I started this diet experiment after watching the documentary "Forks Over Knives". The arguments for cardiac health through diet, although suspiciously grandiose, were interesting enough for me to suppress my disbelief in a dietary panacea and try living as an herbivore to see if it made a difference.
I started the diet well-aware of the fact that my eating habits would change dramatically even though I was already predominantly ovo-lacto vegetarian. Removing all animal-based foods from my diet would mean that I would have to be far more aware of ingredients than I had been. Even more daunting was the fact that I would be giving up most snacking and casual eating. Restaurants, for example, would require prior research or odd menu choices.
As I mentioned before, I don't eschew animal foods through any moral or spiritual imperative (although in recent years I have found myself less comfortable with the products of factory farms). My altogether selfish goal for this diet is to improve my health. The suggestions of Drs. Campbell and Esselstyn were radical enough to be interesting, and I do well at self-denial only if it is radical.
But I do not live in a vacuum. I like to know more about things. So I find myself delighted by this post "Forks Over Knives: is the science legit" over on the Raw Food SOS blog, which calls into question some of the assumptions made in the documentary and by the two doctors.
The reality check does not persuade me to abandon my experiment (I feel that it continues to be worthy of a trial), but it does help put things in better perspective. I like bringing commitment to a project, but it doesn't mean I'm going to drink the Kool-aid (yeccch).
No comments:
Post a Comment