Re: The China Project

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 7/12/03 9:02:27 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

stephen@... writes:

> Any comments on the below? It came up in a discussion about WAP with a

> vegan friend.

Yeah, the logic is idiotic. If it was the low animal products then there

wouldn't be people who aren't obese and don't have heart disease who eat all

animal products.

Obviously we should look for commonalities between the various groups, in

terms of obesity and heart disease. How about lack of refined foods, lack of

n-6

vegetable oils, and non-dietary factors like low-stress lives, strong

familiies, strong social networks, spirituality, exercises, etc, etc.

chris

[Guest guest]

ChrisMasterjohn@... wrote:

> Obviously we should look for commonalities between the various groups, in

> terms of obesity and heart disease. How about lack of refined foods, lack of

n-6

> vegetable oils, and non-dietary factors like low-stress lives, strong

> familiies, strong social networks, spirituality, exercises, etc, etc.

Yeah, absence of refined and lab made foods was my explanation. There

are many possible explanations, as has pointed out, and to make

just one that fits one's theory the only one is either idiotic or dishonest.

Roman

[Guest guest]

The simple fact to me is that thay are NOT eating a vegan diet. Any amount of

animal food is going to help. For some people only a small amount is needed,

remember the rural Chinese didn't grow up with dietary fads (veganism etc. )

and so less animal food may be needed to keep them healthy but I suspect

deficiencies may be more common than what is being presented as the ideal

picture.

I just hate it when someone goes in there with a goal in mind( to increase

consumption of vegetable oils, decrease animal foods to the bare minimun etc.. )

and then distorts the real findings to support their agenda.

Has anyone here actually been to rural China? I have not, but many I know

have and what they eat is not exactly what is being presented as the ideal diet

of the China project. Yes, rice was eaten with almost every meal, depending

upon the region, but animal food was also present daily. This is something the

researchers would like to just ignore though. Not PC correct and we need to

support Monsanto and all those GM soy crops.

Elainie

[Guest guest]

,

From what I understand, the food in China contains plenty of fat. Pork and

duck are major foods there as well as the much more exotic foods like rat etc..

I do think the China project study is flawed, to promote the veg oil and soy

industries.

Elainie

[Guest guest]

>>>>> Obviously we should look for commonalities between the various groups,

in

> terms of obesity and heart disease. How about lack of refined foods, lack

of n-6

> vegetable oils, and non-dietary factors like low-stress lives, strong

> familiies, strong social networks, spirituality, exercises, etc, etc.

>>>>Yeah, absence of refined and lab made foods was my explanation. There

are many possible explanations, as has pointed out, and to make

just one that fits one's theory the only one is either idiotic or dishonest.

------------->oh, but it worked so well for ancel keys! and the other lipid

hypothesis proponents. i think we should hereafter refer to it as " keysian

logic. " ;-)

Suze Fisher

Lapdog Design, Inc.

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg/

mailto:s.fisher22@...

[Guest guest]

, I agree with what you said. Look at what happened with the Okinawa

study. Ever look at that book that claims the Okinawans eat a primarily

vegetarian

diet with lots of soy? From my understanding pork is a mainstay of their diet

yet it's not PC so it must be ignored.

Elainie

[Guest guest]

>>Chris:

>>Obviously we should look for commonalities between the various groups,

>>in terms of obesity and heart disease. How about lack of refined foods,

>>lack of n-6 vegetable oils, and non-dietary factors like low-stress

>>lives, strong familiies, strong social networks, spirituality,

>>exercises, etc, etc.

>Roman:

>Yeah, absence of refined and lab made foods was my explanation. There

>are many possible explanations, as has pointed out, and to make

>just one that fits one's theory the only one is either idiotic or

>dishonest.

Well, couldn't one turn this around and say the same thing about WAP. WAP

says we need lots of fat-soluable sources of Vit A & D (ie. from saturated

animal fats) yet here is a large (the largest?) native population eating

%50 white rice and %40 veggies and only a few percentage of animal fats

and apparantly is pretty healthy and productive/reproductive.

You may be right it could be other factors such as organic-based farming

and exercise and genetics. But clearly one can be healthy without eating

lots of saturated fats which have a whole set of dangers of their own (see

Dioxin thread).

What we need is a grand unifying theory to explain why cultures that eat

lots of saturated fats (Eskimos) and cultures that eat very little

(traditional Chinese) can both be healthy. Why Keys and WAP both

found healthy populations eating foods on the opposite ends of the fat

scale. Perhaps it's nurture (lifestyle). Or nature (genetics). Perhaps our

bodys simply adapt to whatever we give it. But I think it would be overly

simplistic to say that just because a particular native culture ate a

certain type of food that represents the answer to our own personal health

when you see things like the China Project which entirely contradicts the

findings WAP found.

BTW I'm all for the WAP Diet, it's helped me get off the SAD diet, but

also keeping an open mind to moderation. It's possible the China Project

is flawed in some way.

--

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 7/13/03 10:50:55 AM Eastern Daylight Time,

stephen@... writes:

> Well, couldn't one turn this around and say the same thing about WAP. WAP

> says we need lots of fat-soluable sources of Vit A & D (ie. from saturated

> animal fats) yet here is a large (the largest?) native population eating

> %50 white rice and %40 veggies and only a few percentage of animal fats

> and apparantly is pretty healthy and productive/reproductive.

Price measured tooth decay, and I didn't notice tooth decay or skeletal

structure measurements. Moreover, what percentage of their diet is insects or

small animals like whole frogs etc? Many researchers have overlooked

consumption

of insects especially and also tiny animals to the point of not factoring them

in at all, and these animals are the highest of all in these fat-soluble

vitamins.

> You may be right it could be other factors such as organic-based farming

> and exercise and genetics. But clearly one can be healthy without eating

> lots of saturated fats which have a whole set of dangers of their own (see

> Dioxin thread).

Some people probably can, and some people I'm sure can't. Depending on your

ancestor's intake of saturated fats. But what's more important is the

nutrients that come along with them, which is what Price emphasized, in which

quality

is most important. Animals fats are high in nutrients that are protective

from heavy metals and toxins anyway-- and again it comes down to quality, i.e.

what the nutrient to toxin ratio is.

> What we need is a grand unifying theory to explain why cultures that eat

> lots of saturated fats (Eskimos) and cultures that eat very little

> (traditional Chinese) can both be healthy. Why Keys and WAP both

> found healthy populations eating foods on the opposite ends of the fat

> scale. Perhaps it's nurture (lifestyle). Or nature (genetics). Perhaps our

> bodys simply adapt to whatever we give it. But I think it would be overly

> simplistic to say that just because a particular native culture ate a

> certain type of food that represents the answer to our own personal health

> when you see things like the China Project which entirely contradicts the

> findings WAP found.

Well I think that's EXACTLY what Price was trying to do. One of the things

Price pointed out was that the diets he found were widely varying. However,

when all broken down to their nutrient profiles, they were very similar. And

that's the exact reason Price studied so many different groups. It was a lot

more than 14, he studied 14 umbrella groups, some of them consisting of many

tribes with diets differing between themselves.

You know it's very important to differentiate between heart disease and other

problems. Just because a population does not have much heart disease does

not mean they are paragons of health. Price did find low-fat folks who didn't

have heart disease like the Bantu, which later research revealed to be free of

heart disease. Price found them to be very healthy in terms of tooth decay,

but he also found them to be very unhealthy relative to the other populations

he found. If you compare them to *our* society they are paragons of health,

but if you compare them to other groups, you could look at tooth decay and say

they are unhealthier by a factor of 6.

> BTW I'm all for the WAP Diet, it's helped me get off the SAD diet, but

> also keeping an open mind to moderation. It's possible the China Project

> is flawed in some way.

Oh sure. How about the obvious bias of the researchers? If the researchers

didn't already have 100% of the conclusion before they started the project,

they would never have made the non-sequitorial conclusion they made from their

own data. Their conclusion is a total non-sequitor, 100%, but they didn't care

to take that into account.

Price on the other hand, demonstrated an enormous lack of bias, and in fact

deliberately studied so many different populations so he could avoid making

unjustified conclusions. And he rigorously studied their diets, analyzed foods

in labs, etc, to break down all the chemical constitutents of the foods. He

used his own research to dismiss varying nutritional fads such as one particular

food being bad and another good such as cereals, or acid foods, or whatever.

He also was careful to include minor consumption of certian things others

sometimes overlook, like plant products by the Masai or insects by the bantu.

Chris

[Guest guest]

Wow, thanks Suze!

Gotta love WAPF!

This will be great to give to someone I was talking to at work the other day

about consumption of soy in China. This massive Cornell project should carry

some credentials.

Chris

In a message dated 7/13/03 12:04:06 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

s.fisher22@... writes:

> ----->you know, stephen, i am a bit skeptical about whether these numbers

> are truly accurate and would like to see the study scrutinized by someone

> who can recognize if there are problems with it, who can analyze the raw

> data, etc.

>

> ha! i thought i'd read something on the WAPF site about this, and sure

> enough, here's an excerpt of their response to the china project:

> http://www.westonaprice.org/traditional_diets/food_in_china.html

" To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are

to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and

servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. " --Theodore

Roosevelt

[Guest guest]

>>Chris:

>>Obviously we should look for commonalities between the various groups,

>>in terms of obesity and heart disease. How about lack of refined foods,

>>lack of n-6 vegetable oils, and non-dietary factors like low-stress

>>lives, strong familiies, strong social networks, spirituality,

>>exercises, etc, etc.

>Roman:

>Yeah, absence of refined and lab made foods was my explanation. There

>are many possible explanations, as has pointed out, and to make

>just one that fits one's theory the only one is either idiotic or

>dishonest.

>>>>Well, couldn't one turn this around and say the same thing about WAP.

WAP

says we need lots of fat-soluable sources of Vit A & D (ie. from saturated

animal fats) yet here is a large (the largest?) native population eating

%50 white rice and %40 veggies and only a few percentage of animal fats

and apparantly is pretty healthy and productive/reproductive.

----->you know, stephen, i am a bit skeptical about whether these numbers

are truly accurate and would like to see the study scrutinized by someone

who can recognize if there are problems with it, who can analyze the raw

data, etc.

ha! i thought i'd read something on the WAPF site about this, and sure

enough, here's an excerpt of their response to the china project:

http://www.westonaprice.org/traditional_diets/food_in_china.html

----------------------------

In the 1980s, a group of researchers from Cornell University carried out a

massive dietary survey, covering all 25 of China's farflung provinces, in an

effort to determine food consumption and disease patterns. This study is

often cited as proof that plant-based diets are healthier than those based

on animal foods like meat and milk. Study director T. Colin claims

that the Cornell findings suggest " that a diet high in animal products

produces disease, and a diet high in grains, vegetables and other plant

matter produces health. " 12 But the Cornell survey data, when carefully

studied, does not support such claims.13

What the Cornell researchers discovered was that meat intake in China was

highest in the western border region and very low in a number of

impoverished areas centering on Sian. They found that meat eaters had lower

triglycerides and less cirrhosis of the liver-and that they took more

snuff-but otherwise they found no strong correlation, either negative or

positive, with meat eating and any disease.

Some surprising and contradictory findings were associated with egg

consumption, with averages of about 15 grams per day in the northern most

parts of China, about 12 grams per day in the Shanghai region and amounts

bordering on zero in the impoverished area around Sian in central China. (An

egg weighs about 50 to 60 grams.) These figures are at odds with statistics

that show per capita egg consumption in all of China to be roughly one third

that of the United States14, as well as with another study showing per

capita egg consumption of 50 to 80 grams per day in the northern part of

China15, and suggests that the participants in the Cornell study were not

truly representative of the Chinese population. American egg consumption is

roughly 40/grams/day, yet the China study showed egg consumption at expected

ratios in only two underpopulated northern areas and in the Shanghai region.

There was a positive association of egg consumption with the consumption of

meat, beer, soy sauce, sea vegetables, sugar and " other oils " and a strong

correlation with university education and employment in industry. Egg eaters

had more cancers of the brain, lung and bowel, perhaps because large numbers

of them live in the polluted Shanghai region. They had less cirrhosis of the

liver, fewer peptic ulcers and lower triglycerides. Egg consumption appeared

to confer high protection against pulmonary diseases such as TB. There was

no significant correlation of egg consumption with heart disease.

Fish consumption ranged from about 120 grams per day on seacoast areas, to

zero in remote inland regions. Fish consumption was positively associated

with consumption of sugar, " other oils, " beer, liquor, meat, and rice and

negatively associated with consumption of salt, wheat and legumes. Fish

eaters had more diabetes, nasal cancer and liver cancer, but less TB,

infectious disease and rheumatism. Fish eaters had lower triglycerides.

There was no significant correlation, either positive or negative, of fish

eating with coronary heart disease. There was a negative correlation of fish

eating with pipe smoking.

Milk consumption was zero in the vast majority of the provinces. However, in

the western border region, milk consumption averaged 856 grams (about 1

quart) per person per day. (Whether this figure includes fermented milk

products is not specified.) The rate of coronary heart disease in the

western border region was about half that of Jiangxain and Longxian, where

no milk products are consumed and where lipid intake is under 10% of total

calories. Milk consumption showed no strong correlation, either negative or

positive, with any disease but there was a high correlation of milk drinking

with taking snuff.

Likewise, percentage of caloric intake from lipids, as determined by a

three-day diet survey, was found to have no strong correlation, either

positive or negative, with any disease. Fat intake ranged from 45 percent in

the remote regions on the western border, to as low as 6 percent in the

impoverished Songxian district. Not surprisingly, people who drank milk and

ate meat had the highest levels of dietary lipids. Investigators lumped fats

and oils together in the dietary recall questionnaire so that no conclusions

could be drawn about the effects of animal fats such as lard, which is a

good source of vitamin D, versus the effects of vegetable oils such as

sesame, soy, cottonseed and peanut oil; nor did they look at consumption of

insects and concentrated animal foods like shrimp paste, both of which

provide fat soluble vitamins. They did, however, find that the high fat

group tended to take snuff while people on low fat diets smoked pipes.

In his introduction to the research results, study director T. Colin

states that there is considerable contemporary evidence supporting

the hypothesis " that the lowest risk for cancer is generated by the

consumption of a variety of fresh plant products. " 16 Yet Cornell researchers

found that the consumption of green vegetables, which ranged from almost 700

grams per day in Jingxing to zero on the western border, showed no

correlation, either positive of negative, with any disease. Dietary fiber

intake seemed to protect against esophageal cancer, but was positively

correlated with higher levels of TB, neurological disorders and nasal

cancer-perhaps because there was a strong correlation between total fiber

intake and pipe smoking. Fiber intake did not confer any significant

protection against heart disease or most cancers, including cancer of the

bowel.

Given the current emphasis on soy foods, it is puzzling that the Cornell

Study researchers did not single out soy foods for study as a separate food

item. Instead soyfoods are lumped together with other pulses in the category

of legumes. Legume consumption varied from 0 to 58 grams per day, with a

mean of about 12. Assuming that two-thirds of legume consumption is soy,

then the maximum consumption is about 40 grams (about 3 tablespoons) per day

with an average consumption of about 9 grams. Mark Messina, author of The

Simple Soybean and Your Health, recommends 1 cup, or 230 grams, of soy

products per day in his " optimal " diet as a way to prevent cancer, heart

disease and osteoporosis.17 However, the Cornell study found that

consumption of legumes was not strongly correlated with the prevention of

any degenerative disease, results that cannot be extrapolated to the

extravagant health claims of soy promoters, who advocate industrially

processed soy products in amounts far greater than those found in the

typical Chinese diet.

Cornell researchers found a relatively strong correlation between salt

consumption with oesophageal cancer and hypertension. Salt eaters had higher

triglycerides but no significantly higher rates of stroke or coronary heart

disease. Salt eaters ate less fish and consumed less liquor that those with

lower dietary levels of salt.

The Cornell project did not take data on the amount and extent of

osteoporosis in China so it is difficult to assess the claims that bone loss

is rare among Orientals. They did determine that both dietary calcium and

vitamin A-both needed for healthy bones-is low in China. The many references

in Chinese medicine to the use of broth for old people and pregnant women

indicates that bone loss is indeed a problem. Dishes considered important

for pregnant women include fish heads in broth, eggshells dissolved in

vinegar, pork ribs cooked in a sweet and sour sauce made with vinegar, and

pickled pigs feet prepared with vinegar and sugar. Pigs feet chopped into

small pieces and cooked in rice vinegar for as much as 12 hours, then sealed

in containers, are traditionally given as gifts to pregnant women and

nursing mothers. A 1978 survey of the Peking area reported mild rickets in

20 percent of children under seven years of age, but rickets appears to be

rare in southern China where consumption of seafood is high.18

While the Cornell Study, for all the millions spent on it, does not tell us

much about the various effects of food on the etiology of disease in China,

it does present some intriguing findings about tobacco habits. Those who

consumed more animal protein were more likely to take snuff; while those who

consumed more plant foods tended to be pipe smokers. Snuff takers had a

higher caloric intake than pipe smokers, but total caloric intake had no

strong correlations, either negative or positive, with any disease.

Researchers found an intriguing indication that handrolled cigarettes

protected against cancer, while manufactured cigarettes were associated with

increased rates of cancer, albeit very weakly.

--------------------------------

>>>>You may be right it could be other factors such as organic-based farming

and exercise and genetics. But clearly one can be healthy without eating

lots of saturated fats which have a whole set of dangers of their own (see

Dioxin thread).

--------> " clearly " ? i wouldn't say that based on this " china project " . i

actually don't think that's clear at all, depending on how much you define

as " lots. "

i am concerned about dioxin too (heck i'm even dreaming that it's listed as

an ingredient in my favorite ice cream!), but i think the solution should be

to stop it from being pumped into our environment, and consequently into our

food chain, rather than to limit nourishing foods. our bodies are designed

to eliminate xenobiotics (foreign toxins) but require a specific millieu of

nutrients to do so, some of which are exclusively found in *animal*

products, especially from animals raised as cleanly and conscientiously as

possible (pastured, organic, etc).

>>>>>>What we need is a grand unifying theory to explain why cultures that

eat

lots of saturated fats (Eskimos) and cultures that eat very little

(traditional Chinese) can both be healthy. Why Keys and WAP both

found healthy populations eating foods on the opposite ends of the fat

scale.

----------->sorry, but there's no way on earth i'd ever lump *ancel keys* in

with WAP! they are at opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to

integrity in science. keys essentially selects only data that support his

hypotheses, while ignoring the rest. imo, his habit of doing this has

probably contributed to the loss of health, and in some cases the loss of

life of perhaps thousands or even hundreds of thousands of people . he is a

*menace* to human health. i would be *extremely* cautious in taking what " he

found " at face value.

Suze Fisher

Lapdog Design, Inc.

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg/

mailto:s.fisher22@...

[Guest guest]

It would be interesting to know the health status of this groups'

teeth. Cavities? Straight/crooked? Narrow/wide dental arch?

[Guest guest]

-

I wouldn't assume that those figures are correct, and for more than one

reason. First, remember the way Keys observed a post-war diet of temporary

deprivation and concluded that this was the way those people always

ate? It could be that there was some kind of temporary famine or livestock

plague in the area of China in which those observations were made. And

second, everything I've read about China that I would consider reliable

indicates that the Chinese diet was generally very heavy in pork and pig

fat. If famine or other temporary conditions don't account for the data,

it wouldn't surprise me if the researchers simply cooked the data to

reflect what they believed had to be true. Perhaps they just outright

changed it, or perhaps they discarded the data for all the pig-eaters. Who

knows. But I'd say it would be very dangerous to rely on it.

>Well, couldn't one turn this around and say the same thing about WAP. WAP

>says we need lots of fat-soluable sources of Vit A & D (ie. from saturated

>animal fats) yet here is a large (the largest?) native population eating

>%50 white rice and %40 veggies and only a few percentage of animal fats

>and apparantly is pretty healthy and productive/reproductive.

-

[Guest guest]

http://www.westonaprice.org/traditional_diets/food_in_china.html

That brings up the Okinawa issue, which was recently brought up on the

Health-with-Attitude group.

Health-with-Attitude/

From this link:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve & db=PubMed & list_uids=1\

1710359 & dopt=Abstract

shortened for your convenience to:

http://tinyurl.com/gsty

" This [healthy lifestyle] has consisted of a plant-based diet,

low in salt and fat, with monounsaturates as the principal fat. "

My reaction to seeing this was to respond with, " When I think of sources of

monounsaturated fat I think of olive, canola, and avocado oils, none of which I

associate with Japanese cuisine. What is the source of monounsaturates in the

Okinawan diet? And, is this source of monounsaturates a recent addition to the

Okinawan diet or has it always been part of traditional Okinawan cuisine? "

The list owner responded with:

***** Begin Quote *****

I am not an expert on the Okinawan Food Culture. I got my

information on monounsaturated oils from a study referenced in my

original post. Interest in Okinawa started fairly recently with the

publication of a book called _The Okinawa Program_ which was based on

a 25-year study of the centenarians of Okinawa. The Okinawan style

of cooking is low-heat stir-frying in a wok. They typically stir-fry

with Canola oil according to the _The Okinawa Program_.

According to a life expectancy chart at:

http://www.okinawaprogram.com/ Okinawa has had a high level of

Centenarians since at least 1960. They perhaps became the highest

concentration of Centenarians starting in the early '70's. Then

around 1985, according to info in my original post, lost the lead to

other areas in Japan, but still have a very high concentration of

Centenarians to this day.

However, another source of info information indicates that the

explosion of Okinawa centenarians is relatively recent. Recent

enough to take into account the development of Canola oil from

rapeseed oil.

" On the other hand, in Okinawa, there used to be only 32 centenarians

in 1976 when the Okinawa

http://okinawaprogram.com/cent.html

Centenarian Study was started, however, there are now over 400

centenarians in a population of 1.3 million, or 34 centenarians per

100,000 people, and 86% of them are women. "

The extensive use of stir-fry distinguishes Okinawa cooking from

Japanese cuisine, which does not use this method. Historically stir-

fry cooking in Okinawa started with lard made from pigs, which was

switched to rapeseed oil because it cost less to the present day use

of Canola/soy blend. The change from lard to Canola was recent

enough to have been covered in the 25 year study period of _The

Okinawa Program_ book.

This seems to be the only possible explanation for monounsaturates

being the primary fat in the Okinawan diet that I was able to come up

with.

***** End Quote *****

One conclusion this study seems to reach is that longevity has increased since

switching from lard to canola oil. Comments?

[Guest guest]

>Has anyone here actually been to rural China? I have not, but many I know

>have and what they eat is not exactly what is being presented as the ideal diet

>of the China project. Yes, rice was eaten with almost every meal, depending

>upon the region, but animal food was also present daily. This is something the

>researchers would like to just ignore though. Not PC correct and we need to

>support Monsanto and all those GM soy crops.

The researchers also ignore what I think are key points:

1. The rural Chinese are eating the same thing they have eaten for eons.

2. Their diet does NOT include the most common allergens (at least

not in large amounts) -- corn, milk, wheat. That varies by region, but

in any case, they are adapted to what they do eat (see #1).

3. The diet does not have a bunch of chemicals, preservatives, etc.

4. The diet probably has probiotic foods in it.

5. The diet is high in nutrients in general.

6. Because of #1, they have likely perfected the cooking methods and

mixes of food that work for them.

I think it is SOOO disingenous of researchers to just fixate on

macronutrient levels. One thing I respect about Price is that he

basically said there were a lot of macronutrient mixes that " worked "

so the macronutrients were not *the* answer.

-- Heidi

[Guest guest]

--- In , " Stanley " <johnny_tesla@y...>

wrote:

>

> One conclusion this study seems to reach is that longevity has increased

since switching from lard to canola oil. Comments?

I wonder how record-keeping figures into this. I don't know what the gov't

organization was like in the past in Okinawa, but I'd guess that if someone

was doing an " official " study of centenarians in a community, they'd only

include people who could prove they were over 100, meaning those with an

official birth certificate. How long have birth certificates been around in

Okinawa, and/or how have they been preserved? This is just one detail that

would skew statistics. If they didn't count those who had birth certificates

(both

those still living and those now deceased), that could greatly change the

results to show that modern people are living longer, even if the truth is the

opposite, because modern people are more likely to have birth certificates.

I'm not saying that's the case here (since I know nothing about Okinawa), but it

should be considered in any analysis of this study. As an example (I'm

making up these numbers for argument's sake), if 10% of the population born

in 1800 lived to be over 100 but few of them had a documented birth date, a

modern study probably would not include those without the documentation.

But if only 5% of people born in 1900 lived to be over 100, and all or most of

them had a documented birth date, they'd be counted, which would make it

look like more of them lived to 100 than those born in 1800. If the population

also changed the source of fat from primarily lard to vegetable oils during that

century from 1900 to 2000, then it would be easy to say " see, they live longer

now that they eat vegetable oil instead. " Again, I'm not saying I know this to

be the case, but it seems like a very likely scenario, especially if the

" researchers " had an agenda (which they all do).

Aubin

[Guest guest]

The Japanese, which apparently are the defacto administrators historically,

are great record keepers, hence the importance Okinawa has in longevity

studies. Unlike other locations touted, like the Andes or Caucus or Tibet,

Okinawa DOES have records,,,these other place do not.

Re: The China Project

>

>

> >

> > One conclusion this study seems to reach is that longevity has increased

> since switching from lard to canola oil. Comments?

>

> I wonder how record-keeping figures into this. I don't know what the

gov't

> organization was like in the past in Okinawa, but I'd guess that if

someone

> was doing an " official " study of centenarians in a community, they'd only

> include people who could prove they were over 100, meaning those with an

> official birth certificate. How long have birth certificates been around

in

> Okinawa, and/or how have they been preserved? This is just one detail

that

> would skew statistics. If they didn't count those who had birth

certificates (both

> those still living and those now deceased), that could greatly change the

> results to show that modern people are living longer, even if the truth is

the

> opposite, because modern people are more likely to have birth

certificates.

> I'm not saying that's the case here (since I know nothing about Okinawa),

but it

> should be considered in any analysis of this study. As an example (I'm

> making up these numbers for argument's sake), if 10% of the population

born

> in 1800 lived to be over 100 but few of them had a documented birth date,

a

> modern study probably would not include those without the documentation.

> But if only 5% of people born in 1900 lived to be over 100, and all or

most of

> them had a documented birth date, they'd be counted, which would make it

> look like more of them lived to 100 than those born in 1800. If the

population

> also changed the source of fat from primarily lard to vegetable oils

during that

> century from 1900 to 2000, then it would be easy to say " see, they live

longer

> now that they eat vegetable oil instead. " Again, I'm not saying I know

this to

> be the case, but it seems like a very likely scenario, especially if the

> " researchers " had an agenda (which they all do).

>

> Aubin

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

It also seems obvious to me that the okinawans had a much better and more varied

diet after the war, and steadily improving post-war, than before. Japan was

basically fuedal before the war; the rural poor which was a lot of the

population did not eat well. After the war, Japan became something of a modern

Democracy, with a much higher standard of living. It maybe that the switch from

lard to canola was detrimental, but the switch from a basically rice diet to one

that included fish and meat more than once a month more than made up for it.

Anyway there are certainly a lot more factors than that study brought out. No

culture is that simple.

>

[Guest guest]

--- In , " Suze Fisher " <s.fisher22@v...>

wrote:

http://www.westonaprice.org/traditional_diets/food_in_china.html

>>>>>That brings up the Okinawa issue, which was recently brought up on the

Health-with-Attitude group.

>>>>>>I am not an expert on the Okinawan Food Culture. I got my

information on monounsaturated oils from a study referenced in my

original post. Interest in Okinawa started fairly recently with the

publication of a book called _The Okinawa Program_ which was based on

a 25-year study of the centenarians of Okinawa. The Okinawan style

of cooking is low-heat stir-frying in a wok. They typically stir-fry

with Canola oil according to the _The Okinawa Program_.

>>>>>>>According to a life expectancy chart at:

http://www.okinawaprogram.com/ Okinawa has had a high level of

Centenarians since at least 1960. They perhaps became the highest

concentration of Centenarians starting in the early '70's. Then

around 1985, according to info in my original post, lost the lead to

other areas in Japan, but still have a very high concentration of

Centenarians to this day.

----------------->i guess the " china project " and " okinawa centerian " issue

must come up in the same conversation often, because the WAPF addresses the

okinawan diet in the same article that they adress the china project. here's

an excerpt:

" 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, situated equidistant from Hong Kong and Tokyo. The

average lifespan for women in Okinawa is 84 (compared to 79 in American),

and the island boasts a disproportionately large number of centenarians.

Okinawans have low levels of chronic illness—osteoporosis, cancer, diabetes,

atherosclerosis and stroke—compared to America, China and Japan, which

allows them to continue to work, even in advanced years. In spite of Okinawa

’s horrific role in World War II, as the site of one of the bloodiest

battles of the Pacific, Okinawa is a breezy, pleasant place, neither crowded

nor polluted, with a strong sense of family and community and where the

local people produce much of what they consume.

And what do Okinawans eat? The main meat of the diet is pork, and not the

lean cuts only. Okinawan cuisine, according to gerontologist Kazuhiko Taira,

“is very healthy—and very, very greasy,” in a 1996 article that appeared in

Health Magazine.19 And the whole pig is eaten—everything from “tails to

nails.” Local menus offer boiled pigs feet, entrail soup and shredded ears.

Pork is cooked in a mixture of soy sauce, ginger, kelp and small amounts of

sugar, then sliced and chopped up for stir fry dishes. Okinawans eat about

100 grams of meat per day—compared to 70 in Japan and just over 20 in

China—and at least an equal amount of fish, for a total of about 200 grams

per day, compared to 280 grams per person per day of meat and fish in

America. Lard—not vegetable oil—is used in cooking.

Okinawans also eat plenty of fibrous root crops such as taro and sweet

potatoes. They consume rice and noodles, but not as the main component of

the diet. They eat a variety of vegetables such as carrots, white radish,

cabbage and greens, both fresh and pickled. Bland tofu is part of the diet,

consumed in traditional ways, but on the whole Okinawan cuisine is spicy.

Pork dishes are flavored with a mixture of ginger and brown sugar, with

chili oil and with “the wicked bite of bitter melon.”

Weston Price did not study the peoples of Okinawa, but had he done so, he

would have found one more example to support his conclusions—that whole

foods, including sufficient animal foods with their fat—are needed for good

health and long life, even in the Orient. In fact, the Okinawan example

demonstrates the fallacy of today’s politically correct message—that we

should emulate the peoples of China by reducing animal products and eating

more grains; rather, the Chinese would benefit by adding more strengthening

animal foods to their daily fare. "

http://www.westonaprice.org/traditional_diets/food_in_china.html

Suze Fisher

Lapdog Design, Inc.

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg/

mailto:s.fisher22@...

[Guest guest]

Lyn,

Your report of how traditional Chinese eat mirrors my husbands. Meat would

be top choice if it were not for expense. Also many people who did not have

access to a wider variety of foods (animal foods) appeared had health problems

due to deficiency.

I get tired when these projects glorify a mostly vegetarian diet when the

real truth is that these people do eat animal foods.

Elainie

[Guest guest]

> I do think the China project study is flawed, to promote the veg

oil and soy

> industries.

-----> I agree...I've traveled in China and the markets have more

varieties of animal products than one's wildest imgination could

conjure. Snake, turtle, eel, small birds, crayfish, dog so sorry

Suze!)..plus all types of fermented who knows what stuff. I also

remember reading an article about Chinese student's studing here and

realizing no one else hunted cicadas when they were blooming. They

were going crazy - up all night catching them then feasting all day.

They couldn't beleive no one else wanted these incrediable

delicacies!

here's a link to famous food of Shanghai

http://www.shme.com/dish/delicacy.htm

It's almost all meat dishes.

I wonder if this study really took into account " everything single

thing " his target groups were eating or just general stuff. I also

wonder about other health issues like teeth, eyesight, resistance to

common infections, etc. I worked in other parts of rural Asia and my

experience is that people eat grains and vegetables because they are

unable to get or afford meat. They are sick lots, have bad or no

teeth and generally age quickly (they also work physically very hard

and water is often bad so that's a big piece). Given the choice meat

would always go first. Then rice or potatoes would follow as filler.

BTW..the only vegetarians I met were the American and Europeans

studying Buddhism...all the traditional Buddhists were meateaters and

if they could afford it at every meal.

Take care,

Lynn

[Guest guest]

Lyn,

I was talking to my husband this morning (he used to teach at a Buddhist

college - Naropa in Boulder) and he said every visiting monk demanded meat

(lamb)

and lots of it!

So it is strange how it gets warped here in the West.

Elainie

[Guest guest]

> I get tired when these projects glorify a mostly vegetarian diet

when the

> real truth is that these people do eat animal foods.

------->The real shame is that the study was extensive, rare,

expensive and I'm betting poorly constructed. These opportunities for

tradtional dietary studies grow smaller everyday.....hey you can get

a Coke places you can't even drive to!

I had the opportunity a few years ago to work with Tibetian refugees

in northern India. Vegetarianism was the thing with the western

Buddhist students there so it was unspoken that it was Buddhist.

However every older monk that taught these students (those orginally

from Tibet) ate meat with almost every meal. They didn't consider it

a meal without the meat. And they loved their fermented butter tea

with salt.

As far as I know other than the vegetarians of southern India, we

westerners are the only ones that have raised it to an art form. Most

other cultures simply want meat if they can get it. And I think we

westerners are the only culture that tries to be vegetarian without

even adding dairy!

Lynn

[Guest guest]

I agreee that much of what we see is just what the researcher is expecting

to see. Once when I was home sick I was channel surfing and saw most of a

show on Discovery on an indigenous South American family. The show was not

about their diet rather about the changing social structures in the bush.

Anyway this family was actually farming in the jungle. At one point the

narrator made a comment (I don't remember the exact words now) but it

sounded that these people lived on just the corn and beans that they grew.

There were no cows or sheep so I don't think they had access to milk. I

remember thinking that maybe Price was mistaken and there were some true

indigenous vegetarians. Anyway later in the program when the father of the

family was asked if he would like to live in the town, he said no because

there was no room. where would he keep his chickens and pigs? Well that

shocked me because although he might be keeping the chickens for eggs, why

would he have pigs if not to eat them? He already had two dogs as pets.

I wonder how many who watched that show walked away thinking those people

were vegetarian.

Irene

At 09:00 AM 7/14/03, you wrote:

>Vegetarianism was the thing with the western

>Buddhist students there so it was unspoken that it was Buddhist

[Guest guest]

>...all the traditional Buddhists were meateaters and

>if they could afford it at every meal.

>

>Take care,

>Lynn

Seriously? I always liked Buddhism as a religion but there

is no way I'd give up meat. In a bit about Japan it mentioned

they didn't eat beef much traditionally because it wasn't

allowed under Buddhists beliefs, but that didn't stop them

from eating fish and eggs (and bugs, I suppose).

I keep hearing that bit about the Asian diets being

low-fat too, but the cookbooks sure are not. Lots

of deep-fried stuff.

-- Heidi

[Guest guest]

I think they used seal oil to deep fry, I'll need to check that out for sure

though.

Elainie