Harriet Hall, writing for Science-Based Medicine, said that the book had references that do not support directly the claims made by the authors and that it did not explain the exceptions to his data, such as high rates of stomach cancer in China.
Stephan Guyenet reviewing the book for Red Pen Reviews commented that The China Study is a “scholarly and well-written book” but three of its key scientific claims are “not very well supported overall”.
You discredit a webpage that cites all it’s scientific sources and call Michael Greger a quak because two people think some aspects of a study he cites are inaccurate?! That’s your argument? The study has pissed off the entire food industry, of course there are people who disagree with it. And even these two don’t question the basic message: Whole food plant based diet is by far the best diet to heal our bodies and our planet. Is that his bias?
What are you fighting, Commie?
Well, How Not To Die sold a lot of books, but he claims to give ALL book sales to charity and encourages readers to rent his books from libraries and to friends. Before his bestseller, he was on the road for years giving speeches, sleeping in his car. He doesn’t sell any supplements, merchandise or snakeoil. This is not your typical behavior to get rich fast, is it?
Yeah he wants to spread a message, and this message is based on science. My public health insurance and even the states society for nutrition (Germany) shares the same recommendations by now, 10 years after How Not To Die was released. To me, he is more like the guy who discovered that leaded gasoline is highly harmful to humans and can’t stop talking about it.
He lists all his sources, what is your source for calling him that?
he still touts the china study.
And this is wrong? How?
Harriet Hall, writing for Science-Based Medicine, said that the book had references that do not support directly the claims made by the authors and that it did not explain the exceptions to his data, such as high rates of stomach cancer in China.
Stephan Guyenet reviewing the book for Red Pen Reviews commented that The China Study is a “scholarly and well-written book” but three of its key scientific claims are “not very well supported overall”.
You discredit a webpage that cites all it’s scientific sources and call Michael Greger a quak because two people think some aspects of a study he cites are inaccurate?! That’s your argument? The study has pissed off the entire food industry, of course there are people who disagree with it. And even these two don’t question the basic message: Whole food plant based diet is by far the best diet to heal our bodies and our planet. Is that his bias?
What are you fighting, Commie?
I’m fighting a people pushing agendas with bad science.
cherrypicking data to push an agenda isn’t science.
What’s the agenda?
selling books, I think.
Well, How Not To Die sold a lot of books, but he claims to give ALL book sales to charity and encourages readers to rent his books from libraries and to friends. Before his bestseller, he was on the road for years giving speeches, sleeping in his car. He doesn’t sell any supplements, merchandise or snakeoil. This is not your typical behavior to get rich fast, is it?
Yeah he wants to spread a message, and this message is based on science. My public health insurance and even the states society for nutrition (Germany) shares the same recommendations by now, 10 years after How Not To Die was released. To me, he is more like the guy who discovered that leaded gasoline is highly harmful to humans and can’t stop talking about it.