Biased view would be expected, but selecting evidence and dehumanizing vegans is not great

There is a lot in this book and even though the authors starts by committing to stay true to evidence and also acknowledge the world has a lot of nuances, they spend most of the book ignoring that fact.

Let me disclose I’m not vegan nor paleo, but I try to eat 90% whole food plant based foods. And I read this book to challenge my biases and views, but I was expecting real scientific rigor and got the opposite of it.

Let me start with something the authors fail yo acknowledge but that both extremes(less animal, more animal) seem to agree, if one focus on locally produced whole foods (be them animal or plants) this is probably the main key contributor one can have today for both health and climate. Both extremes will get one in a best shape than today for most of westernized population and will force the industry to adapt. And unlike the authors try to claim, none will require vast amount of vitamins. B12 for plant only eaters and probably Cobalt for the cows so they can synthesize B12 :) And in neither you would be protein, iron or any other main nutrient deficient.

Few things about the book:
1. I don’t understand if the author is attacking vegans or the whole food plant based movement. They do openly attack vegans and I think without understanding what being a vegan is. I’m not a specialist either but Vegans seem to be more against exploitation of animals (and humans by the way) than they are against deaths are needed in nature. While as a farm owner the authors seems to paint a beautiful picture about farmers which care by each of their animals, we all know that’s not how billions and billions of animals raised for food are treated. Even in Norway where I live where we are proud to have Cows being as well treated as humans, there has been huge amount of reports and journalistic work showing that reality is very far that what people thought to be true.

2. If they are attacking whole food pant based movement (which is actually the other extreme which there is mounting evidence supports one of the optimal ways of living - add more years to life and life to years), then many of the arguments used are nonsense. Refined sugars, mono crops and all other things mentioned are as against the author view as the whole food plant based diet. There are multiple ways to eat badly and they can be full plant based also :)

3. I always like how large observational studies are dismissed as evidence of what is the best nutrition for humans. Although that’s the only way to find what is best nutrition, because one can’t run a double blinded randomized trial for the entire life and generation of populations. Also RCTs are very focused on reductionism. And the authors like to say that we shouldn’t use reductionism when measuring cows impact on environment, but then they like to use it to prove there is no evidence about plants being optimal diet (btw there is both plenty of RCT and Observational evidence that suggests more plans, less animal implies more and better years in life). But it’s also important to understand no knowledge is definite we keep building how knowledge by looking from different angles. But today based on what I read worst case scenario eating only plants is as good as eating meat and plants. Best case scenario plant predominant diets will lead to longer and better life. (Good summary of most evidence in “The truth about food” book)

But if one removes all the attacks and anti-vegan message as well and the promotion of a paleo diet (and raising even more cows) and the very low trick of scaring people through sensational examples of bad parenting which happen to be vegan and did horrors to their babies nutrition.. there are the things that one can learn/take to start making steps towards better health and environment regardless if one decides to eat animals or not.

Keep in mind that the author says 25% of population is iron deficient.. but remember only a fraction western population are actually non meat eaters. So the problem may mot be the vegan diet, but instead the lack of whole foods in either case :)



If you loved this book I would strongly recommend get the opposite extreme as well through “The China Study” book and the study itself :)

9 people found this helpful

Must read!!

Diana and Robb do an excellent job of truly making the case for better meat. They present the information in a very organized fashion. Although it’s dense, it’s easy to read (you may need to just read it a few times over). I can not recommend this book enough!! If you’re concerned about the environment, global economy, global food system and it’s sustainability, and optimal health, then this book is a must read!!

3 people found this helpful

The omega 3 proportion statement is misleading

The book might have some useful information, but the argument that grass-fed animals are not a good source of omega 3 anyway so they are not superior to corn fed animals in this way is misleading. Eating the meat of animal who has the right proportion of omega 3 to omega 6 means eating much less inflammatory markers and stress hormones, even if the amount of omega 3 is not adequate, the proportion is a marker for a good meat.

2 people found this helpful

Visionary

This book is a must read for anyone who practices conscious eating in the modern era.

1 person found this helpful

Life Altering

This book and the information in it is so important and really changes the way you see life.

1 person found this helpful

Absolutely essential listening

This is one of the most important books of our time. If everyone listened to the information contained within, the world would be revolutionised in the most empowering way. You won't regret choosing this book.

1 person found this helpful

Excellent Read and Knowledge

Excellent read and knowledge from two authors who are cutting through the noise to deliver information and a perspective that is objective and well-intended for our future environment and food system.

1 person found this helpful

Must read: health, global warming, sustainability

This is the most thoughtful and holistic discussion I have seen of the interaction between farming, health, global warming, and sustainability. it should be on the high school required reading list to help give everyone a clue on how big the problem actually is.

1 person found this helpful

This book should be required reading.

This book is positively eye opening, completely changed my perception of the Westernized food system and gave me an invaluable perspective on how to eat and shop. Even if you don't think you'll be interested in the topic, give this a shot since I'm sure it'll surprise you.

It expresses it's arguments in a clear manner anyone could understand and makes an irrefutably strong case for the widespread implementation of cattle in the food system.

I loved this book.

1 person found this helpful

Holy Cow the Vegan Cult!!!!

The author told me the exact conclusion of what I concluded from months of listening to LCHF/Keto talks. Although I came to the conclusion from a very different perspective, she is by far I agreed the most. Holy cow the God damned vegan cult ignoring the exact causes obesity and diabetes epidemic which is sugar and oppose to meats regardless of any convincing evidences, and manipulated the heavy environmental burdens caused by mono cropping and blamed cows for too much methane which in turn caused by heavy use of antibiotics according to Dr. Robert Lusting. The science of nutrition and environment truly need revamps and take out the garbage ideas like Ancel Keys’s diet heart hypothesis which never worked.