenfalls ein eifriger Nutzer von nutritionfacts.org und freue mich endlich mal einen “Landsmann” hier zu treffen, bislang hatte ich immer das Gefühl ich bin der Einzige. Ich bin Heilpraktiker und seit über 5 Jahren nun schon vollwertig, rein pfalnzen-basiert und fettarm unterwegs. leider kennt keiner meiner Kollegen auch nur Ansatzweise diese Seite, geschweige denn empfiehlt diese gesunde Art der Ernährung – selbst mi Veganern habe ich keine guten Erfahrungen gemcht, was das Wissen über gesunde Ernährung betrifft.
      Viel Spass und gute Erkenntnisse wünsche ich die weiterhin mit der Seite – vielleicht “treffen” wir uns ja mal im Chat zu einem Thema wieder. ;-)
      Sorry for no translation the whole words, I just daid “HELLO” to InaPBWF ;-)




      0



      0
  2. I really enjoyed this video. I love to see the process behind the result! I think the reason this website is so popular and so valuable is because of the dedication to determining “is this actually true.” I trust this information. The information is educational, relative, interesting and because of Dr Greger’s keen wit, it is entertaining!




    1



    0
  3. So what does Dr Greger live on if he donates his time and the proceeds from his books? That is certainly gracious and generous and also helps inspire confidence in the site. Thank you for your dedication and commitment, and for the obviously talented and hard working staff.




    0



    0
    1. David Meyer: Dr. Greger explains on the FAQ page of this site that he “has a day job.” In other words, Dr. Greger has a salaried job and does all this other stuff as his volunteer work. You can read more on the FAQ page if you are interested. :-)




      1



      0
      1. I had exactly the same question! Thanks for the answer.

        From the FAQ: He’s got a day job! Dr. Greger proudly serves as the public health director for the Humane Society of the United States.

        I don’t know where he gets the time – I suspect he probably has a cot in a back office of NutritionFacts.org.




        1



        0
      2. I really think he deserves to be paid for his diligence and excellent work. I will donate. Not sure how he can do a day job AND keep his wonderful site going AND write multiple books. Even if he doesn’t need tons of sleep, he still needs *some*!




        0



        0
        1. pgyx: Thank you for your support! Supporting the site is all the compensation Dr. Greger wants for this effort. As a huge fan of this work, I also appreciate your support.
          .
          The reason Dr. Greger is so careful to avoid compensation around educating people is that he wants to be 100% in the clear in terms of conflicts of interest. Dr. Greger is not telling us on one page to buy say B12 and then on another page selling B12. When Dr. Greger recommends B12, he gets no financial benefit from doing so. For me, the lack of conflict of interest provides an added level of trust for the information on this site.




          1



          0
    2. And that doesn’t count the fact that he’s given (I believe) over 1000 talks and lectures, travels frequently, and has a family. I don’t believe he sleeps.




      0



      0
  4. Gosh, I was expecting to see the room in the basement of some university with those 19 researchers sitting around the room studying their computer monitors and taking notes on yellow notepads with mechanical pencils.




    0



    0
  5. Thank you Dr. Gregor for making a video like this. You wouldn’t believe how many people refuse to believe anything I link them to on this site because “that’s a crazy vegan conspiracy theory site that cherry picks evidence”. Only their favorite blogger knows the “truth”, and will share it for a price available to special members only… ‘donations’ can be made in the same section where you can buy the 50+ lifesaving supplements that they endorse.




    0



    0
  6. Still looking off camera Dr. Greger. Whoever told you to do that should be fired. If you tuned in to Lester Holt on NBC Nightly News, and as he was delivering the news he was looking off to the side, what would you think? You’d think he was drunk. Look straight into the camera please and maintain eye contact with your audience.




    0



    2
    1. Dr. G – Just for the record, . . and although I, as a viewer, do not see what Skipper Martin is talking about. . . even if you were somehow looking a tad bit off to the side making your audience feel uncomfortable (which I do not), let me say that I could deal with that just fine. After all, . .I’m here to hear your very excellent information and appreciate your very excellent dedication to MY health for which I thank you so very much. Less than perfect eye contact is not seen by me. Great, excellent, work that you do on my behalf is (and I have done research, . I KNOW how much work it is). Thank you ever so much and I just love your eye contact as well as your work.
      Big, big heart to you.




      2



      0
    2. Is that really important?… I was so mis-led… I believed that the information that Dr. Greger transmits .. was the reason I was listening/watching…
      He could wear a brown paper bag over his head with eye-holes cut in it.. (like the IRS employees testifying for congress did back in 1997).. and the information is STILL getting out there and that is the reason most folks watch the videos.




      1



      0
      1. Obviously the content being provided is highly valuable. What not deliver it as professionally as possible? Again my question: if Jake Tapper or Lester Holt delivered the news and looked away while doing it — you wouldn’t think something went haywire with the broadcast? It would look ridiculous. Whoever is producing these videos is telling Dr. G. that this is a good idea when in fact it’s just stupid.




        0



        0
        1. The two camera angles make it easier to edit – maybe they should go for one camera shooting desk, and more background, and the other, same angle, a close up of Dr Geger’s face – then the few who find the change in camera angle disconcerting might have an easier time….




          0



          0
          1. Seriously… He clearly needs donations to keep going and probably doesn’t know when or how much will come in for any given month. He probably tries to keep cost down as he wants to keep going… So I would imagine he tries to keep cost low and look professional. I think you guys nit pick and miss the point of what he says. And who are you guys to say he isn’t having an off day or stressed or other issues. It wasn’t very noticeable and the person who truly wants to get healthier doesn’t care. I like reading the comments but these are rude and annoying. If you don’t have something valuable to say or nice than you shouldn’t say it. Would you rather he quit the videos cus he doesn’t feel they are appreciated or he can’t afford them to be to your liking. You should volunteer or donate if it makes you that unhappy and make a difference than nit pick.




            1



            0
        2. No cus those are paid networks and this is a man that does the videos as a “labor of love”. Maybe if he gets enough donations he too can be on network tv with an expensive camera guy. Seriously that’s what you guys take away from the video is his glaze and not his info. Why not donate so he can get a more expensive style.




          1



          0
    3. Seriously? That’s what you took away from the video. Maybe their isn’t a camera guy to tell him he isn’t looking at the camera or he feels awkward asking for donations. I noticed it was a little off but it didn’t take away from the video or message and didn’t bother me.




      1



      0
    4. I agree that the cuts with our MAN looking off to the side don’t work too well. How about a less extreme angle shot? In any case, I am surprised at the fuss this comment has created. It is just not a big deal. I doubt that Skipper missed the message and I believe he was trying to improve the video style. Using words like stupid and fired seemed to fire up our gang that appreciates a friendly and courteous comment style. Feedback can be so useful, I think we should encourage it and keep it in a friendly tone. For the record, I am a public speaker and TV guest with 30 years of experience of attending lectures and learning from them to improve my delivery. If only I could speak 1/10th as well and as entertainingly as Dr. Greger! I think he is tops!




      1



      0
      1. Thanks for your comments Gayle. This is becoming a common occurrence in video production recently and as a former producer myself it just annoys me to no end. It’s a misguided attempt to offset the dreaded “talking head” in videos but the proper way to do that is with cut away shots. The only time you take a side shot of a subject is when it has already been established that he/she is speaking to an interviewer. My frustration was certainly not with Dr. Greger who is clearly providing an excellent service. It was with those in the video production business trying to be too cute instead of just sticking with the basics.




        0



        0
        1. It bothered me a lot too, Skipper. But I was more bothered by on the over reaction to your comments! BTW For 30 years I have been on many hundreds of TV shows here and in Europe. So I have developed my own amateur tastes in shots! If you are still doing or coaching video producers, I have a wish: I would love to see a show or video cast that is hosted by one or two people seated at a luscious dinner table with no plates of plain raw veggies, but a lovely setting with sumptuous dishes that would attract those who think vegans only eat raw veggies from baskets. Then have them invite to dinner people in the field for conversation a la Meeting of Minds show with Steve Allen in the 80s! Did you know that Torino, the 6th largest city in Italy has a new Mayor who has declared Turin the world’s first Vegan/Vegetarian city? More a goal than a current reality, but very interesting and I hope you will invite her to your first show dinner! (I’ll translate!)




          1



          0
        2. I agree Skipper. But then I imagine the videographers here might be new to the activity and might not even be paid, but do it for love. I certainly would if I could! I was going to do a regular video cast in my field of dreams, but a year’s reading showed me how much there is to learn about even simple video pieces.




          1



          0
  7. I believe one place that you can donate to NutritionFacts.org is at smile.amazon.com. Use that as your URL and you will be able to select a charitable organization such as NutritionFacts.org. When you purchase items on Amazon using smile.amazon.com a portion of your payment will be given to NutritionFacts.com. It will not cost you anything extra for your item.




    1



    0
    1. I just switched my smile.amazon.com charity to Nutritionfacts.org. Thank you, Michael Cykana as I had no idea that nutritionfacts was one of the charities you could select through amazon.




      0



      0
    2. Hi. I had a hard time finding this at first, but if others are interested, when you “change your charity” under your account, type in nutrition facts org… three words, no “dot.” It said it is based in Tacoma Park MD…I”m assuming this is it and not a copycat charity with a similar name.




      0



      0
  8. Thanks for your dedication and all you do, amazing! It just really gets my proverbial goat that the standards for submitting studies are so pathetically low that it should be criminal in many cases. You shouldn’t have to work so damn hard to just gather facts, instead having to spend so much time weeding out the BS and agendas. It’s gotten to the point where most people seem to trust personal anecdotes more than the “science” that gets reported because it is so inconsistent and confusing. Thanks to the internet the WFPB movement is finally picking up speed, despite the many years it was a proven fact and being advocated by many drs. it was pretty much buried. With people like you taking advantage of this media, educating us and changing lives, we advertise the truth for others to see, so it comes full circle. Kudos!




    0



    0
    1. Use some nuts, seeds and avocado to get your calories from fat into the 20-30% range. You should have no drop in testosterone at those levels. Below 20% it’s possible for some men to experience a drop in testosterone




      0



      0
    2. Slick Willy: nc54 makes a great point. Plant foods come in all sorts of macro nutrient percentages. If you want to add more fat in your diet, you can also include traditional soy products like tofu which are relatively high fat (compared to other beans).
      .
      Also, while Dr. Greger has not done a series on testosterone, he has touched on the subject: http://nutritionfacts.org/?fwp_search=testosterone&fwp_content_type=video FYI: that link is to videos. There is a search error on this site where if you click to show the post also, you get back zero results. But maybe you can find those posts (worth it because I know there is at least one really good one I think you will like) another way.
      .
      Good luck!




      0



      0
  9. Thank you so much for explaining what’s behind the scenes. I had no idea. And I agree with others who have expressed dismay that the standards for publishing research have fallen so low, and that institutions publishing are either beholden to researchers who make big donations or just don’t care if their publications reflect truth or someone’s agenda.




    0



    0
  10. I look forward to the introductory videos summarizing key information. I think this will make it much easier for people to work their way into a topic and learn the essentials. Great idea!




    0



    0
  11. It’s fantastic to hear what the donations go towards, I hadn’t known previously! NutritionFacts has improved my life more than like 90% of other things I spend more than $10 on per month. Very happy to support this initiative.




    0



    0
  12. Thank you for being transparent about your process. I’ll be forwarding this to a research doctor who has been pummeling me with justification questions.




    0



    0
  13. Dr. Gregor is NOT being transparent!!! He should fully disclose with each video that he is an “ANIMAL RIGHTS ACTIVIST” who’s agenda is to get you to stop eating animals!!! Dr. Gregor’s day job is as the public health director for the Humane Society of the United States.




    0



    0
      1. He does not properly disclose his day job as a MAJOR CONFLICT OF INTEREST. I thinkd that his hidden agenda as a covert ANIMALRIGHTS ACTVIST is to interpret the facts to get you to stop eating his beloved animals.
        For example, he chooses to report that his Grandmother was saved by eating a plant based Pritikin Diet. However, he doesn’t say that Nathan Pritikin, the creator of the Pritikin Diet, committed suicide with untreatable leukemia.




        0



        0
        1. “he doesn’t say that Nathan Pritikin, the creator of the Pritikin Diet, committed suicide with untreatable leukemia”
          How could that ever be a conflict of interest? That makes absolutely no sense.




          0



          0
            1. The Humane Society of the United States is an “animal protection” organization not an animal rights organization. Big difference. I bet there are plenty of people at that large organization that eat meat while also feeling strongly that the meat they eat is treated without abuse while they, as animals, are alive and are also killed humanely.
              And even if he DID have an agenda to get people to eat less or no meat. . .. so what? Everyone has agendas in life, . . things they would like to do or see happen or wishes and desires. So what? Greger has ALWAYS made it clear that if you want to eat meat . . .feel free . . it’s YOUR body and you have the right to do with it as you choose. But he feels strongly that you ALSO have the right to good scientific timely information about that choice. Same thing with smoking. I think you have misinterpreted his agenda. His agenda ACTUALLY is “Make your own choice, but here’s some information to consider”. THAT’S his agenda. And, btw, he makes that clear in many of his videos. No hidden heeby-jeeby in the message.




              0



              0
              1. The hidden “heeby-jeeby” is that he neglects to say that he is paid to protect animals. He likes to say “follow the money.” It was only today that I figured out who actually pays him.




                0



                0
                1. Dr. Greger is a physician. As a physician one is paid to advise and treat medical issues in his role as Medical Director. If you only found out today that he works for the Humane Society then you have been derelict in your own fact-finding as Dr. g has always made is work and interests known on this website, in plain site.. You have no one to blame but yourself. As a physician, your role is to treat and protect whomever you are treating and that is their Hypocratic Oath as a physician which is also a legal oath in this country. Why does that come as a surprise to you – don’t you know what doctors do and their legal requirements?
                  And, again, the Humane Society is a protection organization . . to protect its charges. It is not an activist organization. PETA is an example of an activist organization. You clearly do not understand the difference.

                  I think you just like to argue for the sake of arguing. you clearly aren’t interested in learning the facts of the matter.




                  0



                  0
                2. Gusto. He separates both entities. Like the above comment mentions he’s not making vids about B12 and then selling it on the same website. He works for the HSUS as a clinical director . He is not a salesman of any kind. The money he makes from his salary of the HSUS is not determined by the exposure and traffic he gets on Nutritionfacts.org.

                  And calling animal rights an agenda is pretty messed up if you ask me. What’s wrong with the strong protecting the weak? Can you answer that question?..




                  0



                  0
                  1. I think that the Humane Society would Fire him if he reported the real science that you could get your B12 naturally by eating beef liver twice a month. Instead he has to say to get your B12 from the synthetic cyanide form of B12 in order to avoid repercussions from the Humane Society.
                    I read a paper that Dr. G wrote arguing against allowing horse meat to be sold for consumption. I have to go out of the USA if I want to buy horse meat.
                    One of his newest videos recommending DHA doesn’t even mention that you can get it from fish oil. I think that he would be fired if he said that you can get your DHA from fish oil.




                    0



                    0
                    1. gusto: If Dr. Greger promoted beef liver, he would be promoting food which makes people unhealthy. As you may have noticed, this site is about providing people with information that can lead to optimal health. As Dr. Greger has explained many times, food is a package deal. Beef liver is an unsafe food over-all. You can’t get the B12 without all the very bad stuff. And thus, the amount of B12 in beef liver is irrelevant. *That* is why Dr. Greger does not mention beef liver as a source of B12. It would be irresponsible to do so. You can learn more about the ways in which beef liver is unhealthy from just about every video on this site.
                      .
                      Dr. Greger *has* covered fish oil and the DHA/omega 3 it contains in videos on this site. http://nutritionfacts.org/?fwp_search=fish+oil&fwp_content_type=video (It’s in that list somewhere.) Dr. Greger still has not been fired. This is not an issue of opinion. You are just plain wrong.




                      0



                      0
                    2. re: Dr. Greger not mentioning that fish oil contains DHA.
                      As I said, this is a false claim. I went to some extra effort and found an example video where it is directly mentioned that fish oil has preformed DHA and EPA: “Fish is a toughie, because, on one hand, fish has the preformed DHA and EPA. But, on the other hand, our oceans have become so polluted that fish may contain various pollutants, including dioxins, PCBs, pesticides like DDT, flame retardant chemicals and heavy metals—including mercury, lead, and cadmium—that can negatively affect human health.” from : http://nutritionfacts.org/video/should-we-take-epa-and-dha-omega-3-for-our-heart/




                      0



                      0
                    3. Beef liver only twice a month is safe and far safer than getting B12 from the synthetic cyanide form of B12. Dr. G is not reporting the real unbiased science but rather the twisted biased religion of the Humane Society.




                      0



                      0
                    4. Cows don’t make B12; they get it in one of two ways: either from supplements that they are given, or from trace amounts of dirt they happen to ingest while feeding (if they eat grass). So meat is not, and has never been, a natural source of B12. As Dr. Greger has noted, it is more efficient and healthier (not to mention more compassionate) to just take a supplement than to have cows eat the nutrient, be slaughtered and butchered, then have their meat eaten so you can get your B12. Gusto, please base your conclusions on more than a superficial look at what Dr. Greger is saying. Also, compassion for animals is not a “religion,” and saying that Dr. Greger is biased is like saying that physicians who are on the board of the American Heart Association and tell you not to smoke are somehow biased and shouldn’t be believed. Dr. Greger was saying all of these things before he went to work for the Humane Society. If you have a specific quarrel with the conclusions he’s presenting, please refute them scientifically; i.e., demonstrate that the weight of rigorous scientific evidence supports your point, rather than his. Unless you do that, you’re just airing an opinion, which is your right, but it’s not what most people come to this site for.




                      1



                      0
                    5. Compassion is not science but rather Dr. G’s religion. Your statement that “Cows don’t make B12” is absurd. Only 80 grams of calf liver provides 1128% of the RDA of B12. See: http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/lamb-veal-and-game-products/4672/2
                      As Dr. G likes to say: “Just the facts Ma’am.” Instead he and you are twisting the science to fit your compassion religion which is unethical without you declaring your major conflict of interest as an animal rights activist.




                      0



                      0
                    6. Again, you don’t seem to be referencing any source that discusses where cows get their B12. The link is just a nutrition chart. With all due respect to you, I could just as well argue that you have a vested interest in continuing to eat animals, regardless of what the science says. Cows don’t make B12. Look it up!




                      0



                      0
                    7. Cows are ruminants, as are bison, buffalo, goats, antelopes, sheep, deer, and giraffes (1). Ruminants have a four-chambered stomach and a rich supply of bacteria in their rumen (the first chamber that their food enters) (1). Some of these bacteria produce B12 in amounts normally sufficient to meet their needs (2).
                      See: http://veganhealth.org/b12/animal
                      Lets stick to the Science and not your compassion religion.




                      0



                      0
                    8. This seems to be the sticking point (as far as how animals get their B12). It’s from Dr. John McDougall, and I think it explains the process clearly: “Although vitamin B12 is found in animal foods it is not synthesized by plants or animals. Only bacteria make biologically active vitamin B12—animal tissues store ‘bacteria-synthesized B12,’ which can then be passed along the food chain by animals eating another animal’s tissues.” More info here: https://www.drmcdougall.com/misc/2007nl/nov/b12.htm
                      I have no interest in convincing you of anything, Gusto. I’m offering this as an explanation of my assertion that animals are not a “natural” source of B12. If eating liver is your solution, that’s your choice. I hope you live long and healthy. My choice is to be healthy while doing as little harm to others and the environment as I can.




                      1



                      0
              2. W/out getting in between your “debate”, what exactly do mean, “The Humane Society of the United States is an “animal protection” organization not an animal rights organization. Big difference”?




                0



                0
        2. “Dr. Greger is a physician, New York Times bestselling author, and internationally recognized speaker on nutrition, food safety, and public health issues. A founding member and Fellow of the American College of Lifestyle Medicine, Dr. Greger is licensed as a general practitioner specializing in clinical nutrition. Currently he proudly serves as the public health director at the Humane Society of the United States. ”

          What’s not transparent about that?




          0



          0
          1. Dr. G needs to clearly spell out that working for the Humane Society means to never eat animals. I suggest that you read the paper that he wrote against legalizing the consumption of horse meat.




            0



            0
        3. But Pritikin had the leukemia BEFORE he went to a plant based diet. He also had heart disease. This is what motivated him to change his diet. The autopsy revealed that Pritiken had perfect arteries, unheard of at the time for a 69 year old in the Western world.




          0



          0
        4. I’m not an animal rights activist, except insofar as I support my local humane society and have adopted strays. I’ve delved rather deep into the literature, often citing the animal studies which provide most of our mechanistic insights into disease (and which Dr. Greger’s videos avoid). Sometimes I disagree with him (on subjects like how dietary polyphenols work or whether current sodium recommendations are warranted), but in general, Dr. Greger’s videos accurately reflect the views of the best informed experts in the field.

          There’s a reason experts like Harvard’s nutrition chair Walter C. Willett favor diets with more whole plant foods and less refined foods and animal products. The evidence is overwhelming.




          0



          0
          1. Last month, before figuring out Dr. Greger’s ties to animal rights, I made a small cash donation to Nutrition Facts. I will NOT be making any more donations unless I see him come clean. Now I find myself questioning everything Dr. Greger says.
            How come he never acknowledges that there never has ever been a vegetarian super-centinarian? Maybe it has something to do with being paid by an animal rights group.




            0



            1
            1. You are a real nut job.
              Here’s Dr. Wareham, . . 98 y/o began for 50 years. Retired as a surgeon at 95.
              Maybe you will feel better if you go get yourself a beer and relax, . . take a walk in the woods, . . breath. . . .




              0



              0
              1. Ginger,
                Dr. Ellsworth is not at least 110 and therefore NOT a super-centinarian and never will be because he does not eat meat. There never has been a vegetarian super-centinarian.




                0



                0
                  1. Dr. Greger likes to say, “let’s stick with the facts.” The fact is that there has NEVER been a vegetarian super-centinarian.
                    The fact is that Dr. Greger does NOT clearly disclose that he is paid by an Animal Rights Organization. This is NOT a joke.




                    0



                    0
                    1. Gusto – Dr. Greger’s point has not ever been that this site’s goal is to live the longest. The goal of this site is to live one’s life as healthy and without disease as can be and as opposed to experiencing 20 years of disease-ridden decline before death;, to live more healthfully and then go when its your time. It has never been about living as a centenarian. That centenarian idea is something you have made up to hold Dr. g. to.

                      The Humane Society is not an animal rights organization. Maybe you should take a valium or something.




                      0



                      0
                1. You’re right. He’s not 110. Because today he is only 99. And in great health. Just give him 11 years. But retiring from surgery at 95 speaks to a potentially good long life for him.

                  Clearly your issue isn’t about Dr. G’s ethics at all – it’s clearly about meat eating. Let me encourage you to go ahead and eat meat and feel free to do so and enjoy every bite. That’s certainly your choice. To each his own. Why do you feel so angry about all of that? Make your choice and go live in peace. This is clearly not a site you enjoy.




                  0



                  0
            2. Gusto, there is a Blue Zone of centenarians here in the U.S. in Loma Linda, California. It is a blue zone because it is heavily populated with 7th Day Adventists, most of whom are vegetarian. (Dr. Wareham, as noted below in Ginger’s comment, is one of them.) This is the *only* blue zone in the entire United States. Not sure how you can allege that there has never been a vegetarian supercentenarian. Check out that book by Dan Buettner; it documents diet and lifestyle of people in areas where they regularly live to be 100 with good quality of life. He also has a web page at bluezones dot com.




              0



              0
              1. Gusto, there have been vegetarian supercentenarians, for example Christian Mortensen, the first verifiable male to reach 115. However getting to supercentenarian status is generally involves winning the genetic lottery and lifelong calorie restriction. Their habits otherwise vary markedly, and they don’t provide much of a guide to healthy habits for those who would be content to see ourselves to a cogent, vibrant 90 before a quick collapse.




                0



                0
                1. Christian Mortensen was not a strict vegetarian but “preferred” a vegetarian diet. He probably ate enough meat to get enough vitamin B12 and any other nutrients exclusive to meat that enabled him be a super-centinarian. He also drank and smoke.
                  I am a prior cash donor to nutritionfacts.org who was fooled into thinking that it had high ethical standards. Instead I’ve found that Dr. G is on the payroll of the Humane Society who would therefore naturally argue not to eat animals.




                  0



                  0
              2. Sunshine,
                You are correct that there have been vegetarians that have been verified to live to 100. However, not to 110. You are not correct that “most of whom are vegetarian.” Most 7th Day Adventists do eat at least some meat and are NOT vegetarian.




                0



                0
            3. Seems that many people are missing the point in order to find reasons to excuse their food addictions. Dr. Greger has devoted his LIFE to spreading the CHRONIC DISEASE REVERSING and LIFE SAVING truth about plant based nutrition AT NO CHARGE. I don’t know of anyone else who cares enough about the human race to do such time consuming work so selflessly. Are you saying that you know better than the billions of worldwide, LEGIT published nutritional studies (which, by the way, we would never have the chance to decipher through and recognize without Dr. Greger and his thorough work)? The truth is that a plant based diet is CURING PEOPLE and SAVING LIVES! That has NOTHING to do with The Humane Society. Dr. Greger is only one of MANY medical professionals informing us about these truths. Find some research that shows meat or dairy to reverse chronic disease. And make sure that research goes through the scrutiny of back checking to be sure it is legit and not funded by a source that will benefit from the outcome in some way. I’d love to see what you come up with. Facts are facts. Plant based is the healthiest diet for the human race. Period.




              1



              0
            4. Why do you label yourself a “non activist” while defending your opinions? Aren’t meat eaters activists of their own ideas? So, why didn’t you disclose your activism then?




              0



              0
            5. gusto, you exhibit classic troll behaviour but you are however not very skilled at your chosen craft:

              1 all caps writing and !!!
              exclamation point inflation is a big giveaway
              2 you make bold but incorrect claims (like your “animal rights organization” fail) and when the mistake is constructively
              pointed out to you you do not acknowledge your plain mistake but instead
              switch to some other strategy in your futile attempt to make a ruckus. That is a strong troll indicator.

              3 you badly fake to be an innocent bypasser who happened to make a donation and then got struck by surprise and will now stop – but in fact you very clearly have some grudgy axe to grind and with delight and opportunism attempt to stir shit up.

              I recommend that you stay away from the computer a bit and get some air and exercise and think through what you really want to do with the rest of your life and how you can make the world a better place. Because what you are doiing ain’t working.




              0



              0
        5. I don’t see his day job as a conflict of interest at all. Not one bit. I see his day job as a clear an open alignment of his values about how he chooses to live his life. I’m sorry but I don’t think there is anything to disclose. There is nothing hidden here.
          But, . . .perhaps this would make a good conspiracy theory movie, eh? Maybe you should see if you can acquire the rights and make a movie.




          0



          0
          1. I do not see a conspiracy here but rather just a serious lack of ETHICS on the part of Dr. Greger.
            Dr. Greger should say that he’s a paid Animal Rights Activist so that you know and expect him to tell you not to eat animals.




            0



            0
            1. Gusto, are you mathmatically challenged? The reason for the super centenarians is because there have likely been hundreds of millions of calorie restricting meat eaters but very few calorie restricting people who identify as vegans. It takes winning the genetic lottery to live that long. Of course there are going to be some lottery winners in a group of hundreds of millions as opposed to a tiny group. The vast majority of people who indentify as vegan are still pretty young. We should see some super centenarian vegans in the next 50 years now that there is an actual decent size pool getting up in age.




              0



              0
              1. I’m not mathematically challenged, but rather offended by your insult and by being fooled for so long by Dr. Greger and his lack of ethics for failing to disclose what he really is, an animal rights activist.




                0



                0
            2. Oh brother. You obviously can’t hear what the people above are telling you. They all knew what you are so upset about.

              But…what I have found is that most meat enthusiasts are not very schooled in how research works. Additionally, it is so upsetting to find out that what you have done all your life could just be wrong. We have all gone through this transformation.

              Familiarize yourself with the videos on this site and you just might learn something.




              0



              0
            3. Dr. Greger does not self-identify as an animal rights activist. Dr. Greger identifies himself as a Medical Director for the Humane Society. The Human Society does not self-identify as an animal rights organization. Their Mission Statement states they are an animal protection organization, not an animal rights organization. Big difference. Dr. Greger has made his salaried-occupation known on this site from the beginning. The fact that YOU failed to notice this fact is not HIS responsibility. It has been out there from the get-go. YOU missed it. He never failed to disclose it. YOU are the one who states – per your OPINION – that he is an animal rights activist. He has NEVER claimed that. He has only claimed that he is the Medical Director for the Humane Society for the United States as his salaried position. The Humane Society IS NOT an animal rights activist organization. You are quite ill-informed about the facts.




              0



              0
            4. Nowhere that I could find does Dr. Greger state that he is – per his self description which you can find on this site – an Animal Rights Activist. He never states that or identifies himself that way.
              Why, then, should he say that he is?

              Ingrid Newkirk is the director of PETA, an animal rights organization. She defines herself as an animal rights activist. And rightly so.

              I’m confused as to why you think Dr. Greger should identify himself as something he clearly does not identify with. That would be a bizarre thing to do.

              If you want to eat meat – eat meat. If you don’t want to eat meat, then don’t. I don’t think anyone on this site really cares about your choice.




              0



              0
    1. Gusto, it doesn’t matter if Dr. Greger is a one-eyed, one-horned flying purple people eater. He’s not giving his own opinion. Everything he says is quoted from the linked, peer-reviewed scientific studies. If you don’t agree with his assessment, or the study itself, this uncensored comments forum is the place to state your case.




      0



      0
      1. My case is that Dr. Gregor’s day job is as an Animal Rights Activist as the public health director for the Humane Society of the United States who would be expected to argue NOT to eat animals. I think that Dr. Gregor should disclose his day job as a seriously potential conflict of interest.




        0



        0
        1. Gusto, I think you ought to go to the Humane Society of the United States and read their mission statement. The short version describes themselves – in their published Mission Statement – as an animal protection association. Not an animal rights organization. There is no mention in their mission statement regarding their desire to stop people from consuming animals. You can find their full Mission Statement here:
          http://www.humanesociety.org/about/overview/?credit=web_globalfooter_id93480558

          Dr. Greger, . . like T. Colin Campbell, Ph.D., is a scientist and goes where the science goes. As a scientist, I appreciate that – animal rights or not. And, as others have already stated, Dr. Greger DOES disclose his day job and he always has. This is where is salary comes from. If your point is that one should “follow the money” then what are you suggesting? that Dr. G. is financially benefiting somehow from making scientific information available for free? Makes no sense.

          From where I’m sitting, I see that a man who would rather not eat animals – for whatever the reason – has aligned his personal values in life with how he derives his income – from his salary at the Humane Society. Not from some sort of supposed surreptitious clandestine double-talking conflict-of-interest action derived from the fantasies of a non-scientific paranoid whacko.




          0



          0
            1. First of all, the Human society is not a vegan organization. Second of all, you are wrong, Dr. Gregor does disclose his day job with the Humane Society. I think you are just trying to nitpick for some reason. Whatever makes you feel better about your bad habits, I guess. Just expect that there will be rebuttals to your baseless accusations on this site.




              0



              0
            2. The problem – which seems to be yours – is that there is no conflict of interest. Dr. G. would not state there is a conflict if there is, in fact, no conflict of interest. His interests are thoroughly aligned and clearly stated. And he certainly has not hidden any of his positions – on anything. Here is the definition of conflict of interest:
              con·flict of in·ter·est
              noun
              a situation in which the concerns or aims of two different parties are incompatible.
              “the conflict of interest between elected officials and corporate lobbyists”
              a situation in which a person is in a position to derive personal benefit from actions or decisions made in their official capacity.

              The problem – for you here – is that Dr. G. is deriving NO personal benefit from his actions as a Medical Director for the Humane Society. You said ‘follow the money’. He makes NO money from his NutritionFacts site. His money comes from his salary – like the rest of us that work for a living.

              What’s wrong with you?




              0



              0
            3. Actually, he doesn’t need to say it. You’re the only one focused on this “issue”. Since Greger doesn’t feel there’s an issue and you do, you’re the one with the problem. And since you have broadcast your strong feelings that there is a conflict of interest, . . again, he doesn’t need to . . because you have done it for him. So thank you for your contribution to the conflict of interest issue on this site. Your sense of righteousness is duly noted.
              Thank you.




              0



              0
    2. He does disclose this, actually, right up front. However, I can’t see how involvement in animal rights would create a conflict of interest regarding specific benefits of beets, broccoli, flax seed, apples, etc. He reports on studies that show real conditions being improved or prevented by these foods. There isn’t a control group in these studies so that hamburgers were pitched against apples to study the effects, and animals aren’t involved in those issues at all. It’s not like the only two things to eat in life are broccoli and beef, and he’s coming down on the side of broccoli for cutting your breast cancer risk. You could eat animals and still benefit from the encouragement to eat more broccoli if you want to cut your breast cancer risk; in most of his videos there’s no possible conflict of interest there! Even in the ones that DO promote plant foods over animal foods in a general way, you’re free to look at the studies yourself.




      0



      0
    3. I think that if you are going to say that, it is better to say it in a respectful way that considers all of the work and efforts he goes to to help us learn about nutrition. Capitalized “screaming” and name calling is less effective than posing a question or an idea for people to consider. It is also more considerate to us, the fellow readers, and respects our intelligence more.




      0



      0
      1. John,
        So then how do you feel about finding out finally that after seeing all of those videos for several years now that the facts were actually all massaged by an animal rights activist. Wouldn’t you have preferred to have Dr. Greger himself tell you directly at the start?




        0



        0
        1. I do think you have a point. However, if someone bakes me a pie for free and it has raisins in it and I don’t like raisins but I do like the pie, I say, “Thanks for the pie. I liked it. Next time would it be possible to make it without raisins?”

          Likewise, I think the point of possible conflict of interest is a legitimate one. Is the point to get us to avoid eating meat or to attain the highest health possible? I just think when he’s working so hard at no cost to us, thanking him needs to be part of the process. That’s how I feel about it.
          John S




          0



          0
          1. There’s probably just as many meat eaters that work for the Humane Society as in any other mainstream organization. Humane Society is not a vegan organization or an animal rights organization. ALL people, just about, with the exception of sociopaths and/or pyschopaths, believe in animal protection. This is a universal value. How can a universal value be a conflict of interest? Not possible.




            0



            0
            1. I am going to respectfully disagree with you about the number of vegetarians and vegans in the Humane Society. For many of them, as many on this list, protection of animals consists among other things in not eating them and stopping others from eating them. Hence, a conflict.




              0



              0
                1. I am trying to interpret what you are saying, although it sounds neither coherent nor respectful. It looks like you assume that I have never met someone who is a member of the Humane Society, nor had previous discussions with people on this list. Your sarcasm and negativity is a good sign to me to end discussing this with you.




                  0



                  0
                    1. I don’t want to do any of your homework. I find you to be irresponsible, hypocritical and negative. Argue with someone else.




                      0



                      0
                    2. If you didn’t bother to read the Humane Society mission statement, then you are not qualified to have an opinion about a conflict of interest. If you did read the statement then it’s clear to me that you are being disingenuous. The values of the Humane Society are universal values that all sane human beings would agree with, therefore you cannot with any authority assert that there is a conflict of interest.




                      0



                      0
    4. Dr. Greger’s agenda is to share information with us that he has learned over the years so that we, each, can make our own choice and decisions about how we want to structure our diet and lifestyle. He has made that clear in numerous ways, numerous times. And people on this site do just that and share what they’ve learned with the rest of us. THAT’S the agenda – for us to all learn from each other as well as learn new information as it becomes available. Some people on this site still do eat some meat – their choice. No one gets chastised for that.
      The only person I see doing any chastising is you for some weird confusion about animal rights activism. That’s not the subject of this site at all and never has been.
      You have a very rigid set of rules and requirements of Dr. G. that just simply are not ever going to happen. He’s never going to disclose he is an animal rights activist because, . . so far, .. he’s not. You’re going to be waiting a whole long time for that “disclosure” that you require. I bet Weston Price would be glad to have your acquaintance and discussion.




      0



      0
    5. Looking at this from a research perspective, Dr. G being paid by the Human Society of the United States could be a confounding variable. But even if he did have a bias for animal rights, that still doesn’t disprove the scientific evidence that plant-based diets are protective and consumption of animal products are harmful. Too many studies have shown that, both observational and interventional.
      We all have a bias. I suspect the reason people try to find fault with the presenter (Dr. Greger) is because they cannot argue against the evidence and have a bias against adapting a plant-based and evidence-based diet. (They can’t give up meat.)




      0



      0
    6. I don’t like gusto’s argument. It’s like saying that a concert violinist’s playing isn’t highly skilled and beautiful because he also plays oboe with the Boston Pop’s Orchestra.




      0



      0
      1. I believe that the optimal diet, Dr. G says “default” diet, is plant based but with lean meat included at least several times a week so as to get vitamin B12 from the meat. Dr. G interprets the research in a way that is recklessly influenced by his wages from the Humane Society saying to get the B12 from the synthetic cyanide form of B12 as a food supplement. The most common natural way to get B12 is from meat and escpecially organ meat and there might be other things in meat that have not been discovered.
        Dr. G also recklessly says to avoid meat to keep your IGF-1 down when the actual science shows that the ideal level of IGF-1 are a “U-shaped” curve, too little increases cancer risk and too much increases heart disease.




        0



        0
        1. I understood that the B12 from meat is actually from the fecal contamination of the meat. So I suppose you could use a little meat as the cracker to put your poop dip on… but that thought is not very comforting. [And I like meat!]

          It is difficult to take your comments as seriously as I take Dr. Gregor’s, because he supports each comment with studies and you do not. I don’t know that much about IGF-1, and I can’t site any scientific sources to support any opinion I may have on it, so I won’t bother arguing. I wish you too, felt that without siting sources, you shouldn’t argue a point – at least not on this website where scientific evidence rules. Perhaps on other sites it would be OK – but this is a haven for those who are moved by scientific evidence, not opinion and beliefs.




          0



          0
    7. It seems to me, . .after reading all the comments in the thread below, . .. that if Dr. Greger is an animal rights activist by virtue of the fact that he works for the Humane Society of the United States at Gusto states, then logic tells me that we would see evidence of Dr. Greger’s activism on this site. Since’s it’s Dr. Greger’s site he is free to post whatever content he so chooses. In the years that I’ve been following NutritionFacts.org, I have not ever seen one video or written piece that alludes to or directly engages the topic of animal rights. Not one. I just don’t see it. The content has always and consistently been about the scientific facts as they relate to nutrition and our health.
      And even if it appeared that Dr. G. brought animal rights topics into this site, . . . as far as I’m concerned, so what? It’s his site. He can choose the topics. And if someone doesn’t like the topic set or how the site is run, . . .well, . . .bye bye. . . go find a site that suits you better.
      I, personally, love this site and share it with as many people as will be open to its message. And even if one is a meat-eater (your choice of course) there is still plenty of content on this site that is conducive to improvements in our health. Take this Dr. G. video for example: http://nutritionfacts.org/video/1-anticancer-vegetable/ . This is the video about which vegetables are cancer protective. You can still eat meat and use this information. So I share these types of videos with my meat-eating friends and family. It’s to their benefit.
      So, . . note to Dr. Greger . . . If you are a secret and surreptitious animal rights activist in disguise, I don’t care. What you are doing for the rest of us is a gigantic act of love and I think most of us out here recognize that.
      I, for one, love you back Mr. Animal Rights Activist :-) Big heart for you.




      0



      0
  14. Well said Dr. Gregor,… especially the “snake oil” salesmen insert that applies to so many. Won’t mention names but I think you all know who I am referring to. If it is a product with a shelf life over 2 weeks it’s not a healthy food for you. If it is not a whole plant food, it is most likely worthless garbage. Now go empty your kitchen off all those packaged dead products and refresh your life with whole plant mostly green raw living foods with water content.




    0



    0
      1. I guess the definition of healthy is still at question. Healthy and edible are certainly different things. Dr. Gregor should adopt a scale for healthiest foods to edible substances. Whole plant foods (raw: nuts, seeds,) undried have a high water content giving them a vibrational life force. http://wholefoodcatalog.info/nutrient/water/nuts_and_seeds/ and this was my point. Without water in the food there is no vibration. Nuts go rancid very quickly. However dried, cooked, heated, processed, etc. anything I would say is not healthy including dried fruit. Eat only dates for a week and see how you feel and how your blood tests read, then eat only sunflower sprouts for a week and let me know which one gave you a healthier experience. Approx. 50% of the nutrition is lost in the first 30 minutes after a food is picked, removed from it’s source. After 2 weeks, it’s just time for the compost. However thanks for the thoughts. Keep sharing and spreading this message.




        0



        0
          1. I strongly Disagree! 1. I have been living this lifestyle for 11 years 100% organic 100% Raw, Living foods. I drink 10 coconuts (real) I open every day. I collect my own spring water from a mountain spring in glass jars every 3 months. I consume 1/4 pound of raw living spirulina every day. I eat lots of sprouts I grow at home, and raw living green juices. Big raw living salads packed with an abundance of water rich living vibrational foods. … And here is the proof. I am in 100% Perfect Health and I’ll prove it anytime. Never touched a drug, Feel absolutely amazing every day. Never been sick in my life. Happily married to my gorgeous wife. Have amazing sex every day. Enjoy my passion for life and sharing it with others. So, if this is all pseudo-science, bring it on!




            0



            0
            1. You might be getting benefits from your raw diet, but they aren’t due to a ‘vibrational life force’. It may be that there are some interesting phytonutrients (perhaps even some unknown at this time; I do wonder about the potential activity of plant miRNAs) that are made less available by cooking, it could be the overall composition of your diet is a bit different by necessity from a more typical vegan diet, or it may be low in advanced glycosylated end products (though most cooked vegan food would be low in AGEs anyway). It is hard to say. Your diet may be working for you, but it may not work for others; without a proper scientific study, we can’t know. Also, it may not be practical for others (e.g., 10 coconuts a day). But I’m happy that you are healthy and enjoying life.




              0



              0
            2. Been there done that. What you are going through is a phase. I’ve been doing this longer then you have. I followed Doug Graham in the 1990’s and Wolf and Gabriel Cousins. I’ve done it all. I’ve done exactly what you are doing now for years. I wised up and got educated with the scientific literature.




              0



              0
  15. Thanks for all the hard work you do! I point everyone to this site to learn about nutrition. Sadly, there are still people out there who would rather believe the word of some random blogger who purports to read the literature, without any formal scientific training or clinical medical experience. A lot of people can read journal articles, but interpreting them is another story. I would bet most bloggers out there would not understand how to interpret p value, alpha error, sensitivity, specificity, relative risk, etc.




    0



    0
  16. And THAT’s why I am so proud to be a volunteer with NutritionFacts.org! I knew there was scrupulous research to make these educational yet entertaining video and great to learn more about the process.




    0



    0
    1. hey thank you so much for the great effort, I would like to notify you that the translation option in the YouTube videos is disabled which disappoints many volunteers who want to contribute in sharing these precious information in there countries, could you please notify the YouTube uploader to enable it :)
      thank you.




      0



      0
      1. Hi! We currently have almost 100 volunteer translators who help to translate the video subtitles. We have decided to do this through a project that we can manage so we can keep track of what videos have been translated. If you or anyone you know is interested in translating, please apply at nutritionfacts.org/volunteer . Thank you for your interest in this!




        0



        0
  17. Thanks for your incredible contribution to the public health.
    For years , i desperately tried to seek the true about preventing medicine.
    At first , i ask the doctors themselves if there any natural way,
    To prevent or even treat health problems
    They always reply with the same answer,
    It only genetic, You can not do nothing about it,
    That what they said about my skin rash,
    I developed skin rash since i was a child,
    I tried many drugs,
    None of them worked, at least not long term.(My rash “miraculously” disappeared
    When i changed my diet many years after childhood.)
    I got tired from searching cure,
    I thought i would just need to accept it,
    And should live with that for the rest of my life.
    I developed many other health condition as i got older,
    Such as constipation, hemorrhoids, acid reflux, abdominal fat etc
    I thought it just natural process of aging,
    This is what that modern medicine uses as a scapegoat , aging , genetics
    Nothing we can do to change our life, To take our fate with our own hands.
    I was so depressed, I wanted so badly to take my life under control .
    But the message of all experts in the medical field was very pessimistic.
    My father died from heart disease at age 55 ,
    One nurse that i met, discovered the death reason of my father,
    And based on this information alone ,
    She decided i should be periodically monitored
    She said, that i should be monitored because i’m probably susceptible to develop
    heart disease too.
    But i told her that my cholesterol is under 130, and my triglycerides is 52
    So i don’t see a reason to bury myself,
    She said it can be develop years later,
    I told her that i prefer to avoid food contains cholesterol
    (animal food) than give myself a death sentence and bury myself alive in the name of “Prevention Medicine”.
    She argued, that adopting , a plant based diet, by avoiding cholesterol and fat, will not help. Because our liver produces naturally cholesterol.
    I said, My body naturally produces testosterone,
    So you suggesting that whether i decide to inject or not inject myself with 1kg anabolic steroids each day, would not make any difference in regard to my health
    outcomes?

    I gradually started to lose my trust in modern medicine.
    Then i began searching on google about health and nutrition,
    At first i looked on unprofessional popular websites,
    In hope to shed light on my confusion,
    I disappointed that all my search efforts not paid off.
    And instead to resolve the chaos that i have about this subject.
    It only made things worse by contributing even farther to the confusion.
    So then i decided to explore it through the real source,
    The studies themselves which published on pubmed.
    And once again, I got confused by the
    contradicted conclusions derived from each study.
    Quite often completely contradicts.
    Until i found lectures of dr john mcdougall
    (Which is my favourite doctor!) on youtube,
    And he mentioned once, about studies that founded by industries
    Which have conflicts of interest, such as the meat and dairy industry .
    It was first time i became aware about it,
    I naively thought once that all studies are
    completely objective, without exception.
    But i still don’t know how to spot conflict of interest in a study
    at many cases
    And then i found nutritionfacts.org ,
    Which is the most reliable source about health and nutrition,
    Which is also very user friendly.
    Surprisingly however, Most people will not appreciate this site,
    and many don’t realize how Important and usefull this website ,
    Because they assume it just another nutrition website ,
    Like the other infinity nutrition websites on the interenet , Such Livestrong,
    Authority Nutrition,
    Yeah of course it only another nutrition website,
    Only this tells the TRUE,
    While all others (with very few exceptions) not




    0



    0
  18. I’m a subscriber to this site since I heard Dr. Greger’s interview with Thom Hartmann on The Big Picture in February 2016. Since then, I’ve heard a wealth of information that has improved my eating habits. After viewing this video, I wanted to give Dr. Greger a big hug for his labor of love given to anyone who will tune in to his channel. I signed up to send a monthly donation that is long overdue. Thanks to the dedicated staff and volunteers who contribute to this outstanding site that is ONE-OF-A-KIND resource on nutrition. Where would we be without a nutrition site that is dedicated to giving us the truth and nothing but the truth?




    0



    0
  19. As usual, you explain in a careful and clear manner how complex your research work is, how carefully you comb through the vast amounts of data in order to reach plausible conclusions, and how important this project is. As a Nation, we would reap so many benefits by reducing our focus on the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) and shift our attention to GregerCare!




    0



    0
    1. Thanks David. You allude to a very important point. The ACA is at best a band aid and to solve our health crisis we must go much further by addressing the cause of disease.

      I was just reviewing some medicare history and while it does not show the whole picture it is instructive. Over the past 30 years the enrollment in medicare has increased by 250%. At the same time the cost has increased by 7000%. Lest anyone think this is a problem with medicare, keep in mind that with the possible exception of the VA medical service, their delivery is among the most efficient. The increase in medical costs are across the board. We have more drugs at ever higher costs. Even the old standbys are escalating astronomically. (e.g. my insulin cost $50/ vial 15 years ago. Greater efficiency in production has given us a cost of almost $500/ vial.

      The national and global economic cost of the current health care system is currently monumental and is growing. For this reason I must argue that this lifestyle preventative medicine is second only to combating climate change as a necessary measure to keep a reasonable healthy society nationally and globally.




      0



      0
  20. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/28d4bb1cb00c8a50bb1df4c12aa74075502e2e2b612e3ee7566af553fb85e479.jpg These new videos are great to introduce people to the site. Much more “bitesized” and targeted than the the original videos on youtube that got me hooked on Dr. Greger. I am a fan and supporter. They HAVE changed my life for the better. Here is a typical dinner for me. You can’t see the balsamic vinegar and tahini I use for dressing, and there is broccoli in the greens along with the kidney, black and pinto beans. Sometimes I add red rice to the mix. I got my first 100% on the nutrition facts app.




    0



    0
    1. OK Andy, I have been considering using a tahini sauce as a salad dressing for some time. Your example is just the added nudge I needed. I just bought a pint of tahini at Costco for making dressing for my next salad. Oh, with the balsamic vinegar of course.

      The only reason I mentioned Costco is that they are relatively low priced it is organic tahini.

      Thanks man.




      0



      0
      1. Stewart:
        There is still some experimentation need on this. The tastes are good, but I have been pouring the balsamic vinegar on the salad, but it doesn’t stay on well. I’m thinking of using a spray bottle to put it on. Now I’m also considering mixing the two and seeing if that works. I usually just drizzle the tahini around over the veggies and then put on the beans or rice and beans. I’m not usually such a foodie, but with this meal being a big part of my regular daily menu, I might as well. I struggled to find any other dressing that was ok, as most had oils which are not ok with the science of the plant based diet described at this site. The salad base would also be good with red lentils over it. Dr. Greger talked about adding walnuts to the salad for fat, but that doesn’t cover the straight greens taste.




        0



        0
      2. Hi Stewart – let me share with you some info about Costco hummus. Their brand and the ones that they carry are all very, very high in fat with the added oils. If you look at the label you will see that a 2Tbs serving will have 70 calories. 40 of those calories are from fat. That’s 57% fat. Depending on what you’re trying to accomplish with your diet (i.e., reverse heart disease) that may be too high a fat content. I’m not saying don’t consume it, . . just know what you’re eating.
        I shop at Costco as well. As a member you can request that Costco bring in certain foods. I have requested a no-fat hummus option but they so far have ignored it. Oasis brand, which Costco carries in my area, makes a no-fat option which, again, I’ve requested they carry. So perhaps if those of us who are Costco member made the same or similar request we might get somewhere. And, I agree with you about price.
        Anyway, . . .just sharing here. . . .
        Stay the course!! :-)




        0



        0
        1. Hi Ginger, You’re certainly right about the costco hummus. They carry a different brand here in Austin but it’s as oily as any. I do get a no oil added hummus from a local Lebanese pita bakery and food store. Get that and you never want the added grease again. And that’s just because of the taste improvement. You can actually taste the garbanzos and lemon much better.

          I was refering to sesame tahini which, even though no oil is added, still has way too much. Indeed I would suggest that it has more than the hummus even though the tahini oil is not added. Sesame seeds just have lots of oil. So when I bring it home, I let it sit out for a few days and pour as much oil off the top as I can. Then I will put a paper towel into the jar and that will absorb more in a coupla hours. I do that several times. (Wish I had a centrifuge. That might work better.)

          It does get somewhat thick and hard but it’s easy to fix that with lemon and or water. I cannot detect any taste compromise. So yes I take those empty calorie from gratuitous oil to heart.

          I will prod my local Costco about no oil added hummus though. The added choices are always good for education.

          Thanks for the heads up.




          0



          0
  21. Thank you Dr. Greger. You are a rock star and even more than that…you are a national treasure!
    Thanks also to all of your hard working staff and volunteers. You are appreciated, every day!




    0



    0
  22. Seems that many people are missing the point in order to find reasons to excuse their food addictions. Dr. Greger has devoted his LIFE to spreading the CHRONIC DISEASE REVERSING and LIFE SAVING truth about plant based nutrition AT NO CHARGE. I don’t know of anyone else who cares enough about the human race to do such time consuming work so selflessly. Are you saying that you know better than the billions of worldwide, LEGIT published nutritional studies (which, by the way, we would never have the chance to decipher through and recognize without Dr. Greger and his thorough work)? The truth is that a plant based diet is CURING PEOPLE and SAVING LIVES! That has NOTHING to do with The Humane Society. Dr. Greger is only one of MANY medical professionals informing us about these truths. Find some research that shows meat or dairy to reverse chronic disease. And make sure that research goes through the scrutiny of back checking to be sure it is legit and not funded by a source that will benefit from the outcome in some way. I’d love to see what you come up with. Facts are facts. Plant based is the healthiest diet for the human race. Period.




    0



    0
  23. Brilliant. your logic is spot on. I have found it difficult to orient people who have shown interest but felt overwhelmed by the immense pile of info here. A step by step “lead-in” is sorely needed.

    In the past I thanked you for literally saving my live. Now I thank you for moving on to help change the way the world views nutrition and in the process adding healthy years to the lives of so many people, many of which I know and love.

    On an even more personal note…I am concerned about those eyes. You look a bit tired. Please Dr. G, don’t over do (more than usual). We need you with us for the long haul…your health comes first!




    0



    0
    1. gusto: Because he is not. It is clear from your posts that you do not understand either term: “animal rights activist” nor “conflict of interest”.
      .
      I agree with your previous post: it is time for you to move on. Personal attacks are not allowed on this site. The posts with personal attacks against you were deleted. But you are not allowed to personally attack Dr. Greger with baseless claims either. You were given more leeway than is normally given. I’m declaring this this line of discussion over. – Moderator




      0



      0
  24. I look forward to the videos and want to say that your work, and the work of your staffers and volunteers, is appreciated deeply. Thank you for speaking the truth and keeping me on track with my diet.




    0



    0
  25. What I would REALLY love love love to see is a site (perhaps yours?) where a person could contribute to buy a tv spot to encourage healthy eating – without a profit making company behind it. An ad for broccoli??? I think it could happen if enough of us would kick in some $$$$




    0



    0
    1. toddmisk: It is a great idea. While PCRM does lots of activities, they are well known for their TV commercials/ads and billboards doing exactly what you suggest. PCRM is the Physician’s Committee for Responsible Medicine, head up by Dr. Barnard.
      .
      Here is an example from a few years ago, though you can see that TV stations balked at airing it. But I’m pretty sure that PCRM has gotten some of their commercials aired and I know they have got their billboards up. http://www.pcrm.org/media/news/mcdonalds-commercial-too-hot-for-miami-tv




      0



      0
  26. Yes Doc, I love your site and I am very pleased to see a face to the videos. You have the voice and accent your words and sentences that make the difference. I know how hard it is to manage a few sites, as it takes me three-four hours of research to post a three or four paragraph page for natural herbs or my fishing or hunting sites. You always want to be accurate.
    I do not have much income but I love putting your link in my sites. I love my meats, because I’m not a veggy guy and a little one sided that way, but I find you to be very “BULLSEYE” when you post your videos or letters. So as of now the best way I can help you is hitting my face book and social contacts with targeting you more as I do Ty Bollinger with his The Truth About Cancer. You are one of the few people on the internet that has my trust and respect.
    Thank You Doc for taking the time and effort to help educate the sheep.
    May our Father of the Living Bless You and Yours.
    Dale Neff




    0



    0
    1. Ha Ha Ha Ha !!! I got you. We are all sheep and you are the superior big black wolf. Very funny ! But unfortunately you are also sheep like the rest of us humans (we all one species). But there is nothing wrong with eating like sheep and thinking and seeing yourself like a tiger. But eating burnt chicken meat does not make you a tiger.




      0



      0
    1. Ok, enough with the ragging on Librarians.

      And pass the bananas.
      The Librarian would most certainly have a copy of “How Not to Die” on his bookshelves.




      0



      0
    2. OK, enough with ragging on Librarians.

      And pass the bananas!
      The Librarian would most certainly have a copy of “How Not to Die” on his shelves.
      (Altho DEATH may have a few things to say about THAT)




      0



      0
  27. Hey! Quit picking on us Librarians!

    And pass the bananas!
    Ook!
    I’m sure the Librarian would have a copy of “How Not to Die” in his library (although DEATH may have a small problem with that :D)




    0



    0
  28. One useful source for health guidelines in general is the World Health Organization. It is not beholden to US corporate interests. Not surprising that it too adovocates plant based diet.




    0



    0
  29. I just saw this video and I am deciding how much I can donate. Dr. Greger work has changed my life. To donate to NutritionFacts.org is the least I can do. Dr. Greger work and valuable information is the best chance we have to thrive and enjoy the best of life with our loved ones. If Dr. Greger work has touched your life in some way, please consider to colaborate with anything possible.




    0



    0
  30. There is so much discussion today in the media, on the internet of “studies” and yet, here Dr Greger gives the detail about how to REALLY read a study and verify it’s accuracy and interpretation, checking the many references and so on. Just one study! Most doctors I know at least realise how difficult it is to properly understand research and do not really read much primary medical literature for just that reason, and tend to rely on guidelines for their practice. Which at least is honest! However most untrained people that I meet have very strongly held views based on much less reliable sources, newspapers television, internet, advertisement, health food shops etc. I regularly refer people to this website and consult it myself as well, in my everyday work. It is truly a treasure!




    0



    0
  31. Excellent work and videos. However my personal feedback as a herbivore animal-lover activist, is to stop and change strategy. Human health is very important and you have done a fabulous job. However there is a danger of overdoing it and making redundant videos that have little value. There are only limited number of important diseases. And if you make 5, 50, 500, or 1000 videos on Alzheimer, I think you enter into redundancy and repetition.

    Instead I suggest you spend your financial resources (donations) on advertising to expand your market reach. I suggest more confrontational videos on meat, dairy and egg industry and challenge their false advertisements. File complaints with FDA and other governmental authorities responsible for our health. Using science and objective evidence challenge the prevailing “Human is Omnivore theory” on youtube and social media. Doing these things are very hard, take time, effort and money, but I think it does more good than yet another video on Alzheimer or some other relatively unknown disease. Just my 2Cents




    0



    0
  32. How does Dr. Greger make a living if he draws no salary? I really think he deserves to be paid for his diligence and excellent work. I will donate. But I hope he can support himself as well.




    0



    0
  33. I got annoyed with the first page of comments ‘cus people nit pick and your videos are great.. I wanted to say I enjoy your videos and although I can’t financially afford to donate now that once I complete school and have the extra money than I will. I feel your website has helped me when my doctors didn’t have the answers I needed and I wish I found your YouTube videos in 2010 when I complained of weight gain and dry skin and getting white hairs and little hairs on my chin cus my doctors said blood work was fine and clearly it was my blood sugars going up fast but not diabetic level. Today my blood sugar is 85 when I woke up… And I’m not on any meds. Now I have to watch it doesn’t go too low or too high instead of lowering it. I’d love a video on maintaining blood sugar cus I am anywhere from 65-110 and I have to raise with soda but that’s bad and I don’t know a healthy way to raise my blood sugar. That’s normal range on an a1c but doesn’t seem normal… I’m not vegan or vegetarian, but your website has gotten me to eat less meat and diary and add rice, oatmeal, beans, avocados, seeds, and nuts to my diet. I can see myself going vegan or vegetarian if I was around those people more. I never had high cholesterol (total 175 and now total 140), but I do watch your videos to looking for information to lower my triglycerides and blood sugar and blood pressure and heart rate. I was 7.0 a1c then 5.7 and now 4.9. My blood pressure was usually around 160/90, but now 118/78. My heart rate was usually in the high 90’s, but now 60-85. I don’t understand the other blood work numbers, but they have changed but all have and currently in normal range now… But some when lower and higher when I reduced my meat to meat& diary occasionally. It only took 6 month on a mostly vegan/vegetarian diet and I have the research to back me up when people say I need milk or cheese or meat. I use to give in and deal with a tummy ache or sleepy feeling I got. I’ve always been a low meat eater and struggled with milk and yogurts. So you make it easier to be healthier. Everything I have complained about for years to my doctor is gone… I am loosing weight, no dry patches on skin, no chin hairs, and no acne for months all from your videos. Plus all my numbers are excellent or good except my doctor would prefer my triglycerides to be under 99 cus my LDL is 70 and HDL is 40. But it’s going down on its own thanks to your videos making it easy to be healthier. So thank you to your staff, volunteers, and you. It has made the world of difference in how I feel, look, and blood work. I will donate when I finish school cus you saved my life! I can’t yet, but I will cus I was on the road to a heart attack, stroke, or cancer as all my immediate family has before age 60. And I plan to outlive my parents who died at 45 and 62 and my grandparents who died at 82 and 63. They all started families in their 30’s…so I barely got to know most of my family and when I have one I want that cycle to stop with me. So you made a difference in my world and hopefully my future families world. So thank you!!!!




    0



    0
  34. I just got through reading Dr. Greger’s book How Not To Die. It is by far the best book on plant based eating I’ve ever read. Couldn’t put it down. As far as I’m concerned this doctor is doing a real service by providing everything free on his web site He is also doing along with his paid helpers and volunteers a great deal of research and homework. Way to go Dr. Greger!! You can say what you want, but this guy does his work. Enough said.




    0



    0
  35. Thanks to all the amazing people that make this site possible!
    I was referred to this site about 4-5 weeks ago, made a passing bookmark for a few videos until about a week ago.
    If I could not look at the links to the studies my self I probably would have dismissed this site like so many others.
    Before learning soo much information from this site, I would not have even considered moving to a WFPB way of eating.
    Knowledge is power and I have been in transition for almost a week. Finding many things I enjoy, Sep. 30th is my final transition day.
    Already feels like I am constantly shoving food in my face and barely reaching my recommended Calories.




    0



    0
  36. I find this text by professor Joseph A. Schwarcz an interesting description of Dr. Greger: “You will never see Dr. Greger refer to a study that shows anything positive about meat, but you will see plenty of studies that point out the pitfalls of consuming animal products. While there is some zealotry here, the studies that Dr. Greger enthusiastically talks about are from respected journals and merit our attention. I think his videos are worth watching, but keep in mind that there is some cherry picking of data. Of course that doesn’t mean the cherries he picks are rotten; they’re fine.”

    Instead of going into the rivalry mode, Schwarcz gently points out the issue that I also have with NutritionFacts.org. This website is full of great content; much of the research, the editing of the videos, and many of the take-home messages are great, informative, and sometimes perhaps even life saving. It is also true that the message of whole food plant-based eating is basically the bottom line of recommendations by various medical and health institutes, including the WHO. However, I notice that Dr. Greger will always go the extra mile to make the case that for optimal health no consumption of animal products is allowed (but of course I also know that he thinks it’s people’s own choice what they eat eventually). He says: “I want everything on NutritionFacts.org to reflect the best available balance of evidence”, and this results in this website strongly advising against animal products and advocating for a whole foods plant-based diet in order to strive for optimal health. It frustrates me that I do not have the background, knowledge, let alone the time to do the incredible work that Dr. Greger does. However, I find it difficult to solely rely on his interpretation of nutritional science since it is evident that Dr. Greger is already convinced of the fact that avoiding all animal products is important.

    I noticed that Harvard University also has interesting and informative pages available to the public on nutritional science. Their information is less popularized and fancy, however, between all those doctors and websites looking for the best science, Harvard seems to present a way more nuanced image than I would find in most places including NutritionFacts.org. Furthermore, I don’t know yet of any information that would point towards a certain bias existing within Harvard that would influence the information they publish about food and health; Dr. Greger even used a Harvard study in his videos (http://bit.ly/1QACu43). This page (http://www.health.harvard.edu/staying-healthy/becoming-a-vegetarian) for example attenuates much of the claims that Dr. Greger makes. This is for instance said about heart disease and cancer:

    “Heart disease: There’s some evidence that vegetarians have a lower risk for cardiac events (such as a heart attack) and death from cardiac causes […] Even so, fish are the best source of omega-3s, and it’s not clear whether plant-derived omega-3s are an adequate substitute for fish in the diet.

    Cancer: Hundreds of studies suggest that eating lots of fruits and vegetables can reduce the risk of developing certain cancers, and there’s evidence that vegetarians have a lower incidence of cancer than nonvegetarians do. But the differences aren’t large. A vegetarian diet can make it easier to get the recommended minimum of five daily servings of fruits and vegetables, but a purely vegetarian diet is not necessarily better than a plant-based diet that also includes fish or poultry. […] It’s not clear whether avoiding all animal products reduces the risk further. Vegetarians usually have lower levels of potentially carcinogenic substances in their colons, but studies comparing cancer rates in vegetarians and nonvegetarians have shown inconsistent results.”

    Another person I would like to bring up is Stijn Bruers who is a vegan activist and has a PhD in the sciences. He extensively researched many studies to find what we really know about the health benefits of veganism. He presents his results during a lecture (http://bit.ly/2dcVbSp) and his conclusion is that there isn’t much difference between complete abstention of animal products and a very low consumption of animals products since the marginal advantages will decrease at that point.

    What I am trying to say with this long post or what I rather would like to discuss is whether Dr. Greger is taking it too far by insinuating that a vegan version of a whole food plant-based is the best way to go and then also calling this the best available balance of evidence. Is he missing nuance and reticence in the information he presents? As I just pointed out other interesting sources like the WHO, Harvard, and Stijn Bruers would also strongly recommend a plant-based diet as one that is good for health, however, they won’t make the case like Dr. Greger that according to evidence this would need to be a vegan version because the science is too inconclusive. I would love to hear others’ opinions on this.




    0



    0
    1. Daan: While of course you are entitled to your opinion, I think your gut opinion about the science is misleading you.

      One bit I can address directly is this part of the quote: “You will never see Dr. Greger refer to a study that shows anything positive about meat…” Well, Dr. Greger does show science pointing out something positive about dairy. Consider this quote: “Men in a separate study also had a higher rate of death with higher milk
      consumption, but at least they didn’t have higher fracture rates. So a
      dose-dependent higher rate of both mortality and fracture in women, and a
      higher rate of mortality in men with milk intake, but the opposite for
      other dairy products like soured milk and yogurt, which would go along
      with the galactose theory, since bacteria can ferment away some of the
      lactose.” from: http://nutritionfacts.org/video/is-milk-good-for-our-bones/

      You may think this is a minor point in reply to your post, but I think it is a key point. Dr. Greger did not hesitate to show a positive study about dairy when the information was compelling. This site is obviously just one person’s interpretation of the science, but to characterize Dr. Greger as a person who has made up his mind and thus only shows one side of the science is not true from everything I have seen.

      I don’t think anyone should rely on any one source for information about the nutritional science. At the same time, not all sources, just like not all published studies, are equally valid. I personally try to be very careful about which sources I trust.

      FYI: In case you were wondering why you didn’t see your post at first, your post originally got caught in disqus’s automated spam filter. I have rescued it.




      0



      0
      1. Thank you for your response and rescuing my post Thea! I think you’ve pointed out a good example of Dr. Greger actually also mentioning something positive about an animal product.




        0



        0
  37. I don’t know about you guys but this video made me feel all warm and fuzzy inside :) . I’ll mail a monthly jar 0 change money order once I get a job.




    0



    0
  38. Great Video(s)!! I will be making a donation asap. Keep up the good work & thank you to everyone involved. As a teacher I get a huge amount out of the information presented (both personally & professionally) and pass it on to anyone interested. A huge thumbs up from me!!




    0



    0
    1. Tanju Hassan: Thank you for your post. It’s always nice to reach people directly, but I get an extra thrill when I learn that we are reaching the people who reach the people. ;-) Go teach!




      0



      0
  39. Let’s go to the dogs for a moment. Maybe you can send me a link that I haven’t found yet that is as reliable as you guys on human nutrition. I want to know if I can prepare dog food from plant-based ingredients. ASPCA, in their pet food info (http://www.aspca.org/pet-care/dog-care/dog-nutrition-tips) repeat the misinformation of plant protein being incomplete. If I don’t have to bring animal food products into my kitchen, I would love that. http://homemadedogfood.com/ insists on using meat in its recipes. I can do the math if there is a canine equivalent to the EAA ratios that go into the PDCAAS (amino acid score) for humans. Of course, the other nutrients are important, too. Of special interest: our Dog-In-Charge is prone to bladder stones and is doing well on the can and dry Royal Canin SO prescription food.
    Blessings to you all.




    0



    0
    1. Daniel Bowser: I thought you might be interested in a post I did some time ago to a similar question to yours. I’m not sure the text below fully answers your questions, but I think it may help. You might want to pay special attention to the talk from the vet who helps people transition their dogs to a vegan diet.
      **************************
      It is a good question that pops up from time to time. Dr. Greger has been known to say something like, “I’m a vet of just one species – humans.” So, I don’t know if he will be tackling this topic. I think you have gotten some good replies from other people so far. Assuming you are still interested, I have some more to add to the discussion. And something about your post prompted me to give my most thorough answer yet.
      .
      I like that you asked about the science, because that is the key. To my knowledge, the science is deploringly lacking. It’s deploring because humans LOVE their dogs and dogs do great things for humans and yet proving the saying that familiarity breeds contempt, we have relatively little good science on dogs, especially when it comes to their diet.
      .
      I am aware of only one independent (ie, not paid for by a dog food company), published scientific study on dog food in regard to a vegan diet. The study was on a small number of dogs and was very short term, but the study gives us tantalizing hints. The study was on working Alaskan sled dogs, who have to be in peak condition. And the study looked at objective measures, not asking the owner “Hey, how do you think they did?” The result was that the vegan dogs did just as well as the omnivore dogs in the control group. This tiny study proves nothing. But it does hint at an answer and shows that we need more and better studies. If interested, here is the study: http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayFulltext?type=6&fid=6488300&jid=BJN&volumeId=102&issueId=09&aid=6488296&bodyId=&membershipNumber=&societyETOCSession=&fulltextType=RA&fileId=S0007114509389254
      .
      In terms of anecdotes, we have many, many additional hints that dogs can thrive on a vegan diet. I understand that one of the longest lived dogs according to the Guiness Book of World Records was a vegan named Bramble. I think Bramble lived something like 27 years and was not a small dog (small dogs typically live longer relative to large ones). And then there are the many, many dogs which are thriving on vegan diets today in people’s homes. I personally know a handful of such dogs, including a lucky dog who has a vet for his human.
      .
      My own dog has been on a vegan kibble for 6 years. My dog is a 12 year old Great Dane whose blood work is still all normal and who most people think is much younger when they meet him. Great Danes usually only live 8-10 years. Certainly no one can say that my dog’s diet has hurt him. When my dog was 6, the food I had been feeding him got bought by the company, Purina. I did not trust that Purina would keep the same quality, so I started doing research, including learning about how tainted the meat supply is in the world, especially in America. So, even feeding my dog human grade meat did not seem to be the answer. After doing lots of research, I finally decided to switch to a vegan kibble. My dog went vegan before I did, and we both got a very nice surprise: My dog’s health didn’t just stay the same, it dramatically *improved*.
      .
      About a year and a half before switching diets, my dog had started peeing blood. Sometimes it was dark red and very scary to me. I had gone to multiple vets about this problem, done x-rays, etc. Nothing helped. I did not expect the diet change to fix this problem, but after a couple months on the vegan kibble, the blood in the pee magically disappeared. The cure was likely *not* just coincidence since as I said, he had been peeing blood for a long time. His coat and nails also got shinier. And his energy/play level went up. In a 6 year old Great Dane, those changes were really something and sold me for life right there on the value of a vegan diet for dogs.
      .
      One important piece to this question is to note a study that came out about 3? of years ago that showed that dogs have a significant biological difference from wolves – one that had to do with having 3 genes that help dogs digest starch. This makes perfect sense to me since one of the current leading theories about how wolves became dogs is that dogs started hanging out around human trash piles, eating human leftover food. Which as we know from NutritionFacts, would primarily have been plants, including a lot of starches. For more about the biological study of how dogs are different from wolves, check out this article from one of my favorite, nationally known dog trainer Patricia McConnell: http://www.patriciamcconnell.com/theotherendoftheleash/dogs-wolves-diet-and-sociability This information makes me believe that dogs are especially adapted to be able to tolerate (a specially designed for dogs!) vegan diet and that arguments from the other side that look at wolves diet and biology are not so valid.
      .
      FYI: V-dog is the brand I feed my pup. I did several feeding tests and my dog loves his v-dog just as much as he loved his old brand, Innova. If someone reading this post is interested in feeding their dog a vegan diet, it is worth doing some research. Like any diet for any species, there are some potential “gotchas” worth avoiding. There is a vet who speaks around the country trying to help people be successful in getting their dog on a vegan diet. And you can catch her lectures for free on the internet. Here is one example: Vegan Diets For Cats and Dogs, Risks And Benefits: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIMBX3jdYM0
      .
      I find that most of the people who believe that dogs should eat meat use the same flawed arguments that paleo proponents use for arguing that humans should eat meat. Meat proponents for dogs certainly do not have any more science to back up their assertions than I do for my vegan assertions–at least none that I have seen. Something to think about. Another philosophical point: What do we owe our non-human companions? We certainly owe them physical (as well as mental and emotional) health. And, in my opinion, we owe them a future. A world where they can exist, which will not happen if humans continue to promote the animal food industry. So, even if meat and vegan diets came out neck and neck in terms of general dog health, other factors then weigh the scales to favor the vegan diet.
      .
      After reading all that (assuming you are still with me all the way down here!), what do you think?​




      0



      0
  40. I really enjoy your videos, Dr. Greger. The information is great. What makes me want to listen to them is your delivery.
    The inflections in your voice make you very interesting to listen to.
    Thank you for what you do!!




    0



    0

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This