Weston A. Price Foundation: shills and quacks

Thanks Anonymous for talking right back to this guy. tom, I wish you would do what you say and admit "I don't want to eat meat" You have come up with a hundred excuses and you have been brazen enough to tell a poster _his_ reasons to eat it. You've announced that you know how someone else feels about his own mother and called yourself compassionate. The argument whether we should make someone stop eating meat only assumes hunting equates to murder. Over and over when reminded that killing other species is natural behavior you play warfare/cannibalism is natural behavior and noone has asked you how war/cannibalism and hunting are similar. They're similar in that they're behaviors you don't want people engaged in. You used just what animals do as an argument why we wouldn't eat meat yet an animals sentience why we should spare its life. It's obvious that to you it's worth imitating if it eats plants.
Over and over - yapping about loving an animal and never answer, why should we be compassionate?
Over and over, that animal thinks and loves and - yeah? and? big deal. Well if I kill an animal I might kill someone's mother - there you go. You've said his mother is as important as an animal. She has only the rights of an animal.
Oh, I can hear you respond, I care about her; I think she has the right to graze in the sun free from predators.
Predators? Oh, the animals that are allowed to kill! Let his mother be one of them.
But the woman doesn't need it! Necessity is a different argument from morality. I'm not going to give up something just because I don't need it. Especially when it's cheaper physiologically.

From pointless sympathy to circular morality to slipshod necessity, Swiss goes round and around an endless debate.
Yes, your third argument is sloppy. A 'significant' number of humans do without meat long periods...therefore they all can? A significant number do without meat, and are healthy - implying all of them, but you should say some of them. Fewer as the period stretches on. A 'significant' number...and it occurred to you that the number who are herbivores is the number who CAN be herbivores. Everybody else can't. They eat meat, and they continue to eat meat, in the face of massive propaganda that's into its second century.

Proprietor "unreasonable".org is ironically fitting. Drop evolution if it favors meat - Swiss doesn't want to listen.

"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."

---- When milk consumption "appeared on the scene" and the "argument that {dairy consumption is an ancient and traditional} is specious" is irrelevant in light of the fact that milk IS THE ONLY FOOD IN NATURE that is specifically intended to be food for mammals. The substance that we are exclusively fed during the formative period of infancy (a time when we are growing and developing relatively greater in terms of mass and speed than any other time in our lives) is not beneficial to our health? You can split hairs by pointing out that Cow's milk is not Mother's milk but they are still simply variations of the same food.

Tens if not Hundreds of Thousand of people around the world can attest to improvements in their health related to the consumption of foods like raw milk, and other naturally farmed animal products. Probably just as many former vegetarians can attest to the negative effects that excluding animal products from their diet produced. Those numbers are obviously being pulled out of thin air, but I personally know a great number of individuals who fall into both categories.

Consult scientific data and your own food history research all you like; when it comes to practical, personal, real world, and applied observations about the debate which I have taken from my first hand experience and those of my friends and family, the WAP stance takes the cake in my little corner of the universe.

Tom,

Clearly you think you're a romantic, however, that's in your own little world and mind. I find it quite hypocritical of you to attack every other human on the basis of diet alone. So if you're an example of a compassionate vegan, what's a mean one like?

Apparently, your diet is not very calming because I find you one stressed individual, who simply felt that you must go on the attack. Obviously your approach doesn't work. Further simply disrespecting everyone because of their food choice is extremely childish considering most of your way of life comes from the very things which you say you abhor. How do you think you get all the finer things in life so you can shrill about them while typing on your keyboard?

If you believe that a grass fed animal herd being milked is cruel then when you sucked your mom's tits was she being cruel to you or did you enjoy it?

Fact is I find your lack of knowledge and reason to be likened to a child who simply cannot believe that they're not right and must throw a tantrum.

Further you're only 40, let's see where you are at 50/60 on your diet. Also, all due respect to your karate (art), I don't see you fighting anyone, you look about as powerful as a stick, maybe you should try UFC to prove your point. I see no big deal in breaking cinder blocks as many little old ladies (non-vegan) can do that without much training.

Aajonus health fell apart on a strict vegan diet, and he bicycled north america for 2.5 years. Then switching to his current raw paleo diet obtained super-health. During his exerice days he was running up to 13 miles, doing 250 pushups 2-3 feet off the ground and 30 handstand pushups daily. So can you do this daily? I doubt it or you'd be bragging about it.

The point is you cannot tell people one diet works for all because it doesn't. To me you're worse then the people you abhor, because with them I know what I'm getting with you, you simply are a hater in sheeps clothing. That's abundantly clear. Recall Hitler was a vegetarian too, obviously he liked animals more than people.

However, you could become the kind ambassador of veganism and do great athletic feats to prove us all wrong.

The world awaits your arrival.........

"which according to our best scientific knowledge is linked to a higher risk of heart disease and stroke."

That is completely false. In fact there is not one single study proving this, but proving the exact opposite.

It was part of a vegetarian agenda to tell us all that saturated fats were bad.

Weston A. Price foundation is all FOR "traditional soy foods," as you call them. Because traditional soy foods are fermented. Nothing like what is available at most health food stores nowadays. Modern soy foods are highly processed and contain problematic ingredients, many of which are there because the soy has NOT been fermented. Your comment about dairy consumption beginning only in the last 10,000 years made me laugh. And I guess you've got some sort of proof that people who [supposedly] lived before that time were healthier before dairy was "introduced." Ha! Good one! I think I'll stick with diets that have worked to keep cultures healthy over time. That would most certainly NOT include vegetarianism or veganism OR eating junky, synthetic-laced soy products.

I came to this site because I couldn't find what I wanted on WAPF. At a recent community fair, photos were displayed of people with elongated heads (several photos looked deliberately distorted) and the contention was made that they were that way because of processed foods. They were characterized as ill and "mouth-breathers." Other photos showed people with rounder heads and big smiles -- purportedly eaters of raw milk and additive-free foods.

I'd like to know:

Where did these photos come from? Did someone actually do a study of people brought up on different foods? Is there any way to determine a) how many have elongated heads, b) is there an unusual percentage among those of a certain diet, c) whether their diet or other causes like heredity determined their head shape d) whether that head shape is in fact any sort of diability? (Not counting anyone's aesthetic preferences for round or long faces.)

And why get worked up about it if there's nothing we can do?

the WESTON A. PRICE FOUNDATION has saved my life.......i was a very sickly person, depressed, feeling lethargic, skin problems, high blood pressure, digestion problems...... depending on pharmaceuticals to "cure" me.......it was a "process"...eating healthier.... unprocessed foods, HEALTHY FATS...animal protein.....and i also elIminated dairy (raw or goats milk products only).....AND NOW I FEEL GREAT, LOOK GREAT AND GETTING ALL SORTS OF COMPLEMENTS ABOUT WHAT I DID BECAUSE OF MY DRASTIC CHANGE IN APPEARANCE (I AM OVER 50 AND DON'T LOOK ANYWHERE NEAR IT!!!!).......WESTIN A. PRICE FOUNDATION taught me how to be aware of how what i put in my mouth affected your health.......YOU ARE WHAT YOU EAT....and over a period of 2 years i am not on any more "pharmaceuticals".....THE BEST PART IS MY KIDS SAW THE TRANSFORMATION AND I DON'T NEED TO LECTURE THEM TO EAT ANY PARTICULAR WAY....THEY COPY MY DIET.......SO, "BEFORE YOU SLAM WHAT YOU DON'T BOTHER TO FULLY EDUCATE YOURSELF ON" or choose to believe all the "myths" our FDA wants us to believe without scientific evidence..(protecting BIG PHARMA and BIG FOOD MANUFACTURERS OUT TO MAKE A PROFIT REGARDLESS OF HEALTH)...DON'T MAKE ANY UNINFORMED DECISIONS YET....GO TO ONE OF THESE PRICE FOUNDATION SEMINARS....THEY EDUCATE YOU WITH FACTS AND SCIENTIFIC INFO, YOU CAN TRY VARIOUS FOODS THEY PROMOTE BUT MOST OF ALL YOU WILL ACTUALLY TALK TO HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE WHOSE LIVES HAVE BEEN CHANGED OR THEIR CHILDREN'S LIVES FOR THE BEST......STORIES OF THEIR KIDS DOING MUCH BETTER WHEN REAL DOCTORS DIDN'T HAVE ANYMORE ANSWERS....IT IS AMAZING...PROFESSIONAL PEOPLE FROM ALL WALKS OF LIFE GOING TO THESE SEMINARS WHEN NOTHING ELSE HAS WORKED FOR THEM....I HAVE NEVER MET ANYONE WITH A NEGATIVE RESULT.......ONCE YOU DO THAT...I THINK YOU WILL BE PLEASANTLY ENLIGHTENED AS WELL......P.S. - I ALSO BELIEVE THE FAT AND CHOLESTEROL SCARE IS DUE TO UNHEALTHY PROCESSED FATS AND VEGETABLE OILS (INCLUDING "CONVENTIONAL" ANIMAL FATS, TRANSFATS, ETC.) AND TOO MANY PROCESSED GRAINS AND SUGAR!!!!!!!!! IMPROPER BALANCES OF OMEGA 6/3.... OUR DIET IS FULL OF SUGAR (TURNING INTO FAT IN OUR ARTERIES)....IT'S EASIER FOR THE FDA TO SLAM HEALTHY FATS AND WESTON PRICE!!!!! (IT'S MORE "PROFITABLE" FOR THEM!!!!!)

I understand the WAPF claims about the anti-nutritive qualities of soy. What occurs to me is that if they are true, the best counter-measures would be bone broth and fatty meat. So maybe unfermented soy is okay if you're an omnivore (like those Okinawans). Just a little food for thought...

I agree, it is something that is suspect with the WAPF.

// Kalorier

Did you know that USA and Europe blocked Wikileaks? What do you think about it?
Hih you hear me??

You're a jerk for not letting people even respond as to why price might have been right.

Veganism and vegetarinism are senseless when you consider predator-prey relations and when it comes to your need for omega-3s in balence with omega-3s. If you don't listen to me oh well, you will be infertile as a result. Soy is nutriution deficient and a scam.

By the way thanks for censoring the important things I have to say because I don't agree with you!

Wow, what an angry little man.

I have to say that since we changed over to the WAPF way of eating, we are feeling better health-wise. Not perfect. But better. We have been researching THEIR research for over a year now and it really makes a lot of sense. Also, although they CAN, (see their website), bowl you over with a lot of scientific/medical jargon, they also have no problem in breaking it down for the layman. They don't use elitist verbiage to try and scare away those with opposing opinions. That's such a cop-out.
I can't help but wonder if the writer of this article has taken any time past skimming the raw surface, to consider that what they say is right...much more than 'twice a day' as in the clock illustration given.
I know young mothers who have switched, mid-stream, to feeding their babies as advised by "Nourishing Traditions", the encyclopedic book written by your hero, Sally Fallon Morrell. Some of these babies suffered from constant colic, others with failure-to-thrive...and many of them had been prescribed by conventional medicine to switch to soy milk. What a dumb answer. When these moms made the WAPF switch, against the 'sound advice' of their pediatricians, they saw an immediate improvement in the health of their children. And those same children thrive to this day. Not fat. Not sick. Eating meat. And eggs. And the saturated fats so necessary to the development of children.
I will not get into the debate between vegans, vegetarians and meat-eaters. Good grief. Do we not have enough contention in this world? HOWEVER, like another reader who left a comment, I want to be able to eat as I believe is best for me. I want to be able to share what I believe is good, too. And that means, I don't want to have people like you spitting out your contagious and venomous propaganda to those who just might benefit from seeing things from a different angle.
This age is the age of tolerance, and I would venture to guess that you are one who preaches it...Yet...where is yours? There is no one answer to eating. I am partial, yes, to WAPF, but I would not venture to pretend they have all the answers any more than you should venture to pretend you do.

Inuits, who meat industry lobbyist like WAPF(ironically and misleadingly) use as an “example of health,” life expectancy is 43.5 years.

Not only that. All the fat they consume is "natural" and unprocessed and their 3rd leading cause of death(suicide is number 1) is ischemic heart disease. Sound familiar?

Inuits have the highest osteoporosis rates in the world!!!

I just came through here via GirlieGirlArmy.com and wanted to just say how scary the comments on this blog post are. None of you really know much of anything, do you? Yet it's the internet, and everyone is a genius/anthropologist/historian/dietitian. Really people?
Sigh.

It's completely inaccurate to say that the WAPF are anti-soy.

They make it clear that the problem lies in soy that hasn't been adequately prepared, or that has undergone industrial processing. In other words, cheap mass-commodity soy milk (an offshoot of soy processing that's easy to package and sell) is best avoided, whilst traditionally-prepared soy foods like tempeh, miso, natto, shoyu, and tofu that has had a long fermentation period, are fine.

It's quick and easy to find their perspective on soy by reading their articles, which are nuanced and informative.

only in America!

Gobsmacked ... just gobsmacked by the overweening arrogance and ignorance of vegan contributors here. Why do vegetarians call themselves "vegetarians" when they plainly have no great love of vegetables, but prefer grain and soy? Furthermore, why don't vegetarians expose their real agenda and refer to themselves, far more accurately, as "anti-carnivores"? A little honesty from the vegan/vegetarian ranks would be refreshing.

Another comment: vegetarians who eat dairy, eggs and fish - aren't these folks just giant hypocrites? Where's the compassion for the fish? Why don't they care about the millions of male chicks and male calves slaughtered every year because those male animals can't grow up to produce eggs or milk, like the females? Furthermore, male chicks can't even be used as meat, because egg-laying chickens are a special breed with less meat on them than broiler chickens (but greater egg output).

I respect vegans - at least they practise what they preach. But I have zero respect for vegetarians who consume eggs, dairy, fish, etc, because such vegetarians contribute to the mass slaughter of animals while pretending to be more virtuous than omniovres. Shame!

Lying is a full time job for Weston A Price Foundation----they are lobbyists.

You are basically the essence of a shill or quack and have no idea what you are talking about. Fermented soy is the only true healthful form of soy, even the Japanese know this and you know nothing of their dietary heritage. As far as Weston A. Price goes...if these people who believe they are eating soy for their health switch their soy habit for real milk they would live a much healthier life. I have a degree in this "quackary" and wish people like you would stop spreading such unfounded ideas. Also, if you want to talk $ let us look at the large paper trail between the government and the soy industry, ESPECIALLY the wonderful gmo soy they have blessed us with. OPEN YOUR EYES.

I ate a raw vegan diet for four years. I felt good initially and finally became sick from nutrient deficiency. Eat the way you wish and let others do the same without your vegan diatribe. WAPF promotes private, small dairy farms. How are they making money by promoting raw milk (unlike raw gurus who sell warehouses full of goods)? I know soy isn't good for thyroid unless it's fermented. Even vegan websites will tell you that!

After three years, I'm getting tired of correcting the same mis-information over and over again, so I'm closing comments on this post. But first -- since it is my blog :-) -- a few final words in summary:

Sally Fallon and her Weston A. Price Foundation are to nutrition what Scientology is to mental health. They promote homeopathy and unpasteurized milk, and denigrate vaccination; this tells you all you need to know about their attitude towards science.

As John Robbins points out, WAPF's propaganda have little to do with the work of Weston Price himself. By rights, the group probably ought to be called the Sally Fallon foundation. Price got at least a few things right -- though he knew little about nutrition or anthropology, the link between illness and a diet heavy in processed foods is clear enough that even an amateur like himself could see it clearly. But that has little to do with the WAPF's emotional and financial attachment to flesh foods and dairy.

WAPF's anti-soy propaganda has no scientific basis. The American Academy of Pediatrics guidelines say,

In humans, very limited data to date suggest that soy phytoestrogens have a low affinity for human postnatal estrogen receptors and low potency in bioassays...Although studied by numerous investigators in various species, there is no conclusive evidence from animal, adult human, or infant populations that dietary soy isoflavones may adversely affect human development, reproduction, or endocrine function.

and a review in The Journal of Nutrution notes

There is intriguing animal and epidemiologic evidence indicating that modest amounts of soy consumed during childhood and/or adolescence reduces breast cancer risk. Evidence also suggests that soy reduces prostate cancer risk and inhibits prostate tumor metastasis, but additional clinical support for the chemopreventive effects of soyfoods is needed. Soy protein is modestly hypocholesterolemic and there is suggestive epidemiologic evidence that soyfoods lower risk of coronary heart disease (CHD) independent of effects on cholesterol. In clinical studies, soy favorably affects multiple CHD risk factors; however, with the exception of improved endothelial function, the data are too limited and/or inconsistent to allow definitive conclusions to be made. In regard to bone health, although recent clinical data have not supported the skeletal benefits of isoflavones, 2 large prospective epidemiologic studies found soy intake is associated with marked reductions in fracture risk. Soybean isoflavones also modestly alleviate hot flashes in menopausal women. Finally, other than allergic reactions, there is almost no credible evidence to suggest traditional soyfoods exert clinically relevant adverse effects in healthy individuals when consumed in amounts consistent with Asian intake.

That's not to say that you should fill your diet with soy. And you certainly should not load up on processed, chemically extracted soy protein isolate from GMO soybeans; but there is no evidence that reasonable amounts of soy from soy milk, tofu, edamame, miso, or tempeh, from non-GMO is harmful, and plenty of evidence that it helps. For example:

• People who ate a diet rich in foods that lower cholesterol, such as nuts, soy, avocado, olive oil and oats, saw a bigger drop in cholesterol than people on a low-fat diet
• Soy food consumption is associated with decreased risk of death and recurrence in breast cancer patients
• Soy protein consumption is associated with a significant improvement in lipoprotein (cholesterol and triglyceride) risk factors for heart disease.

WAPF likes to make much of the phytates found in soy. These do reduce the absorption of some minerals, but are found in a variety of plant foods. If soy is anti-nutritive because of them, so are most other legumes, whole grains, pretty much anything with fiber. But more than that, phytates have antioxidant and anti-tumor properties, decrease cholesterol and triglyceride production, and help reduce the overall glycemic index of meals of which they are a part. There is also evidence that phytates are protective against osteoporosis. The picture that's emerging suggests that rather than being an "anti-nutrient", phytates are actually a vital nutrient.

WAPF's claims that traditional soy foods are fermented is simply untrue. And Fallon's claims that soy makes kids gay and causes learning disabilities ought to be filed under bizarre conspiracy theories, not serious debate.

Now, this is all an odd argument anyway, because you don't have to eat soy to be vegan. I ate very little soy for the first decade or so of my veganism, and only began to incorporate it as the evidence of its benefits mounted. But WAPF's anti-soy FUD well-illustrates their tactics in all areas: ignore science, make vague claims of vast conspiracies of vegetarians, industrial food producers (never mind that the vast majority of soy goes to animal feed, and so "Big Soy" is quite happy to have you eating meat), and government, and romanticize the past.

Another WAPF contention that is simply untrue is their claim that there is no evidence proving a link between saturated fat and heart disease. I've linked to several studies about this in posts above, here and here. We also have evidence that saturated fat blocks insulin and leptin in the brain and has addictive potential. We can rationally argue over how strong the evidence is, or that there are other factors involved; but any claims that there is no evidence for a link between saturated fat intake and heart disease are just plain wrong.

It is, of course, possible to eat an unhealthful vegan diet. Beer and corn chips are vegan -- you can even get them organic!

Vegan diets encompass a large variety, from the Ornish plan to eco-Atkins to raw vegan. It's worth noting that almost all of the folks who tell me how ill they were on a vegan diet and how they're much better now that they're eating animal flesh again, were eating raw vegan. The proper conclusion would be that raw veganism is difficult to do well, and eat some cooked vegetables, legumes, and grains; instead, these folks jumped from the fad of raw veganism to the fad of the WAPF-style diet.

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!