>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 22:12:10 -0500
>From: "T. Colin Campbell" <email@example.com>
>Subject: Re: Sally Fallon/Colin Campbell
>To: Stephen Byrnes <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>Cc: romerog@Prodigy.Net.mx, email@example.com
>The comments on our China Project work are quite bizarre and reflect a
>certain amount of naivete when it comes to the interpretation of
>nuritionally related data. I therefore enclose for your edification a
>recent paper published by Nutrition Today to help you and your friends
>consider a somewhat different perspective.
>As you read this material, I would remind you that this is only an
>abbreviated version of the original manuscript. I also would emphasize
>that the China Project data, however unique may be the study design (and
>well done, I might add!), ARE NOT sufficient to make firm conclusions, but
>when taken in context of other findings going back 2500 years and involving
>some very rigorous study conditions, one would be quite blind not to see a
>rather clear conclusion.
>Whether you like it or not, I am confident that these findings will stand
>the test of time, if only we will set aside the highly reductionist views
>of so many would-be scientists. I grew up milking cows, then went to
>Cornell for my graduate work doing my doctoral dissertation trying to
>advance our knowledge on how to grow animals more efficiently so we might
>eat more of them! I only am interested in the interpretation of the data,
>and would be glad to present my arguments anywhere anytime--as I have many
>times, preferably to the most difficult audiences. I have spoken at Grand
>Rounds to physicians, to clinicians, to basic scientific symposia (many,
>many times), to agriculturalists and animal scientists, to toxicologists,
>to molecular geneticists, and even to historians, and have yet to find
>serious challenge. I would welcome any further opportunities--if I have
>Just today, I accepted 2 further invitations to participate in high level,
>nationally based panel discussions on what is wrong in science and medicine
>and what we might do to make some much needed changes. When we produce the
>most expensive food, only to produce the most expensive diseases--while
>tolerating modern American medical practice DIRECTLY becoming the third
>leading cause of death, then I think we need to do some honest thinking. I
>would hope that you might join us.
>Thank you for your stimulating remarks,
>>Hi Mr. Romero:
>>Thanks for your response. It was not my intention to suggest that
>>you were intellectually incapable of understanding the B12 issue--I
>>was just referring you to another paper on the subject.
>>The China Study analysis I mentioned in my message was not the
>>one posted on the Price Foundation site. I referred you to the
>>analysis done by http://www.beyondveg.com.
>>Additionally, it makes no difference if the newcenturynutrition.com
>>site has "4 dozen peer reviewed papers on the China Project" if the
>>study and its parameters are flawed (which they are).
>>And regarding Sally Fallon and Mary Enig's work, I don't believe Dr.
>>Enig is "paid" as you state, and I'm sure she would have much to
>>say about your claim that Sally "is making reckless and out of
>>context analyses and claims based on third-party scientific
>>evidence 'interpreted' by her paid co-author, as it is a direct swipe
>>at her academic honesty and ability.
>>Sally and Mary's reference to Okinawa in their paper was not
>>intended the way you imply. They were merely pointing out that,
>>since no consistent dietary data or conclusions could be made
>>from the China Study, it is reasonable to look to another diet that,
>>although rich in saturated fat and animal protein, does not correlate
>>with disease (which the China Study implied). Even if from a
>>different people, this analysis seems quite reasonable to me since,
>>even though there are cultural differences, humans are, well,
>>humans. If a conclusion about diet and disease is made, then
>>logically one should see the same pattern in other cultures that
>>follow a similar diet. but such is not the case.
>>It is information like this that confounds much of the vegetarian
>>rhetoric out there and I for one am happy that Ms. Fallon and Dr.
>>Enig (and to a certain extent, myself) are publicly announcing it.
>>Thanks for the honesty and swiftness of your reply.
>>Date sent: Mon, 13 Mar 2000 18:25:51 -0600
>>From: Guillermo Romero <romerog@Prodigy.Net.mx>
>>Subject: Re: Sally Fallon/Colin Campbell
>>To: Stephen Byrnes <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>>Copies to: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
>>> >I did a name search for myself and discovered the recent bantering
>>> >by Sally (a good friend of mine) and Dr. Campbell of Cornell.
>>> >I thought you might be interested in two websites that, although run
>>> >by vegetarians (not vegans), are willing to admit it when mistakes
>>> >and misinformation of vegetarianism occur.
>>> >This site has an excellent article on vitamin B12 that you should
>>> >This site has a revealing analysis on Campbell's China Project, as
>>> >well as other articles pertinent to the veggie debate.
>>> >Hope you enjoy these.
>>> >All the best,
>>> >Stephen Byrnes
>>> Thanks for the info Stephen.
>>> I am not a friend of Ms Fallon, I once met her in a "conference" and I
>>>can not say that I was imp
>>ressed by her comprehension of the evidence and data she used to support
>>her tedious reading sessio
>>n ("conference"). Further on, I was troubled by the way she dismissed
>>questions with some unsustain
>>ed claims and a constant recommendation to buy her book as the only way
>>for her audience to find an
>> answer. IMHO not a very professional approach, but effective marketing
>>> I see from your bio. that you are on the Board of Ms Fallon's foundation
>>>(W. Price F.) so that I
>>must assume you are partial to her approach.
>>> Let me clear a point here: the "bantering" was not between Dr. Campbell
>>>and Ms. Fallon, it was be
>>tween Ms. Fallon (mediated by Allan Balliet from BD-Now) and myself. Dr.
>>Campbell sent some commen
>>ts to me re Vit B12 and vegetarianism (which I posted to Sanet and sent to
>>Mr Balliet to be posted
>>in BD-Now), but Dr. Campbell refrained himself from reacting to Ms
>>Fallon's name calling discourteo
>>> I have a BS, MS and studies at PhD level in Nutriology (MS and PhD
>>>studies from Cornell U) and
>>I am also sympathetic to alternative health approaches, Anthroposophy,
>>Ayur-ved and Mexican traditi
>>onal therapies. I am a Biodynamic gardener as well and have an active
>>participation in the promot
>>ion of agroecology in my Country. IMHO I have the credentials to judge
>>this sort of information on
>> my own. I do not need interpreters; I can understand the sources, but
>>again my thanks for bringin
>>g the above web sites to my awareness
>>> About the China study: Following Ms Fallon suggestion, I went to see the
>>>info avail at the W.Pric
>>e F web site. There the author (?) mentions that the China study is
>>inconclusive, but then uses da
>>ta from Okinawa (from a different study, and experimental framework) to
>>support his/her views on th
>>e basis of both studies coming from "Asia". Is that a valid comparison to
>>you ?, IMO such thing i
>>s absurd and manipulative.
>>> Here is the (mis)quote from Ms. Fallon's web site: "Before we throw up
>>>our hands and decide that
>> no conclusions can be made about diet and health in China, let us turn
>>our attention to the mixed
>>peoples of Okinawa" http://www.westonaprice.org/food_in_china.htm
>>> Ms Fallon is not a nutritionist, IMHO she has very little understanding
>>>of research methodology a
>>nd of the subject matter, beyond whatever dogma she adheres to from the
>>theories of Pottenger and P
>>rice. Regardless of which, she is making reckless and out of context
>>analyses and claims based on
>>third party scientific evidence "interpreted" by her paid co-author. Ms.
>>Fallon probably has some
>>valid things to contribute, but she does not help anyone by making biased
>>generalizations from seco
>>ndary analysis of relative information. I might be mistaken, but as far
>>as I know there is no piec
>>e of original research published by Ms. Fallon and her collegues.
>>> To me she is just one more author trying to sell yet another "cookbook"
>>>fad; IMO her merit comes
>>from her interest in natural farming, not from her understanding of
>>> If you have questions about the China study, I encourage you to send
>>>those to Dr. Campbell himsel
>>f. I am sure that he will be able to give you an honest answer about the
>>validity of the research
>>claims he is making. (email@example.com).
>>> You might also benefit from checking http://www.newcenturynutrition.com
>>>where there are listed mo
>>re than 4 dozen peer reviewed papers on the China Project by Dr. Campbell
>>and his collegues.
>>> Many thanks for you interest.
>>> Guillermo Romero Ibarrola
>>> Comala, Colima, MEXICO
Guillermo Romero Ibarrola
Comala, Colima, MEXICO
To Unsubscribe: Email firstname.lastname@example.org with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
To Subscribe to Digest: Email email@example.com with the command
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 05 2000 - 20:00:28 EDT