Hello, I'm back from a month in sunny Arizona where I couldn't get to this site.
If I remember correctly, these articles are a mix of different things. Some of the people were vegan and some were vegetarian. If vegetarian, they were eating dairy (and some vegetarians eat fish) so they must have been getting B12. If they were vegan they were ignorant of the need to consume B12 in supplement form or with fortified food.
Babies should be completely breastfed for six months and then when they have the pincher movement down pat, should be started on solids. Probably cereals, while continuing to breast feed.
I am certain there are vegans/vegetarians who eat a really unhealthful diet. Dr. McDougall talks about them. After all, you can call yourself a vegan while eating beer and potato chips. However, look at the rising level of obesity and diabetes in younger and younger children which is due in great part to the diets their parents are feeding them. I guarantee you these are not vegan diets.
So feeding children a poor diet is due to parental ignorance or misinformation.
I had a friend who was bottle feeding her child with a formula which I assume contained B12. Yet the baby failed to thrive. So the doctor prescribed bacteria to be given along with the formula and the baby improved after that. This was no doubt the same bacteria that is plentiful in breast milk. A breast fed baby's stool is practically a pure culture of this bacteria.
I believe more bottle fed babies die from SIDS than breast fed babies so do we condemn moms who bottle feed? I don't think so, but we know it isn't the best way to nourish an infant.
You can find lots of examples of extremely healthy vegan babies whose parents know what they are doing and supply them with adequate B12 via ingesting it themselves when nursing and supplying it through fortified food when adding solids. I am also assuming that a knowledgeable vegan woman would supplement with B12 while pregnant, thereby nourishing the fetus who would no doubt retain a supply of B12 for quite a while after birth.
No matter what the diet, the optimal, primal or vegan, one would suspect something is not quite right because all of these diets should produce weight loss. If these people are coming to Jeff saying they are compliant with a healthful diet and are obese I would question their statements.
There are a group of interesting BBC you tube videos called, "Secret Eaters". All the subjects cannot understand why they are overweight or obese because they are not eating enough to have gained so much weight. Cameras are placed in their homes to record what they are eating and a couple of detectives, supposedly unknown to the subjects, are following them when they go out and film what they are eating out of the home and if they order food, the detectives order the same thing to keep track. They also get family and coworkers to take note of what the subjects are eating.
Although the people keep a diary of their eating for the 5 days of the experiment they either underestimate their food or neglect to write down the mouths full of food they snack on. So I question what obese vegans (or anyone else on any other diet) say they are eating.
Maybe you have resources to find out why Jimmy Moore takes something called glycosolve to keep his blood sugars very low. I believe his HbA1c is 4.3. He got these numbers in just a few months. I wonder why he needs glycosolve if his high fat diet is reducing blood sugars.
Perhaps Atkins' diet contained too much protein because some (he gives no numbers) of his patients "adjust" as he puts it and their blood sugars rise. He did not eliminate protein from their diets but added carbs.
Jimmy Moore gives lots of numbers to show how healthy he is (and ignores his very high cholesterols) but I do not believe he says he ever took a glucose tolerance test. Atkins says to go off his diet before a gtt or else you will test diabetic. In would love to have Jimmy do this for his followers (without going off his diet.)
Mr. Moore has his own HbA1c meter which I would love to have but they are very expensive. And do they work well?
He says that about a year and a half after starting the Atkins diet he started to gain weight. About nine years later he went on the "nutritional ketosis" diet. And lost 78 pounds. So he has been on his diet for a few months. Let's keep an eye on him. I really think it is too soon to award him the health prize yet.
Do you know how long the subjects in the article you sent were on this diet? Or are we just talking about mice here?
Reading what people report on forums is hardly scientific proof of anything., You mentioned some of the problems just now. For instance, you said people on Atkins might have been eating too much protein and not enough fat. The same could be said for anyone on a low fat, high carb diet. Exactly what are they eating? Maybe people on the low carb diets are dead so they would hardly be reporting any lack of success. Maybe people on either diet are not accurately reporting what they eat. It takes a long time to build up arterial plaque. Neither diet can be said to be healthful if one is following it for only a couple of years. People eat the SAD and some die at 40 some die at 60 and some continue well into their nineties. Does the advanced age of some people who eat the SAD prove it is a healthful diet? AT least one low carb advocate died of a stroke in his early forties. Does this prove low carb is dangerous?
Some on the McD group do report that they are not doing that well on the plan. Others report they switched from low carb to the McD plan and their cholesterol lowered, or they cured their rheumatoid arthritis or MS or they lost weight or any number of other improvements. Go on web md diabetes support group. Some report great results with low carb and others say that their sugars are rising or erratic and they have either been on meds or have had to add insulin and or increase meds.
Everyone has to make a choice. You can't have it both ways.
When I said whatever you are eating I naturally meant whatever your present diet is. It seems to totally agree with you.
don't you think that all the people who got well on Pritikin's program can be attributed to more than just belief? The news program, 60 minutes, followed three of his dieters and even had them see doctors picked by the news program with an eye to debunking Pritikin. They were surprised at the results, the report of which put pritikin on the map.
Pritikin's autopsy showed clean arteries. Atkins dieters have to rely on belief because the family did not allow an autopsy. But leaked medical results did show he had artery disease.
Jimmy Moore of Livin La Vida Loca went on Atkins, lost weight, then a year and a half afterwards started to gain. A lot over several years. Now he is on a "nutritional ketosis" diet where he fasts quite a bit,takes numerous supplements including something called glycosolve for his blood sugar, eats 85% fat, 3% carbs and 12% protein, takes numerous blood tests and poo poos his high cholesterol numbers because his CT scan registered zero. Yet, speaking of belief, he has been given another book deal, is on the speaking circuit and doesn't seem to have made his followers question what he says. Now there's belief.
What I do believe is that H is doing well on whatever he eats.
Integrity has nothing to do with it. He came to a conclusion. Maybe he is right and maybe he is wrong. If he is right, good for him. If he is wrong that is no reason to cast aspersions on his integrity as I believe some web bloggers have done.