President Clinton is now mimicking President Eisenhower, not in terms of foreign policy, but becoming obsessed with diet as a cure for his heart disease. President Clinton revealed that he has become a vegan, and is under the tutelage of Dr. Dean Ornish – a proponent of getting rid of all but about ten percent fat in the diet.
The results, as they were with President Eisenhower- are not likely to be different. Eisenhower ended up eating almost nothing but Melba toast and grapefruit, obsessed with his cholesterol level, and having more heart attacks until the last one killed him.
What is the evidence that a vegan diet is healthier for a person than a diet with animal proteins? None. There is no evidence that a diet that is based around plants or a diet with low animal fat does little.
Some will cite epidemiologic data- a poor source for data less than a level one. If you cite epidemiologic data you have to explain all the data—and often they ignore the “French Paradox.” Or ignore that while the Japanese eat little meat and have few heart attacks – their average consumption has increased over 22 percent with no increase in heart attacks (often people cite data from post World War 2 Japan, and not current Japan – and then ignore the data about stroke rate). When all epidemiologic studies are examined – one cannot justify a plant based diet on those.
Some cite the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) study claiming that an animal based diet had more mortality than a plant based diet – but few have read the study. While Dr. Ornish jumped on this study, saying it justified what he has been telling people- apparently he didn’t read the study either.
This study divided people into two groups- the low-carb group received 37 to 60 percent of their calories from carbohydrates (that isn’t low carbohydrate by any standard). The meat group was not divided out for those who smoked and were overweight (a higher portion of the meat group smoked and were obese). The vegetable group had 30 per cent of their calories from animals, as opposed to 45% for the meat group (so not really a vegetable group). Once again, an epidemiologic study and it is flawed.
What we do know from science about low-density-lipoproteins is that they fall into two groups- one group is far more deadly than the other, causing the majority of atherosclerotic plaques. That is the group with the high tri-glyceride levels is the one that is deadly. Of this there is no doubt in the scientific community. When the Very Low Density Lipoprotein and apo B – leading to high low density lipoprotein – leads the the increased in artery plaque leading to heart attacks and strokes. The lower the triglyceride levels then the lipoproteins secreted by the liver become the subspecies of intermediate-density lipoproteins, which are far less cause of atherosclerosis than the others. Where does the triglycerides come from? Not animal proteins, but primarily carbohydrates.
Bottom line from science – the more triglycerides – result in atherogenic small, dense LDL proteins – and this happens from carbohydrate rich foods.
What about Greece, and Southeast Asia, and Japan(after world war 2) . These populations barely had enough food to survive. They didn’t use refined carbohydrates – and ate whatever they could. It was not the low-intake of saturated fat that protected them, rather the relative lack of a refined carbohydrate leading to low triglyceride levels. Still, those studies, championed by the late Ancel Keys, are still cited. This in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
Back to President Clinton – a vegan diet will not save his heart. Saturated fat is not what led to the atherosclerotic plaques – rather, it was the abundance of triglycerides from highly processed and abundant carbohydrates. What he has done that will help him is, lose weight, have heart surgery, take medication –but in terms of diet, President Clinton falls into what Eisenhower did, as well as every anorectic—when the only thing they can control is diet, they will fall victim to fads that sound healthy, are promoted by TV MD’s – but have no science to back them up.
If you want to be a vegan for health, there is no data to support that. In fact, vegans have a life expectancy that is less than pescetarians (fish eaters) and omnivores.President Clinton – a Vegan
Right on the money, Doc! Never believed in veganism, and often felt very alone in that belief. Yet all my reading is in line with what you describe here (ps, I’m RosenetTV on Twitter).
Hey! Well, being a vegan is very difficult- there are a lot of nutritional issues they have to deal with.
[...] sounds like he’s doing an Eisenhower
… By @brentkearney on August 23rd, 2011 @ 11:21 • Comments google_ad_client = [...]
I studied Ornish’s work after developing heart disease – severe angina was my main symptom – some years back. Following the advice in his books definitely helped me avoid pills and procedures. I’d seen several acquaintances reliant on drugs or undergoing what I consider to be ‘radical’ surgical interventions – angioplasty and bypass – with questionable benefit. I was determined to (in my own modest way) look for what might have caused my condition and, if possible, adopt a more ‘holistic’ approach to my treatment. I must say that within days of following the Ornish’s dietary advice I began to feel better. Incidentally, Ornish does not recommend a vegan diet. He allows skimmed milk, egg-whites and some fish. Interestingly, as I became more immersed in my ‘research’ I came across doctors Esselstyn and McDougall. Now, they certainly do recommend a very low fat vegan way of eating as the best response to and best protection against heart disease and the common cancers – breast and prostrate, to name but two. Ever the optimist, I switched to their recommendations and my symptoms virtually disappeared. Let’s put it this way, if I was getting these results from a pill I’d be hailing it as a miracle drug – and the drug companies would be even richer than they are! I simply don’t understand the animosity that is aroused in some people whenever vegetarianism or, heaven forbid, veganism is mentioned – I put it down to all that meat, fat and junk food they must surely be eating! Good Health!
Confirmation bias– sad that you fell into it. Happy you are feeling better. Just did a bit about Esselstyn – he was also flawed. There is no evidence to support your claim. Sorry
I don’t know what the ‘nutritional issues’ are that a vegan has to deal with – as mentioned by a previous commentator. The only thing you won’t get from a vegan diet (unless you leave dirt on your veggies) is B12. This can easily be supplemented. There is no other nutrient we require that cannot be obtained from a vegan diet based on, say, rice, potatoes, corn, legumes, colourful vegetables and fruits. Yes, I do include protein in that assertion. Check it out! It’s simply incorrect to think you need meat and fish for protein or dairy ‘for calcium’. There’s loads of calcium in spinach, to name just one of the calcium-rich vegetables. Let’s replace some of this prejudice with facts!
Don’t set up the straw man. If you are happy being a vegan- more meat for me. The life span of a vegan is not as long as a vegetarian and far less than someone who eats fish – but don’t let the facts interfere with your prejudice
Been vegan for 35 years and have never been sick a day in my life. We may not live longer but we sure look better. Hard to tell under the beard but you look pretty fat to me!!!
Thank you for your kind comments. I became ill after smashing into a ski slope- but that was my shoulder and somehow I don’t think being a Vegan would have helped that.
I have practiced in the Texas Medical Center for over 15 years. I have treated thousands of patients with a strictly plant based (vegan) diet. We find a very significant decrease in inflammation as well as an improvement in the lipid profile (decrease total cholesterol, LDL, and triglycerides) of patients who follow the diet. We see angiographic evidence of reversal of CAD. The data that supports the benefit of a plant based diet over an animal protein diet is overwhelming. You should read The China Study. You should also know that no study has shown elective heart surgery or angioplasty has been shown to improve survival or improve quality of life. The scientific and clinical data supports the benefits of a plant based diet over an animal protein diet. If eating meat was beneficial for preventing heart disease, former President Clinton would not have had coronary artery disease to start with.
Working on the China Study now- significant issues with it. Angiographic evidence of reversal of CAD is very suspect, as you should know- and the materials published in the literature are not significant. In terms of survival benefit of CABG or angioplasty- it is rather difficult to believe that someone who is surviving ten years post LAD lesion is not an improved survival benefit. When you say scientific and clinical data supports- you are ignoring a large basis of evidence in the literature and cherry picking others. Still- I would like to see the citations (besides China Study which you can respond to later) and the published literature that you have with reversal