ITMFA
gonzo blogging, commentary, opinion, and more from Tom Swiss
about unreasonable.org | contact Tom | recent updates | register | RSS feed | send a story
Active forum topics
Weston A. Price Foundation: shills and quacks
By tms at 30 January 2008 - 5:26pm | Categories: |

I've been seeing flyers around lately for a upcoming lecture in D.C. by Weston A. Price Foundation president Sally Fallon. Today I got spam from them about it, which prompts me to post a bit about these shills and quacks.

The Weston A. Price Foundation is one of the primary groups responsible for spreading some of the FUD that you may have heard about soy products. Their interest (both philosophical and financial) is in promoting dairy consumption, specifically raw milk. They make claims about supporting "traditional diets", which would be fine - except that the use of dairy products is fairly new in the 200,000 years history of the human species, dating only to the neolithic revolution of about 10,000 years ago; and of course dairy consumption was just about unknown in many areas of the world where lactose intolerance is common. In fact, Price himself wasn't such an advocate of dairy.

They advocate a diet high in saturated fat, which according to our best scientific knowledge is linked to a higher risk of heart disease and stroke. WAPF simply denies that such a link exists, sort of like how tobacco companies simply denied the link between smoking and lung cancer.

On the soy front, they point to studies where animals were injected with extracts of soy protein and got sick, and ignore studies where humans ate traditional soy foods and improved their health. (It is true, though, that overconsumption of processed soy foods is not healthy. Choose tempeh over TVP.)

There's a good series of articles about WAPF at vegsource.com, and a critique of their FUD about vegetarianism at energygrid.com.

Of course, even a stopped clock is right twice a day, and they do have a good point about the prevalence of processed food in the standard Western diet. Apart from that, though, it's mostly nonsense.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Weston A. Price

By damien81 on 9 July 2008 - 7:57am

In defence of the Weston A. Price Foundation
I am posting my thoughts on the continual defamation of the foundation set up to honour and continue the work of Weston Andrew Price. One would have thought that the Weston Price Foundation, which is a non-profit organization that promotes healthy food, healthy eating, raw milk and most importantly the health and well being of moo cows and other animals, is surely a good thing and would be embraced wholeheartedly. I would also have thought that vegans, lacto-vegans or whatever ridiculous name you guys call yourselves nowadays, would actually be applauding the Foundation and the work they continue. They stand for such ridiculous policies of hormone free, un-pasteurized milk, grass fed beef. Hence the expression, ‘clean cows clean milk’. I’m not sure if any of the lettuce nibblers on this site are/were aware of the Posilac/rGBH scandal in America. I’m not American I’m Irish so I’m not sure if this shit is still being used in America so perhaps someone can enlighten me on this one. So you guys are happy to slag off the Weston Price Foundation, but have not got the bottle to criticise Monsanto, McDonalds, Burger King and all the other multinational, powerful corporations collectively known as Big Food and Big Chemical? Unbelievable but everything I would expect from people whose main source of meat/protein comes from tofu or soy or some other crap like that. I’m sure my soy munching friends would be delighted to know the facts about their beloved soy. 97% of the world’s soybean crop is genetically modified. This does not mean that it grows faster or produces more soybeans. It simply means that it is resistant to the herbicide sprayed on it. Which means well intentioned but ignorant farmers are free to spray huge amounts of Roundup which contains a substance called glyphosphate. I’m not going to get into the chemical structure of this filth but it’s safe to say this substance will wipe out all and every wildlife it’s sprayed near. Monsanto was the chief supplier to the US government of Agent Orange which was used by the US military to defoliate the rain forest eco-systems of Southeast Asia. Unbeknown to the US military(although I have my doubts) but known to Monsanto was that the Agent Orange contained Dioxin a mortal and toxic poison, one of the most toxic ever created by man.
Bottom line guys is that people will be eating meat for the foreseeable future, me included. In actual fact im going to see is there any juicy steak in the fridge. But I also agree with you guys that animals should be treated with love, care and compassion, which is where the Weston A. Price Foundation comes in. So I suggest that you guys get some meat into you (excuse the pun), and take the fight to the real abusers of the animals you profess to love, i.e. McDonalds, KFC (they’re real bad!), Burger King, Walmart, etc.
All I have heard so far is idiotic treehuggers whingeing about how we shouldn’t eat meat or drink milk, or the ludicrous argument that it is a front for the beef or dairy industry. So you fools should wise up and realize it’s not going to change, like I said the Weston A. Price Foundation is working for the better of animals and animal welfare. So what if some beef barons have jumped on the bandwagon to further there own purposes, at least the animals on their farms have a pretty good standard of living. Would you rather said farmers were injecting their moo cows with steroids, hormones etc and then shipping them off to the MaccieD’s slaughterhouse? Thought not!

Weston Price Foundation's dietary recommendations.

By Anonymous (not verified) on 12 July 2008 - 12:56am

If the people who follow WPF & Sally Fallon's diet religiously are healthy, I will take their word for it. I see a contradiction, though, as follows:

Their diet is high in dairy products (good quality, of course). Yet of the many tribes, nations & races that Weston Price himself visited, and who were impressively healthy, the vast majority consumed no dairy products at all. I think there was only one that did, as I remember.

So, it seems to me that they are being dishonest in saying that their dietary philosophy is based on the work of Weston Price.

Weston Price Foundation's dietary recommendations

By Anonymous (not verified) on 16 September 2008 - 5:38pm

No, most tribes, nations & races that Weston Price himself visted did not drink milk. But many did regularly eat some form of raw meat which was often specific to that particular tribe, nation, and/or race. WPFs argument is that raw milk (or some form of raw milk) was the "raw meat" of many northern European groups.

Of the people Weston Price visited there may have been only one group that drank milk (I haven't read his actual writings) but milk drinking appears to have arisen independently in at least two groups (northern Europeans and east Africans).

Weston Price Foundation's dietary recommendations

By Anonymous (not verified) on 16 September 2008 - 5:38pm

No, most tribes, nations & races that Weston Price himself visted did not drink milk. But many did regularly eat some form of raw meat which was often specific to that particular tribe, nation, and/or race. WPFs argument is that raw milk (or some form of raw milk) was the "raw meat" of many northern European groups.

Of the people Weston Price visited there may have been only one group that drank milk (I haven't read his actual writings) but milk drinking appears to have arisen independently in at least two groups (northern Europeans and east Africans).

If you looked more carefully

By Anonymous (not verified) on 15 October 2008 - 12:11am

If you looked more carefully at the information from the Weston A. Price Foundation you might notice that dairy foods are far from the only foods that are recommended. I imagine the raw milk gets emphasized some because consumers rights to obtain raw milk are being threatened in certain parts of the country, so that is an issue right now. Check out the foundation's website and you will see that while they emphasize foods rich in vitamins A and D, (though not at all exclusively) they are very clear about the fact that Price found healthy people eating an incredible variety of different foods. I have read Price's book and it seems like the foundation does a great job trying to help people apply his principles and findings to their food choices today.

Yes. I believe the reason

By Anonymous (not verified) on 23 November 2008 - 10:01pm

Yes. I believe the reason you hear so much about raw milk from WAPF is because of all the current legality issues around it. Good, small farms are being shut down by public health beaurocrats on the basis that milk is "unsafe" unless it is pasteurized. WAPF is all about eating a real balanced diet rich in nutrient dense foods.

Weston A. Price diet

By Anonymous (not verified) on 17 September 2008 - 1:50pm

I have a 71-year-old (very frail) sister who has been following the Weston A. Price Org eating regimen for 9 months and she is now suffereing from cryptosporiosis, to a near life-threatening degree because of the severe dehydration and possible resulting kidney disease. I believe the parasite's origin is in the raw milk, which can never be completely free of bacteria, protazoa, parasites, and whatever else may affect us adversely. She is, however, adamant that pasteurizing milk kills ALL nutrients so she will not listen to my (or anyone else's) opinion. Only under her strong protest did we get her to see a doctor and take medication to attack her illness. I will not be surprised if this diet kills her.

Hi Anonymous,I appreciate

By Anonymous (not verified) on 3 January 2009 - 2:56pm

Hi Anonymous,
I appreciate your concern for your sister. Unfortunately the cryptosporiosis is probably not coming from the raw milk. As people eating and living in a Western culture age they general have less good bacteria and digestive power. This inability to digest the food or to kill the bad bacteria because of low Hydrochloric acid and low good bacteria is probably more of the problem. The WAPF doesn't exclusively say that raw milk is good for all people. Some individuals have specific food needs based on biology and heritage. Your statements of completely free of bacteria is true. So the solution is to build the immune function and health of the host. If the "terrain" as our bodies have been called, is in a good state of health over all we can handle most bacteria.

Sorry for your sister's illness.

Soy shills/propagandists = Monsanto shills/propagandists

By Darth Chaos (not verified) on 8 October 2008 - 12:39am

I find it funny how soy shills/propagandists never explain the difference between fermented soy and unfermented soy. Asians have been consuming fermented soy for years, and even that is done in moderation.

I am so sick of you soy shills/propagandists encouraging people to overconsume soy products, and I am so sick of you smearing people as "meat/dairy industry shills" when they attack any form of soy at all, including GMO soy. So take your Monsanto dirty money and choke on it.

The soy industry, soy shills/propagandists, CSPI, PETA, National Action Against Obesity, Monsanto, and the Center for Consumer Freedom. ALL Rockefeller fronts.

Weston A Price

By Anonymous (not verified) on 10 November 2008 - 2:09pm

I just attended the Weston A Price foundation conference in San Francisco last weekend and would like to contribute to this conversation on the basis of what I learned there. I attended a 5 hour talk by Sally Fallon there.

1. This thread complains extensively about the emphasis on milk products but I think the characterization of WAP as being so focused on milk is unfair. Yes, milk is a big part of the agenda. They support this by showing evidence of the health benefits of raw milk from grass fed freely pastured animals. That said, milk is just one small part of the total agenda. In Sally's 5-hour overview, she spent relatively little time talking about milk. It was just one of many topics that were explored.

2. At the conference there were a lot of speakers and some were more knowledgeable than others. Sally Fallon was the most amazing. Very articulate and educated. I was comfortable with her and had confidence in what she was saying. I have a fairly good gut instinct for separating quacks from real teachers, and I definitely do not believe Sally is a quack. I found her to be very credible.

3. I do agree that the overall recommendations of WAP are focused more on what might appeal to the American audience and they don't necessarily have a 360 degree view. In other words, a lot of the material and research fails to comprehensively explore diets of other regions, particularly, Asia. That is an area for further development. But, just because they haven't fully explored Asian (or other) diets does not mean the advice is bad. To the contrary, I still believe everything I learned at the conference from Sally to be sound. There is room to improve by integrating a more global perspective.

4. There was detailed discussion about the difference between Asian use of Soy and American use of manufactured chemical-based soy products and the difference between fermented and non-fermented soy. There was NOT a wholesale dismissal of soy, we had a nuanced and thoughtful discussion of soy and Sally specifically recommended traditional Asian forms of soy like Tempeh and Natto and Miso, she was counseling us to avoid heavily processed artificial soy products that are de-natured and full of toxic chemicals. These products don't exist in the traditional Asian diet.

WAP

By Anonymous (not verified) on 13 November 2008 - 9:14pm

I have just dared quackbusters to give me one objective way they decide what is mainstream and what is peripheral. As a research scientist myself for 40 years outside the university labs, I find them biased, self-centered, self-laudatory, and often about 15-20 years behind independent science. Regarding WAP, I have yet to find a paragraph they have written that I can reject. On the other hand, the frequent drugging of children is so low that months of reading about Stalin and Hitler has yet to turn up an instance of them drugging children for "mental illness," such as ADD and juvenile bipolar disorder that were unknown before 1960. I will debate before an audience any professional who claims that the mainstream is a 40-fold increase in bipolar disorder in a decade among tiny children, and millions who may be budding geniuses called hyperactive (compared to what?!). 'Nuf said

Quackbusters are like neocons and neolibs

By Darth Chaos (not verified) on 29 November 2008 - 3:02am

They run their mouths like they're the kings of the world, but when you call them out on their BS and show them documented FACTS, they cower and call you a shill. Quackbusters is a front for Big Pharma and the FDA. Stephen Barrett is a government shill.

"WAPF simply denies that

By Anonymous (not verified) on 2 December 2008 - 3:04pm

"WAPF simply denies that such a link exists, sort of like how tobacco companies simply denied the link between smoking and lung cancer."

Uh, no, actually that's a good analogy for what you do in your post, denying the excellent deconstructions provided by Enig and Fallon of highly publicized original research (perhaps simply ignorance in the case of your post, blathering from your apriorisms instead of actually checking it out). Enig particularly, also Fallon, does an excellent job of reporting on the statistical and methodological flaws and biases in original research - not to mention some laughably ridiculous "conclusions" drawn that contradict the papers' own data.

By the way, the vegsource.com articles are pure crap, barely literate FUD. The energygrid one is better. I disagree with the arguments, but at least the author attempted some logical points.

I find it funny how soy

By Anonymous (not verified) on 7 December 2008 - 12:30am

I find it funny how soy shills/propagandists never explain the difference between fermented soy and unfermented soy. Asians have been consuming fermented soy for years, and even that is done in moderation.

This is a good example of the disinformation about soy. The truth is that tofu (unfermented soy) is consumed at levels in china, taiwan and japan roughly equal to the same amount we in the west consume bread. somewhere in the neighborhood of 70 pounds a year per person. This is not including the massive amount of soy milk consumed from some 38,000 tofu shops in Japan. the population in japan has 15 times the number of people over 100 than we do in the west. that alone is quite a dietary study. The people in Japan that consume the most unfermented soy are the people of Okinawa. They eat tofu every day. Okinawa boasts the longest lived population on earth. They have 50 times the people over 100 than we in the US do.

some other actual facts (instead of Weston A. Price Foundation lies) about un fermented soy are:

no studies not one ever have reliably demonstrated an increase in the risk of breast cancer among human women eating soy. There are however reliable studes that have reported a decrease in the risk of breast cancer among human women eating soy compared to women who did not eat soy.

Animals that were given soy phytoestrogens developed fewer mammary (breast) tumors in many studies.

Phytoestrogens are actively being researched by the medical community for beneficial effects on cardiovascular and bone health. Studies are also examining various phytoestrogens for relieving some of the symptoms associated with menopause.

all of the above facts are actually the opposite of the false propaganda put out by the anti soy people and make the anti soy people seem quite evil and point to questionable motives and a desire to do people harm with false information.

Veganism is a philosophy of

By Anonymous (not verified) on 7 December 2008 - 6:39pm

Veganism is a philosophy of compassion. Eating dead animals and their secretions contributes to the enslavement and death of many sentient beings. A whole foods vegan diet is the healthieset diet on the planet according to "THe China Study", by Dr. Colin campbell. Read "The World Peace Diet " by Dr. Will Tuttle. May all beings be happy and free from suffering.

This is the ultimate truth.

By Jim Pflieger (not verified) on 12 December 2008 - 6:48am

This is the ultimate truth. Thank you Anonymous. :-)

WAPF

By John (not verified) on 11 December 2008 - 10:05am

To me the type of diet that the Price foundation advocates makes sense. A traditional diet that has been consumed for millenia. In the bible the Promised Land is the "land of milk and honey." I am not able to get raw milk where I live but I certainly would drink it if I could. But with all due respect to Dr. Enig and Sally Fallon, I don't believe they have really made the case with the necessary scientific rigor. I believe they are right but I myself would not be convinced by their writings and I don't expect other people to be. The best case for rejecting the lipid hypothesis--the theory that it is saturated fat and cholesterol that is responsible for heart disease and obesity--was made in the recent book "Good calories, Bad Calories," by Gary Taubes. To say it makes for dry reading is probably an understatement but I found it really gripping because it tears apart the reigning nutritional orthodoxy with such meticulous care. Taubes is a writer for Science Magazine and he has really done his homework. His book more than any other I've read (and I've read books like "The China Study" as well) convinced me beyond the shadow of a doubt that the healthiest diets are traditional diets that include mostly, if not all, whole foods. And meat is not the villain! It is possible to eat more or less meat and either way be eating a very healthy diet--but I think completely abstaining from meat is probably not wise. To me his book and Sally's writings have been have taken the scales from my eyes and let me see what is obvious if people would look with an open mind and not get caught up in fad science. Why would people think that skim milk is healthy but whole milk isn't? Why would one integral component of milk--the protein--be healthy and the other--the fat--not be? Why would meat and saturated fat be unhealthy when cultures such as the Inuit eat these virtually exclusively and thrived until our "civilized" processed foods penetrated their lives?

"The land of milk and honey"

By tms on 12 December 2008 - 2:02pm

Consumption of dairy products was unknown for most of the existence of the human species, it began only with the Neolithic revolution. It cames common only in some cultures, and only became a mainstay fairly recently. No other mammal on the planet drinks milk into adulthood, and no other mammal drinks the milk of other species.

"The land of milk and honey" - who drinks several glasses of honey a day? The use of the phrase shows that milk was a rare treat, not a staple food.

As for Taubes, he's the guy who write that famous piece of nonsense in the New York Times Magazine in July 2002, "What If It's All Been a Big Fat Lie?", defending toxic "low-carb" diets. This is a guy who recommends against exercise for weight control, on the grounds that it makes you hungrier. I suppose that why I see all those fat marathoners.

I suggest John Robbin's "The Food Revolution" as a good cure for such nonsense.

Of course, whole foods are healthier than processed junk. Your diet should be built around vegetables and fruits and whole grains.

As for the idea that the Inuit "thrived" on their traditional diet, it's simply untrue. Life expectancy has always been low.

It's true that they did not suffer much heart disease. This is explained by the fact that the flesh foods that they ate were high in monounsaturated fats - lots of fish, and mammals who ate fish.

There is no necessity for meat in the human diet. None. The fact that its production entails the suffering and death of sentient creatures, is a strong reason to completely abstain from it.

Tom Swiss - proprietor, unreasonable.org

How we doing?? Results of the Great Low Fat - high carb diet

By Anonymous (not verified) on 2 January 2009 - 5:33pm

The McGovern Committee hearings on diet and Ancel Keys put America through a great social experiment. Fats are bad - Carbs are good. Viz. the American Food Pyramid.
The results: after 40 years of lowfat this and lowfat that we have an out of control obesity and diabetes and cardiac epidemic that is driving our health care costs through the roof.

If we had listened to Weston Price and Robert Atkins we would be living longer and healthier lives and our medical costs would be going down.
You can't argue with vegans who have scruples about killing other living beings but they should realize their health is being compromised. Along with people who eat unfermented soy.
You can't argue with the boys who run this post. Their minds are made up and facts will only enrage them. "Peace" indeed!!!!

obesity - not fats vs. carbs, but too much food!

By tms on 3 January 2009 - 3:19pm

The reason we have rampant obesity has nothing to do with "lowfat this and lowfat that", but is because our caloric intake increased by 24.5 percent between 1970 and 2000.

And we certainly haven't increased our physical activity by the same amount.

We eat too damn much and exercise too little. Low-fat foods are less caloricly dense, but that doesn't help if you eat twice as much of them.

Your claim that vegans are damaging their health is simply specious; evidence shows that vegans suffer lower level of cancer and heart disease, while Atkins-style diets are dangerous and toxic. And soy foods - including unfermented ones - are beneficial in small, sane amounts; unfortunately, Americans all too often fall into the "if a little is good, more is better!" trap, and start throwing processed soy protein supplements (probably made from GMO soybeans) into everything.

The adult human body doesn't need much protein, and in fact reacts badly to excessive dietary protein; but coming off a meat-heavy diet, many people incorrectly think they need to replace that meat with another high-protein food, and so load their diet with soy (or dairy).

Tom Swiss - proprietor, unreasonable.org

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <b> <i><hr><blockquote><img>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
More information about formatting options