Re: questioning Weston Price Foundation

Anyway, it seems that nor the pro-WAPF nor the anti-WAPF have real
arguments pro or against the consumption of cholesterol, sat fat and a
diet which is mostly animal food

It's three simple questions:

* Are saturated fat harmful?
* Is dietary cholesterol harmful?
* Are there any reason to have a diet where 90% of calories come from
animal food or fats?

Questions that should be answered clearly with details of the
physiological and biochemical processes that make them harmful or
harmless for the body

Yet, especially the pro-WAPF, seems to go on with old trite arguments
"my other ate butter everyday and lived to 90" "the Inuits eat just
animal foods and are healthy" "you body need that so it can't harmful"
....

is that science?
WAPF accuse their detractors to be short of science, and they're right,
but they're the last group that should accuse one of lacking science?

I think the substances that WAPF wants us to gorge in and that
anti-WAPF want us to avoid like plague have "clear" and "specific"
physiologicall and metabolical effects and influences on the body that,
with the technology and knwoledge we have nowaday, can be easily
observed and proved ...

Anyone?

.

Quantcast