Aug 25 2011
Dr. Veg
HSUS’s top MD, Michael Greger, puts out an annual DVD titled “Latest in Clinical Nutrition.” Greger’s spiel is that he searches through just about every English-language journal every day—some 12,000 articles last year, for example—so that we don’t have to. He then presents what he thinks is the most notable science, in what can amount to an hours-long lecture.
(Greger, by the way, says all the DVD proceeds go to charity. We’re not sure which one though. HSUS? PETA? But we digress.)
So what did the good doctor find this year? If you know anything about the propaganda mill that is HSUS, you already have an idea.
Greger basically dredges up studies to back his conclusion that a vegan diet (with vitamin B12 supplements) is the way to go. That’s fine for him to believe and promote, but it leads to some rather comical statements as he pushes his orthodoxy.
Greger insinuates that eating chicken can shrink a man’s, well, manliness, and even goes into detail about stool-size studies. All of this leads to laughable statements from Greger like “we may want to not eat pork, and maybe not anything made by anyone who eats pork.” (Exaggerate much?)
Like most HSUS propaganda, some of it seems plausible on the surface. But do a little digging, and it’s easy to expose the flaws.
Greger, for example, trots out a British researcher who attacks egg yolks for being high in cholesterol. The implication is that people shouldn’t eat eggs if they’re at risk for heart disease, which most people (he alleges) are.
But what do more reasonable experts say? The Harvard Health Letter in July 2006 declared it a “myth” that “eating eggs is bad for your heart.” (Harvard also helpfully points out that dietary cholesterol isn’t the same as blood cholesterol.) A recent USDA study found that eggs are lower in cholesterol than previously believed.
Elsewhere, Greger tries to imply that eating chicken could cause problems with the “virility” development of boys. One study found that poultry consumption is associated with a class of chemicals called phthalates, and a separate study found that phthalates are associated with “manliness” issues.
Sounds icky, right? Again, context is key.
The Centers for Disease Control’s National Exposure Report finds that phthalate levels in people are well below the reference dose set by the EPA. Our bodies break them down quickly. And diet is just one way people are exposed to these chemicals.
Interestingly, the study Greger cites finds that fruit and vegetable consumption are associated with metabolites of at least two phthalates, while meat consumption generally is associated with one. And the British government’s National Health Service has noted this about a recent phthalates/reproductive-development study: “[E]vidence is too weak to form any definite conclusions.”
Starting to get the picture?
We’re sure we could sift through all of the studies that came out last year and find some to fit a narrative we create—hypothetically, for example, that soy milk causes brain cancer or that tofu causes strokes. One study does not a scientific consensus make; and some researchers believe that many studies are methodologically flawed.
And naturally, there’s plenty of research that Greger leaves out. One study, for example, found no association between red meat and higher incidence of cardiovascular disease. Another found no association between fish, processed meat, or poultry and colorectal cancer. Another determined that “higher consumption of poultry and fish may reduce the risk of ovarian cancer.” Another concluded that the positives of moderate consumption of lean red meat outweigh the possible negatives.
Hey, it’s not like Greger was short on time. This year’s DVD is half the length of last year’s.
Maybe these studies will make the cut over at Greger’s new “Nutrition Facts” website. But we won’t hold our breath.
Comments
There was an interesting article (I forget which magazine) that had reports of feminization and decreased fertility in men that consumed a diet high in soy products.
Men are a harder target to switch to a vegan philosophy than women. One easy way - threaten their manhood! Fearmongering is the most successful tactic to ellicit a changed social behavior, and AR / environmental industry knows how to scare people!
On the plus side, if soy does indeed feminize men and affect their reproductive capabilities, it suggests that, like the Shakers, the Veganists will eventually die out if they lose their ability to recruit from the outside, because they can’t reproduce.
” HUH” So its eat your soy beans every meal( and become a wussy) No thanks give me a balanced meal I’ll have a veg. burger please. It has everthing in one sandwitch.
I have a son in the medical field so what I know is limited to his experience. What I do know is that you can’t pay attention to everything being published. In the first place every student who is going any where has to write a term paper and it is usually on an area where they are doing experiments. After that comes their thesis again generated by what ever view point they are trying to promote. Some are accepted as gospel and others lead to a lot of interesting dialog by other master degree student. Then the real competiton begins. Every researcher has to generate interest in what they are doing so that they can get grants to continue their work. If they are employed on the college level, the huge push is to get tenure and in most cases getting published is demanded. There is fierce competion for that publication space. So, if you are working hard and things are just not turning out as one would hope, do you think they may tempted to push the envelope just a tad? Since many colleges self publish it is pretty easy to run under the radar if you don’t claim to cure cancer with an apple. We know that a lot of animal rights retoric comes from collages where the goal is that we eat nothing with fur and big brown eyes. Touchy Feely is big on campus but the cafeteria still sells big juicy hamburgers. Since I have a very difficult chronic illness, I do read everything that hits the internet about it. The stuff I sort out on my own looks like a flim flam man wrote it. Then I run the more serious stuff past my son and beleive me, there is very little left after that. Believe me, if there is something of value that comes out of research, it gets big head lines in publications of interest to those with the illness and those treating it. Don’t get too excited until you see it on the cover of the Journal of the American Medical Association. I might also add that research is worth a lot of money. That’s the kind of money HSUS, Peta and SPCA has to spend to try to prove what they want to hear. However, their research will only be publicized in their print. I’m sure you have heard the old addage, “Don’t Believe Everything You Hear.”. Good advice that has stood the test of time.
Not everything need be so polemic.
I found the videos on anticancer vegetables and the best way to prepare tea quite informative. I would not dismiss all the videos out of hand, everyone should use their own judgement as always.
there are lies, damn lies.. and Greger…
Dogs are carnivores and they need meat to properly
stay healthy….this vegan diet that is being pushed by Human Society of the United State is down right cruelty to animals.
Comments are moderated, and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive. Extremely lengthy comments and those that contain obscenities may be edited before they are posted.
Add a comment:
Meta-analysis of previous studies is indeed a legitimate form of research, but it seems as if Greger was cherry-picking his data. In addition, he left out data that shows soy to be equally damaging to testosterone production. Like so much produced by AR-related scientists, Greger’s study appears to be nothing more than junk science.