[Reading] ➶ The China Study: The Most Comprehensive Study of Nutrition Ever Conducted and the Startling Implications for Diet, Weight Loss and Long-term Health Author T. Colin Campbell – Motyourdrive.co.uk

The China Study: The Most Comprehensive Study of Nutrition Ever Conducted and the Startling Implications for Diet, Weight Loss and Long-term Health txt The China Study: The Most Comprehensive Study of Nutrition Ever Conducted and the Startling Implications for Diet, Weight Loss and Long-term Health, text ebook The China Study: The Most Comprehensive Study of Nutrition Ever Conducted and the Startling Implications for Diet, Weight Loss and Long-term Health, adobe reader The China Study: The Most Comprehensive Study of Nutrition Ever Conducted and the Startling Implications for Diet, Weight Loss and Long-term Health, chapter 2 The China Study: The Most Comprehensive Study of Nutrition Ever Conducted and the Startling Implications for Diet, Weight Loss and Long-term Health, The China Study: The Most Comprehensive Study of Nutrition Ever Conducted and the Startling Implications for Diet, Weight Loss and Long-term Health f4f560 More Than Thirty Years Ago, Nutrition Researcher T Colin Campbell And His Team At Cornell, In Partnership With Teams In China And England, Embarked Upon The China Study, The Most Comprehensive Study Ever Undertaken Of The Relationship Between Diet And The Risk Of Developing Disease What They Found When Combined With Findings In Colin S Laboratory, Opened Their Eyes To The Dangers Of A Diet High In Animal Protein And The Unparalleled Health Benefits Of A Whole Foods, Plant Based DietIn , Colin And His Son Tom, Now A Physician, Shared Those Findings With The World In The China Study, Hailed As One Of The Most Important Books About Diet And Health Ever WrittenFeaturing Brand New Content, This Heavily Expanded Edition Of Colin And Tom S Groundbreaking Book Includes The Latest Undeniable Evidence Of The Power Of A Plant Based Diet, Plus Updated Information About The Changing Medical System And How Patients Stand To Benefit From A Surging Interest In Plant Based NutritionThe China Study Updated And Expanded Edition Presents A Clear And Concise Message Of Hope As It Dispels A Multitude Of Health Myths And Misinformation The Basic Message Is Clear The Key To A Long, Healthy Life Lies In Three Things Breakfast, Lunch And Dinner


About the Author: T. Colin Campbell

Biochemist who specializes in the effects of nutrition on long term health He is the Jacob Gould Schurman Professor Emeritus of Nutritional Biochemistry at Cornell University, and the author of over 300 research papers He was one of the lead scientists in the 1980s of the China Oxford Cornell study on diet and disease known as the China Project , set up in 1983 by Cornell University, the Univer



10 thoughts on “The China Study: The Most Comprehensive Study of Nutrition Ever Conducted and the Startling Implications for Diet, Weight Loss and Long-term Health

  1. says:

    UGH I totally loved this book as of page 150 or so At the beginning you find out about this really interesting research that showed that feeding milk protein casein to rats encouraged them to develop cancerous growths after the rats had been exposed to a carcinogen called aflatoxin, and the cancer barely grew at all in rats that were fed low amounts 5% of calories of casein The cancer also barely grew at all in rats that were fed low to medium to high amounts of PLANT protein wheat protein and soy protein were tested I thought they were going to do a lot tests to find out the effects of OTHER animal proteins besides casein what about whey protein, fish protein, beef protein, chicken protein, etc , and I thought they would do tests with other carcinogens besides aflatoxin Since the results were so dramatic, you d think all these other studies would have been the natural offshoot But Campbell doesn t ever mention these follow up studies which surely must have happened Or if they didn t happen, then why not It doesn t make any sense that scientists would not pursue these very provocative and promising research questions I am perplexed by this Either Campbell left the information about the follow up studies out of his book, or they simply didn t happen If it was the science medicine government industry complex that BLOCKED any further research, then Campbell had every opportunity to explain that, but he didn t Also, it makes no sense because there are plenty of organizations like Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine and PETA that would have the money to sponsor the research OK, maybe not PETA, as they wouldn t approve of doing experiments on rats, but these research conclusions are just way too groundbreaking You know, Diets Rich in Dairy Products Accelerate Cancer Growth and Plant Based Diets Prohibit Cancer Growth There are so many scientists who have already made their money and don t need to be slaves to the power establishment and who would LOVE to be responsible for conclusive research like this they could win the Nobel Prize, for sure So either the follow up research was done, and it wasn t conclusive, which would explain why Campbell left those details out, or well, it just makes no sense why no one would have investigated it further UGH The book is okay in general, especially for people who want reassurance that a vegan diet is healthy Also, reading this book helped encourage me to eat healthier, whole foods, not so much refined sugar and added oils I m very thankful for that I also found out that my cholesterol at 167 is not that great and I need to get it below 150 But I got rather annoyed with the author because he keeps saying that a whole foods, plant based diet vegan is the HEALTHIEST diet, and he didn t give any scientific evidence for that I m vegan and I definitely wanted to see that scientific evidence, but it wasn t there And note that unlike other people who got bored and skimmed through parts of it, I actually read every word of every page, all the way through from beginning to end, including the appendices If I had only flipped around in the book and saw him claiming that he has already proven in other chapters that the vegan diet is best, I might think, OH, that s probably true, I haven t read the whole thing 100% Well, I DID read the whole thing 100% and he did not prove that a vegan diet is best What he showed is some correlations between cancer rates and heart disease rates in various countries the animal protein and animal fat you eat, the cancer and heart disease you get OKAY, point taken, but it doesn t show that eating a vegan whole foods diet is any better than, say, a 95% plant based, 5% animal based diet In fact, even in the studies with rats, they had almost no cancer growth when they had only 5% of their calories from milk protein casein They only got the high amounts of cancer growth when it went up to 10% and 20% So it looks like low amounts of dairy products are actually OKAY, according to the rat studies I just hate that Campbell goes from showing us these really interesting studies and then takes a leap to say that 100% plant based diet is the best.He also provides as evidence some studies by Esseltyn and others who REVERSED heart disease by putting people on restricted diets This is good news and throws egg in the faces of all the stick in the mud doctors who think drugs and surgery are the only ways to treat disease OK, cool But I noted that most of the restricted diets weren t totally vegan, the people were allowed small amounts of meat and dairy every day In cases like this, Campbell always said something like, Well, if the results were that good, imagine how good the results would be if the diet was 100% vegan Well, that s just imagining Where is the evidence that the 100% vegan diet is better than a mostly plant based diet I don t think there is any, otherwise he would have shown it to us So what gives him the right to go around saying that a 100% vegan diet is the best And acting like he has the research to back it up And probably fooling some people in the process Ooooh It makes me angry.Now for my most obvious gripe I thought the book was going to be mainly about all these exciting results of the China Study, since it says THE CHINA STUDY in big letters on the front One would think As I read the first 140 pages which are NOT about the China study , I simply thought I was being given the background info, as surely we were being led up to a big discussion about THE CHINA STUDY So I was shocked by the time I get to the 200 s pages, and we were moving on to other topics It was then that I checked the Table of Contents, and came to a shocking realization the 15 pages where the author talks a little bit about the China Study in the mid 100 s pages somewhere, I don t have the book with me is ALL YOU RE GONNA GET What the heck Even in those 15 pages, he actually doesn t even stay focused on the topic of THE CHINA STUDY He spends quite a few paragraphs within those 15 pages, discussing Esseltyn and Atkins diet and other stuff I couldn t believe it Also, when I read about the procedure of the China Study, it just doesn t sound very good They pooled together all the blood from people in 2 cities in each county and based their statistics off of that So even though they took blood samples from 100 s of people, they only ended up with about 65 data points to compare This is because they couldn t get enough blood from individuals to test all the factors that they wanted So if they took all the vials of blood and mixed them, they got a combined sample of several pints of blood from people from that county And that was enough blood to do 100s of tests But if there were some people in the county who ate a lot of animal products, and others who ate mostly plants, and you got survey data from all those people well, now you have to average their eating habits and make a composite average diet for someone in that county You can t compare the disease rates of people who ate well in the county vs people who ate poorly All you can do is compare one county s pooled blood sample to another county s So maybe the reason why T Colin Campbell doesn t talk much about the China study, in his book entitled THE CHINA STUDY, is that the results there are not very conclusive or persuasive I was thinking I should read Junshi s original research published in 1990, but I googled it and found a summary of its shortcomings here above web site seems to be all about busting the myths and fanaticism of vegan and raw food diets, etc, so be aware of that Nonetheless, the points it brings up are the same ones I was thinking of as I read about the techniques employed for the China study research Oh, I found another review that sums up many of the criticisms I have.http www.westonaprice.org bookrevieThis review actually brings up another important point Campbell makes a big deal about how dairy is linked to autoimmune diseases, but what about the links to wheat and gluten Unfortunately, Campbell generalizes that if milk protein is bad, then all animal protein is bad, whereas he generally assumes that plant protein is good.Oh, the guy who wrote that review above is Chris Masterjohn, he s the author of a fanatical PRO CHOLESTEROL site So that guy is biased, also His web site says that low cholesterol diets are bland and boring As if Masterjohn s obvious bias on his web site, his review of The China Study seems fair and even handed He gives 48 references in his review, although I haven t checked them Hey, I m just trying to do a quick write up The gist of his review agrees with my feeling as I read the China Study, so despite my skepticism regarding Masterjohn s underlying agenda of promoting cholesterol consumption, I think the information he provided is probably correct Taken with a grain of salt, of course.Anyway back to T Colin Campbell s book It turned me off that Campbell seemed so biased toward a 100% vegan diet he SAID his beliefs were based on science, without providing the scientific evidence He STARTED to provide compelling research, and then he stopped It s a total bummer.And I m disappointed that the book says it s all about the China Study, when it is not And maybe it s because the China Study wasn t really worth writing a book about.However, I give it 3 stars instead of 2 because that stuff at the beginning is really interesting And it did get me motivated to eat healthier I am on a quest to lose 10 pounds in 10 weeks and get my cholesterol to under 150 And it s due in large part to the motivational and compelling parts in the first half of this book.Still, I might put it down to two stars It was a pretty big disappointment And for the Vegan Book Club I know you said you wanted to do this for a future book selection I ve got no opinion either way, since I ve already read it now I suggest checking the links above and deciding for yourselves if you want this or a different book While I do have my criticisms, it certainly would make for a good discussion


  2. says:

    Whew, where to start with this one I do feel compelled to explain why I see this book as a one star it is frankly bad science I think most people would read this book and seriously feel scared, he certainly wrote it with that purpose in mind Many of my thoughts stem from years of math and statistics classes, years of working with statistics in environmental engineering, some come from the dozens of research studies that I ve read over the years, some come simply from being a die hard critical thinker I truly question everything I read and as a result can drive my ownself nuts I don t want you to think for one minute that I think I have all the answers to what we should be eating I eat based on what I personally feel is the best odds for health This changes and evolves, and I definitely struggle with a sweet tooth I think refined sugar may be the worst evil of all the foods, yet I love it, go figure , If I speak my truth, based on everything I ve read, researchers and health professionals that I respect and trust, I do strongly belief that quality meat rich in omega 3 s is the healthiest source of protein for our bodies I would eat fish if I didn t feel so much concern over toxins in our oceans and thus our fish Grass fed beef has a better omega 3 fat profile than grain fed beef,but without the toxins of the wild fish This is what I eat predominantly for meat.Who knows, maybe further research will come out to show that a no meat diet is best, but I really do not believe that any science so far proves that to be the truth from a health standpoint So if you really want to know why I think this book is bad science, here is a start tip of the ice berge to be honest Epidemiology is a good tool for predicting future outcomes for large communities, but is terrible for predicting individual causations He even admits himself very quietly and sort of as a side note that there are incredible amounts of variables that confound the results.Correlations does not equal causation this is basic statistics, yet almost all of his data is based on correlations Rich people eat meat than poor and rich people have cancer than poor therefore eating meat causes cancer don t even get me started on how this poves nothing The author definitely says many things that I agree with and are scientifically backed up by lots of other studies That s a big thing for me, I don t trust anything until it has been shown repeatedly in unrelated studies The Standard America Diet SAD as they call it is certainly dismal Processed and refined foods are terrible for us and he talks a lot about that in the beginning of the book This is all very, very true I m not vegan obviously but I would consider a vegan diet and a whole foods diet closely related than most Both attempt to eat whole fruits and veggies, lots of omega 3 s, fibre, and adequate protein But there are also many technically incorrect statements this books makes, as well as leaps of logic that are truly unscientific I could actually be forgiving of minor technical errors, but the data has been presented in a way that I believe is irresponsible I would imagine anyone who would take the time to read this book as it stands would certainly be afraid of dairy I am not When you start looking into the real data and how it was interpreted that the problems start to surface and I lost faith in the rest of his possibly accurate data.Anyway, most people don t take enough interest in their diet to even read one book or they are not open minded enough to consider whether meat, or wheat or big macs are good for their health I m not emotionally tied to my diet and I read a lot, so I am happy to read and consider what is best for my personal health I want to believe I am open to change Sorry for the rambling review.


  3. says:

    I haven t read the whole thing yet I have skipped around a bit and I probably won t finish it I am reading it because my sister in law read it and wanted my opinion At first I had an open mind about what he had to say, but the further I got in to it the less I liked it The first thing was the evangelical tone of the writing You can almost hear Amazing Grace being sung in the background I once was lost, but now am found Then he completely disses anyone who believes that fiber can contribute to anemia by calling them experts in quotes There are a lot of real experts who have done some very good research that shows that plant components can impair mineral absorption He demonizes animal foods, backing up his claims with epidemiological data and rat studies I find the rat studies rather believable, but I m not sure he is interpreting the epidemiological data entirely correctly There are so many factors involved I have a hard time with is attribution of all diseases of affluence to animal foods There are MANY factors dietary, lifestyle, and environmental correlated to animal protein intake that could just as easily be the problem Most likely it is some combination of factors China is so different from the US and Europe that I don t think that you can make a straight comparison I don t think that the answer is to start eating like a rural Chinese peasant The thing that bothers me the most is that he almost completely ignores the possibility and probability of malnutrition among the millions of Chinese people who are consuming these very spare vegetarian diets by attributing it to parasites and saying that it could be prevented by public health projects to provide clean water He talks about how great it is that the girls in the villages reach menarche in their late teens and that it isn t so important to be tall He misses the point that it isn t tall per se, but the other impairments that go along with not reaching your genetic potential for height.He does make some good points about the typical American diet We eat too much overall We eat too much meat and fat and not enough fruits, vegetables, and whole grains Anyone taking Nutr 101 should be able to tell you that It is no secret In the rat studies it looks like the benefits of a low animal protein diet taper off at below 10% of calories from animal protein That is still a fair amount, not low protein, but less than what most Americans eat I think that there is a diminishing return to the reduction in animal protein he talks about He spends the last section of the book making it sound like there is some national conspiracy among scientists, industry, and policy makers to keep Americans sick in order to make money I don t think so.Over all I am unconvinced I think that he has over reacted and I still think that you can get the benefits of a vegetarian diet by eating lots of fruit and veggies including soy and whole grains while incorporating smaller amounts of lean meat and dairy.


  4. says:

    I really wish Campbell would have included the most compelling data from this study But for some reason he left if out his book Below is a study co authored by Colin Campbell and is derived from the Cornell China Study Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part A 136 2003 127 140Fish consumption, blood docosahexaenoic acid and chronic diseasesin Chinese rural populationsYiqun Wanga, Michael A Crawforda Junshi Chenb, Junyao Lib, Kebreab Ghebremeskela,T Colin Campbell, Wenxun Fanb, Robert Parkerc, Julius LeytondThe conclusion of this study same Cornell China Study was that consuming fish was one of the strongest indicators of overall good health Fish had the strongest correlations with decreasing chrnonic disease, Cardiovascular disease, and cancer I m giving this book 2 stars due to Campbell excluding this data and therefore misrepresenting the study in the book.


  5. says:

    Wow Time to start cutting down on animal protein This is a well supported with real scientific evidence on the dangers of eating animal proteinfrom cancers, to arthritis to osteoporosis It also provides good insight into how some in the scientific community, government and industry work together to keep valuable nutritional information from the public The most interesting and surprising point for me was the dangers of milk and how increased milk consumption can actually cause osteoporosis This book is written in a style appropriate for both doctors scientists as well as the average public.


  6. says:

    Wow What an impressive book This book looks at what ails us and what is truly the cause Based on well over 750 studies done over a 35 year period by various researchers, doctors, etc it highlights the true cause of many of our cancers, diabetes, aches and pains animal protein This isn t a vegan rules meat eaters drool kind of book This is empirical data that proves that our diet overall and animal proteins specifically are the root cause for most of the diseases ailments of affluence Additionally, this book looks at the effect and results of the various industries that depend on the continued promotion of animal proteins e.g., dairy, meat, fish, politicians, drug industry, medical practises specifically surgery It also highlights the misinterpretation of many researchers of the results of studies and using a reductionist view i.e., pulling a single fact or point out of a study rather than looking at the whole consider that many of our health headlines identify single causes cures Vitamin C, alcohol, etc At the least, read it to be informed That s the biggest problem right now It s not that hard to live healthy on a whole food, plant based diet lifestyle.


  7. says:

    To go from a dairy farmer who went to college to learn how to make animals produce milk and meat, to a human nutrition expert promoting a whole foods, plant based diet as the key to human health and disease prevention represents a remarkable shift in beliefs, career path, and personal behavior This book tells the story of that shift the story of Dr Campbell s life and career as a scientist who was persuaded by what the growing body of nutrition research including the groundbreaking epidemiological study he led demonstrated As he tells his story, he explains the science in a way that is explained for the layperson while still presenting a detailed analysis.What I liked about this book, than other books with a similar message, is that Dr Campbell doesn t come across as a zealot determined to make.you.understand.dammit the glorious truth he has to share with you, the poor unenlightened dupe He doesn t try to shame the typical Westerner for his her diet first of all, he begins the book explaining that he started out as exactly that the typical mid Westerner who believed that cow s milk was nature s most perfect food Second of all, he presents a concise yet thorough case for just why the typical Westerner probably hasn t heard about all of the peer reviewed, objective research presented in The China Study and why most people can t shake the opinion that animal protein is a necessary component of the human diet, even after they re confronted with evidence that it does harm than good For a less concise and thorough case, I recommend Food Politics by Marion Nestle Rather than zealotry, Campbell s tone is science based and fact oriented He does have an opinion, and he is building a strong argument for a whole foods, plant based diet, but that argument is the result of the story he s telling, rather than the starting point for an effort to prove a pre conceived opinion When I read this book, I was already vegan, and I had already read a number of other books, articles, and web resources with the same essential message, so the book didn t need to persuade me of anything I hadn t already heard But what I am grateful for, and what I got from this book that I hadn t before found so completely anywhere else, is a careful, thoughtful, detailed and organized look at the science behind all the claims and pronouncements Other books and sources say numerous scientific studies show and my instinctively cynical mind I am the daughter of a scientist, after all doesn t completely trust that the science is being faithfully represented by the claims The China Study takes the time and the care to go through those studies and to explain how those studies show what they do So what I liked about this book, I guess, is that I found it to be a trustworthy source of objective research that, ultimately, reassures me that I have chosen a genuinely healthy diet and lifestyle.I would love to hear what my omni friends think I can t wait for your reviews


  8. says:

    The most important book I ve read in a long time Changed the way I eat Strongly recommended, if you re interested in the latest research on nutrition and health, disease, cancer, energy, and longevity I came to this with an eager and open mind, since it was highly recommended by someone I respect greatly, Art Eggertsen, founder of ProBar I have long been seeking out the best approach to nutrition for two reasons 1 maximize athletic performance I am an avid cyclist, formerly a fanatical triathlete, and always love to feel healthy and fit 2 I have a history of cancer in my family, having lost both my parents 6 weeks apart to cancer in 2004 Insights into decreasing the risk of cancer for myself, family, and friends, is paramount.The book has some unpopular themes unpopular with big established industries like meat and dairy, and the media, politics, and world of business they influence However, as our recent presidential inauguration demonstrates, a time of change is upon us Hallelujah


  9. says:

    25 1397 06 19


  10. says:

    see bottom for updateFor openers, I m biased because I already believe that for me to be a vegetarian is better for the animal, better for you, and better for me So I find myself wanting to believe this book I also found a possible conflict of interest the author is on the advisory board of the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, a group that reportedly gets funding from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals And the book advocates a diet that avoids animal products.Having said that, I think Campbell s main message is probably right, which is that a plant based, whole foods diet is the most healthful and that animal foods are harmful Some results that he cites are remarkable like patients with type 2 diabetes going on a plant based diet and then no longer needing insulin treatments He also makes the case that animal protein is simply bad for long term health, which is why he discourages consuming dairy products The end chapters about the behind the scenes workings of the health and food industries are interesting, too I recommend the book, but even strongly recommend trying vegetarianism or veganism to just see for yourself You can always go back to eating meat Update September 2012 A well cited critique of this book, excerpt below, can be found here China Study contains many excellent points in its criticism of the health care system, the overemphasis on reductionism in nutritional research, the influence of industry on research, and the necessity of obtaining nutrients from foods But its bias against animal products and in favor of veganism is a preexisting bias that results in a mainstream book intended first and foremost to convert It displays hallmarks of bad science used in the same fashion by the very industries it criticizes.


Leave a Reply

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