|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,477 Year: 3,734/9,624 Month: 605/974 Week: 218/276 Day: 58/34 Hour: 1/3 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: "Natural" (plant-based) Health Solutions | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
herebedragons Member (Idle past 879 days) Posts: 1517 From: Michigan Joined: |
the plural of anecdote is not data. If you round up a whole bunch of anecdotes, each of which individually amounts to nothing, you still end up with nothing. To put this another way, a major problem with anecdotes is that it is way too easy to cherry pick. "Here's a story about someone who was cured using this treatment." But what they don't tell you is the 99 who tried it and it didn't work. So if you could round up 10 anecdotes of success, that might be convincing all by itself. But when you look at it in context where 100 people tried it and there is only 10 success stories, now it doesn't seem so convincing. Anecdotal evidence is simply finding a story that supports your position and relating it. HBDWhoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca "Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem. Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Granny Magda Member Posts: 2462 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 3.8 |
Yes Esselstyn is extreme and I know I couldn't follow his program. Pointless to have a regime you can't follow.
I hope this kind of study will be repeated with a less extreme regimen. From my reading of Esselstyn's FAQ, I doubt that he would approve of any less zealous regime.
He asked for the most difficult cases and was given these so I doubt the ones you mention who had had surgery were somehow less complicated as you seem to think. It's not that. It's that half his sample group had undergone surgical treatments that could be the actual cause of their improvements. This invalidates the study.
AND I'm sure those who were on drugs came off them when the diet improved their conditions. Oh you're sure. I mean, you don't actually know either way and can't be bothered to find find out, but nonetheless, you're sure. You are extremely quick to claim certainty from a position of ignorance. Mutate and SurviveOn two occasions I have been asked, — "Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?" ... I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. - Charles Babbage
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: In other words look at the advertising instead of trying to dig into the facts. Why would that be a good idea ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Granny Magda Member Posts: 2462 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 3.8
|
Watch Lim's presentation. Watch Forks over Knives. Watch What the Health No. I haven't even watched The Last Jedi yet, I'm not about to waste my time watching a bunch of tedious videos about nutrition. This remains a debate forum. If you have something to say, bring it. Defend it. Debate it. If you can't be bothered with that you have no business posting to a debate forum. If you want to promote nutri-woo without having to defend it, post it on your blog. Mutate and SurviveOn two occasions I have been asked, — "Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?" ... I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. - Charles Babbage
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Granny Magda Member Posts: 2462 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 3.8 |
No, standard clinicians are NOT prescribing plantbased diets, no they are not. You are starting to rant. Calm down. Mainstream clinicians advise their patients to eat less saturated fat, and take on fewer calories. Cross did exactly that and his health improved. This is no surprise.
They prescribe meds and treat diet as an adjunct This is simply false. There are thousands of professional dietitians around the world who practise dietary interventions on a daily basis. Numerous maladies are treated through diet. There is nothing remarkable or "alternative" about this.
and it's not anything like the diets I'm talking about. The diets you recommend are low in saturated fats, high in fruit and veg, low in refined carb's, and high in fibre. That is exactly what your mainstream doctor would recommend. That these fad diets go way beyond what doctors recommend is a flaw, not a badge of merit.
Maybe you are turning a lot of people away from this idea and that's too bad. I certainly hope that I might dissuade people from thinking that they can treat their cancerous tumours with carrot juice. I would not wish to dissuade anyone from improving their diet. I would simply urge them to stick to scientifically plausible, evidence-based regimes which they can actually manage long-term, rather than wasting their efforts pursuing pointlessly punishing quack regimes.
Your stickler mentality doesn't convince me of much though. Your apparent reluctance to engage with any form of evidence is very persuasive either. Mutate and Survive Edited by Granny Magda, : No reason given.On two occasions I have been asked, — "Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?" ... I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. - Charles Babbage
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Pointless to have a regime you can't follow. Seventeen followed it and had no heart problems for twelve years...
From my reading of Esselstyn's FAQ, I doubt that he would approve of any less zealous regime. If it worked he couldn't very well object. But I'm thinking of someone else doing the study.
It's not that. It's that half his sample group had undergone surgical treatments that could be the actual cause of their improvements. This invalidates the study. Improvements over twelve years would not be the result of that sort of surgery in people whose diet was unchanged, or even when the diet was minimally modified. They continue to get plaque buildup. And they would not have been included in the exsperiment if they were actually free of the disease.
Oh you're sure. I mean, you don't actually know either way and can't be bothered to find find out, but nonetheless, you're sure. Yes, because that's the aim of all this dietary treatment and in case after case you see them getting off their meds as the diet frees them of the need for them. It just wasn't specifically mentioned for this experiment.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined:
|
About watching the various films you say
In other words look at the advertising instead of trying to dig into the facts. Why would that be a good idea ? Because I may not be doing the best job of getting across the necessary information.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Mainstream clinicians advise their patients to eat less saturated fat, and take on fewer calories. Cross did exactly that and his health improved. This is no surprise. And how often does that mainstream diet radically change the patient's health for the better? No, Cross specifically benefited from the nutritive value of the foods he was taking in.
There are thousands of professional dietitians around the world who practise dietary interventions on a daily basis. Numerous maladies are treated through diet. There is nothing remarkable or "alternative" about this. Sure they "treat" them but they have no expectation of curing them, or even getting them off their meds; and they aren't reporting the radical cures of the totally plant-based regimes.
and it's not anything like the diets I'm talking about. The diets you recommend are low in saturated fats, high in fruit and veg, low in refined carb's, and high in fibre. That is exactly what your mainstream doctor would recommend. Funny they don't cure anything then while the radical alternative diets do make that claim, based on the nutritional value of the foods and not just isolated beneficial factors or the absence of particular problem foods. The emphasis of all these diets is on the nutritional value of each food. The athletes who are on such diets are maybe the best evidence since they claim actual improvement in their strength and stamina and general performance. ABE: Maybe the most appealing (as well as effective) thing about this whole foods plant based diet is the positive emphasis on foods rather than the emphasis on avoidance. I'm really enjoying the berries and other fruits and the nuts and the potatoes and the big salads with greens and beans and mushrooms and nuts and seeds, and even the oatmeal. And I'm still not really doing the diet yet, far from it. I had an egg salad sandwich for lunch, bread I shouldn't eat, eggs I shouldn't eat, mayo I shouldn't eat. I do love the recommended foods on the WFPB regimes but I have to get better organized so they're available when I 'm too hungry and tired to spend time making a meal. [abe] I did better for dinner. Still not up to much prepping. Had a plate of kidney beans, cooked cold cauliflower, cooked carrots, all flavored with oil and vinegar and garlic powder. Berry smoothie which is a vehicle for my vitamin C and other supplements. Put half and half in it to make a frosty berry shake, otherwise it would have been fine for the diet. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: Looking at the videos is not a good way of getting the necessary information. Digging into the facts is a much better way of doing that. So again, why should we look at videos rather than digging into the facts ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
The films are good, full of information. Some are more investigative than promotional too, such as "What the Health" and "In Defense of Food," and "Food Choices." I'm now watching another one of that type about the food industry, titled "Food Inc." I've learned a lot watching these films.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
They seem more about pushing a particular point of view. What the Health sounds especially bad. Try reading this review
Film and video is also not a great choice for actually investigating the real facts. And relying on it is probably one reason you have trouble finding - or even naming - studies to support your claims.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I read some of the review, but it's too long. And the guy has his own agenda anyway, being a Paleo Diet aficionado.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
Text still beats video for conveying factual information. And if you are going to dismiss sources purely for bias then I guess yours go as well.
I say that comparing sources with different biases - and taking the biases into account - is, in fact, far better than only looking at one side.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
He also makes a lot of unsubstantiated assertions in a very dismissive tone.
Yes, both sides are biased. Your sources are just as bad, and this one is actually worse. Take all the information with a boulder of salt. The films are worth watching. This one I'm still watchingt, "Food, Inc." is pretty depressing. I think we need a culture that encourages farming to become more local again, raising food including animals on a small scale. More private gardens too. We need regulations that stop the money-focused mega industries in their tracks. That's my conclusion from watching the film's coverage of the animal-and-people-abusing methods of agribusiness, as well as how they are bacteria incubators that cause food poisoning breakouts. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: And that is an unsubstantiated assertion, in a very dismissive tone. The films would take a lot of time to watch - even if they are available for free (I don’t know that they are) - and don’t sound very promising either. If you can’t produce anything really worthwhile from them - and so far you haven’t - I don’t see the point in spending that time.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024