These anecdotal arguments back and forth are interesting, but they're not science. I mean, where's the details on the methodology? Where are the data? Why do we listen to/argue about the various experts, instead of digging into the actual research that's been done?
If you're looking for studies on the topic, check out these two videos:
It's basically a survey paper in video form, presented by one of the researchers. It has actual graphs! With error bars!
The corresponding book is pretty good too, it's called the China study.
Personally, I trust statisticians on health much more than biologists. It's nice that there's a biological basis for the conclusion, but trying to argue diet based on the metabolic process seems like a stretch, especially when it conflicts with what's observed.
If you're looking for studies on the topic, check out these two videos:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-847196066367535747
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1719204869171202407
It's basically a survey paper in video form, presented by one of the researchers. It has actual graphs! With error bars!
The corresponding book is pretty good too, it's called the China study.
Personally, I trust statisticians on health much more than biologists. It's nice that there's a biological basis for the conclusion, but trying to argue diet based on the metabolic process seems like a stretch, especially when it conflicts with what's observed.