I strongly disagree with your recommendations for Campbell and Robbins (and I assume you mean John Robbins, not Tim Robbins). Like most nutritionists, they do a

I strongly disagree with your recommendations for Campbell and Robbins (and I assume you mean John Robbins, not Tim Robbins). Like most nutritionists, they do agree on eliminating refined carbohydrates and processed foods from your diet. But these two specifically argue that saturated fats are unhealthy and low-fat diets are optimal, the exact opposite of the thesis of the study and article. Robbins is a dietary extremist and his books make Quackwatch's list of non-recommended books that "promote misinformation, espouse unscientific theories, and/or contain unsubstantiated advice" [1]. The National Council Against Health Fraud even had a critical blurb towards his television program about Diet For a New America in their '91 newsletter [2]. While I find Campbell's actual research in the china studies important, the book infers much more than the studies showed, not to mention a lack of supporting follow-up studies that control for the most common criticisms (genetics, rates of exercise, comparisons with mostly meat-eating populations without diseases of civilization, etc.). I have a real issue with taking descriptive information from data and turning it into prescriptive advice before accumulating sound evidence. For a good critique, the always awesome SkepDoc Harriet Hall posted a review on the Science-Based Medicine blog (which I highly recommend) [3], although the comments get bogged down about her linking to a similar criticism by the Weston Price foundation. Oddly enough, as a lifelong vegetarian myself, I find myself wanting to agree with these authors and recommending them to others. But it's disheartening these authors feel the need to fortify their ethical choices with shoddy scientific inferences. Yes, following their recommendations will almost certainly lead to better health, but only because those recommendations merely happen to correlate well with a healthier than average diet, not because their assumed causations about optimal health are necessarily correct. However, I do agree with your recommendation for Pollan. [1] http://www.quackwatch.org/04ConsumerEducation/nonrecbooks.html http://www.quackwatch.org/04ConsumerEducation/nonrecbooks.ht... [2] http://www.ncahf.org/nl/1991/9-10.html http://www.ncahf.org/nl/1991/9-10.html [3] http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=385 http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=385