Dr Ornish and Spectrum

[Jaggu]

I know Dr Ornish, Dr Essylsten, Dr McDougall, Campbell were pretty much on the same page and recommended plant based, whole food vegetarian diet and advised against dairy, meat, fish, oil, high fat, dietary cholesterol etc.

I have just finished reading first chapter from Dr Ornish's Spectrum and puzzled and confused and may be someone here can clarify it further.

In the book, Ornish says, he feeds a fish to his son twice a week.

He also highlights how one can get omega-3 from canola oil and nuts and seeds.

So what happened to no food which has a face or mother? No oil? no diary? etc

Just curious whether he changed his position? and whether he did it for a reason because of advancement in nutritional knowledge over the course of last so many years.

If this is not a right question to ask here then I will remove the thread but I believe it is important that people know why, what, how, when?

[JeffN]

Jaggu,

I can not speak for anyone else.

But, just a point of clarity...

...while many in the vegan movement have used Dr Ornish's work to support their philosophy, his recommendations have never been vegan. Even his reversal diet included non-fat dairy and eggwhites.

Also, there were no "vegan" groups in the China Study either.

The best answer to why Dr. Ornish has said or done something would come directly from Dr. Ornish.


In Health
!eff Novick, MS, RD

[Clary]

I've noticed also, over the six or so years that I have participated on this board, that slowly, over time, more and more people refer to Dr. McDougall's program as "Vegan". As far as I know, Dr. McDougall has never referred to his program as "Vegan". The term "Vegan" is not listed in the indexes of any of his nine books that I have available. I loaned out my copy of Dr. McDougall's Healthy Heart Book, so can't check that one. And Dr. McDougall has "made a point of having roast turkey on Thanksgiving Day, and sometimes on Christmas, too." "To escape having [even a] vegetarian label pinned on me... (--see "Vegetarian" in the index of the 12 Days book.)

A person who follows a Vegan philosophy and belief system and lifestyle can easily choose from and incorporate Dr. McDougall's teachings and principles, but a person does not have to be "Vegan" to choose from, apply, and benefit from the principles of the food/beverage/moderate exercise principles and lifestyle changes recommended by Dr. McDougall.

I've pondered this process as I have watched it develop, and am not sure how the term "Vegan" has come to define Dr. McDougall's program to many who now use that term in relation to it.

I appreciated this recent post of yours, Jeff, and have shared it with several of my family members and friends.

Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2008 5:14 am
Greetings,

There is no known physiological reason, why anyone would benefit from eating animal protein and/or saturated fat, if they were already consuming a well planned optimal plant food diet. I do not know how adding animal food (or saturated fat) can make it better.

However, IMHO, that is not the real question or problem. The real question or problem is why do some people say they do not feel good on a vegan or plant based diet. And, to me, the answer is simple. Look at the diets that most vegans/vegetarians consume.

While some of you may be the exception, most vegan diets I see are full of highly refined, highly processed (junk) foods, low in fiber, high in fat, high in sodium, high in refined sweeteners, low in essential fats, high in omega 6s, high in calorie density and low in nutrient density. The contain little fresh fruits, veggies, starchy veggies, intact whole grains and legumes. These are not ideal, nor are the optimal.

Being vegan (as in being raw) does not in anyway guarantee you a healthy diet. Regardless of whether or not someone is vegan (or raw), they still have to optimize their nutrient intake and limit the known harmful dietary components.

To me, veganism and raw foodism are not diets, they are philosophical ideas and/or belief systems. In and of themselves, they do not tell you how to eat, nor do they guarantee optimal health. If someone tells me they are a raw fooder or a vegan, I know absolutely nothing about what they do eat and/or how healthy their diet is, I only know what they dont eat (animal food and/or cooked food). You can easily follow an unhealthy vegan diet and/or a raw food diet.

In Health
Jeff Novick, MS, RD

[catalina1]

im somewhat confused also. i know dr. mcdougall mentioned while in costa rica ( and im sure at other lectures ) that after 3 years ( unless pregant or nursing ) we should take a vit. b12 supplement. this suggests to me that dr. mcdougall expects all at his lectures to be vegans. i also know that he is a member of pcrm , a strong vegan advocacy group. even tho he states that he may have turkey every other thanksgiving , nowhere has he advocated it for any of us mcdougallers , has anyone ever seen a recipe for turkey in any of his recipe books ? i believe that he does not think this ( eating turkey 0nce a year ) is healthy or neccessary and that is why he calls these festive occasions. in the final analysis , mcdougall beleives veganism is the healthiest option available.

[Jaggu]

The question is not about strict vegan or not. I don't look at Vegan as someone who doesn't eat any meat or dairy at all. If someone is eating turkey or some other meat once in blue moon but the diet is otherwise(99%) vegan then they could be considered as vegan or vegetarian. We want to focus on terms such vegan, vegetarian, non-veg from the health point of view and not any other point of view.

Dean said he is feeding fish twice a week to his son. That is much different than having turkey on a Thanksgiving.

He also highlighted how canola oil and nuts are a source of omega-3 instead of categorically advising against it like you see in the writings of Dr Essy or Dr McD or Dr Novick.

[catalina1]

jannu im sorry if u misunderstood me concerning dr m . u r correct in bringing up dr ornish feeding his son fish 3 x a week. y he is doing this is beyond me . when dr. ornish 1st started studying the relationship between diet and cad , the only animal product he allowed was 1 cup of low fat yogurt and no oils or other fatty plants. his patients on this diet , along with exercise and maintaining a positve attitude , were shown to reverse their cad ! then he allowed eggwhites and later on , fish oil capsules. now he is allowing small portions of meat and or fish . my question is now that we know in retrospect that his original recommendation ( no oils , other plant fats or any animal products other than 1 cup low fat yogurt ) reversed cad , y is there an emphasis of omega 3 ? isnt it probable that there was always an adequate amount of omega 3 prsent in his original diet recommendation ? or is it possible that omega 3 is highly overrated , as is protein. as most in dr m plan know , and from decades of research on diet and cad reversal , we dont need any special nutrient or supplement to prevent or reverse cad. just to consume what we have been and not worry about adequate amounts of this or that nutrient

[Adrienne]

Jaggu: Although I do not know the exact answer to your question, here are some links that may be of some help. I was surprised a few months ago when I saw ornish on GMA cooking shrimp so I did some reading on his websites. He has separate guidelines for preventative and reversal diets. Feeding his kids fish twice a week seems to go in accordance with his preventative guidelines

http://www.pmri.org/?p=krf

Also his groundbreaking research on reversing heart disease was conducted in 1990, which was a long time ago. Since then it seems he has changed his opinion on omega 3's.

http://www.webmd.com/content/pages/2/3079_1700

Catalina1: I was listening to a McD podcast a while ago and heard him say that he was not a vegetarian and ate Turkey every other THanksgiving. I couldnt believe it so I asked a friend of mine and he sent me this interview Dr McD did with Shareguide magazine:

Dennis: Are you a vegetarian yourself?

Dr. McDougall: In practice I am, but some people have bad associations with "the cult of vegetarianism" so I tell them that I eat turkey every other Thanskgiving. Then they get the point that I don't eat the way I do for any religious principles, or animal rights issues--I eat this way because it's healthy. But if you want to eat meat in small amounts on occasion, you can still enjoy good health.

Its a good interview if you are interested in reading the whole thing
http://www.shareguide.com/McDougall.html

[ladynnred1]

I think that people get attached to a particular variable (low fat, nuts-no nuts, dairy-no dairy, etc), then the extrapolate to what they HOPE will be true. I don't speak for anyone but my own experience is that I eat fewer calories if I eat exceptionally low fat, vegan. I don't expect that, however, to work for everyone b/c people who won't stick to it aren't going to benefit from it. If they can only do low fat and 75% vegetarian, that's still healthier than SAD. Too often we seem to be critical that people aren't doing everything 100% as we envision McD or Ornish or anyone else who advocate for a program.

Too many times people are looking for these approaches to eating to do more than they are intended by their original advocates. Ornish's plan originally was to reverse heart disease, NOT to create weight loss. If I remember the early McD books, they were also about heart disease and weight loss were an effect. Fuhrman, on the other hand, is a relatively different program that seeks to provide longer life and weight loss is again a subsidiary effect. Esselstyn seeks to reverse heart disease and says weight loss will result.

When it turns out that the advocate really is looking to solve a different problem than weight loss, people following that advocate's program seem disillusioned that there might be something else going on. I just hope to get better health and have found McD the best way to do that.
Cynthia