China fiction?

10. July 2010 William Davis (39)
Dr. Colin Campbell caused a stir with publication of his 2005 book, The China Study. Dr. Campbell, after extensive animal and epidemiologic research conducted in China over 20 years, concluded that a diet high in animal protein, especially casein, was associated with increased cancer, osteoporosis, and heart disease risk.

Richard Nikoley of Free the Animal and Stephan Guyenet of Whole Health Source have been talking about an analysis of the China Study raw data performed by a young woman named Denise Minger.

Denise's analysis is nothing short of brilliant, absolutely "must" reading for anyone interested in nutrition.

Her comments on the relationship of wheat to heart disease:

Why does Campbell indict animal foods in cardiovascular disease (correlation of +1 for animal protein and -11 for fish protein), yet fail to mention that wheat flour has a correlation of +67 with heart attacks and coronary heart disease, and plant protein correlates at +25 with these conditions?

Speaking of wheat, why doesn’t Campbell also note the astronomical correlations wheat flour has with various diseases: +46 with cervix cancer, +54 with hypertensive heart disease, +47 with stroke, +41 with diseases of the blood and blood-forming organs, and the aforementioned +67 with myocardial infarction and coronary heart disease?
Tags :

Comments (39) -

  • aqf

    7/10/2010 4:27:14 PM |

    Thanks so much for this. I'm a T2 diabetic controlling my blood sugar with a low carb diet. The only thing in my recent lab work that my GP is unhappy with is an elevated vitamin D level. A few years ago, a friend gave me a copy of The China Study (along with Fuhrman's Eat to Live, because they had "changed [her] life" and she hoped they would change my life as well. Based on my experience and reading about blood sugar regulation and insulin levels, what both had to say just felt wrong to me, over and beyond the simplification one might expect in a mass-audience book. So, I was skeptical about their broader health-related claims, though I wasn't concerned enough to investigate further (and have actually considered the ethics of regifting books that I think make dangerous recommendations). Because of this, it's quite gratifying to find my initial suspicions confirmed by detailed analysis.

  • Anonymous

    7/10/2010 5:26:19 PM |

    When I looked up The China Study on Amazon, I found this statistical analysis of the China Study dataset under the comment section.  This is simply amazing and backs up pretty much everything you've said in your blog.  I hope someone can do an analysis to confirm this analysis.

    http://www.amazon.com/Analyzing-the-China-Study-Dataset/forum/Fx1YJPR95OHW08P/TxY4S5EZD8Y2XE/1/ref=cm_cd_dp_ef_tft_tp?_encoding=UTF8&s=books&asin=1932100660&store=books

  • Anna

    7/10/2010 5:32:50 PM |

    Very glad to see this analysis featured here, too.  I groan every time someone recommends The China Study to me as a great authoritative book, so Minger's detailed review was most welcome.

    We must keep in mind however, Minger's review and different conclusions not withstanding, that The China Study is epidemiological data and it can only show association, not causation.   It still doesn't prove in any way that consuming wheat is harmful to health.  Don't get me wrong, I'm no fan of wheat anymore and no longer consume it myself or serve it to my family.  But it *is* fuel for the argument that considerably more study is needed before the government and health agencies continue to push wheat consumption on the public as matter of policy.

  • nielso

    7/10/2010 8:32:15 PM |

    Perhaps the most astonishing thing about this analysis is that is is done by an "amateur" without any axes to grind.  It is a telling comment on the dihonesty and/or stupidity of most government and industry funded research.

  • David

    7/11/2010 1:45:27 AM |

    Campbell doesn't deny that processed refined wheat flour (which is what they eat in china) is unhealthy.  He advocates eating whole plant foods.

  • Peter

    7/11/2010 4:06:22 PM |

    Whole wheat, brown rice, beans, and steel-cut oats all seem to raise my blood sugar about the same amount, which is quite a lot depending on how much I eat.  Are they equally problematic?

  • Anonymous

    7/11/2010 5:36:59 PM |

    happy to see denise mingers study featured here. Smile

        wheat asides, milk pasteurised or uht causes a pretty massive immune system flare up for me.

  • Anonymous

    7/11/2010 7:15:10 PM |

    How do we explain the positive correlation between plant protein and cancer?  I'm not ready to give up my kale and chard just yet!

  • kellgy

    7/11/2010 10:18:17 PM |

    Denise's astute analysis gives rise to the importance "digging a little deeper". I have always thought the benefit of eggs was contrary to the "official" line of thought. Little did I know the controversial aspects of wheat until stumbling along Dr. Davis' musings.

  • ramon25

    7/12/2010 3:08:10 AM |

    Sorry to come off topic here but i dont have the program in my  computer to email you. Dr. what do you think of this http://www.westonaprice.org/blogs/are-some-people-pushing-their-vitamin-d-levels-too-high.html

  • Anonymous

    7/12/2010 3:45:30 PM |

    ramon25-

    Very interesting study.  I would love to hear a reply as well.

  • Evan

    7/12/2010 6:50:57 PM |

    Here is the T Colin Campbell's response to Denise's debunking of the China Study:

    http://tynan.net/chinastudyresponse

  • sonagi92

    7/13/2010 12:13:36 AM |

    Some commenters have wondered whether the wheat flour assessed in the study was refined wheat.  Chinese today eat mostly refined wheat products, but in the 70s, rural Chinese on collectives might have eaten differently, so I emailed a few Chinese professors of nutrition to ask.  It's morning now in China, and I got one response from Dr. Duo Li of Zhejiang University.  He told me in a brief reply that rural Chinese ate whole wheat products and the refined wheat was rare.

  • 30BaD

    7/13/2010 12:13:02 PM |

    Denise's analysis of The China Study is heavily flawed and therefore invalid.  Debunked by a cancer epidemiologist...

    Here it is...
    http://www.30bananasaday.com/group/debunkingthechinastudycritics/forum/topics/a-cancer-epidemiologist

    The proper testing procedure as stated by an expert on analysing stats...
    http://www.30bananasaday.com/group/debunkingthechinastudycritics/forum/topics/my-response-to-denises

    Campbells response to Denise..
    http://www.30bananasaday.com/group/debunkingthechinastudycritics/forum/topics/campbells-response-to-denises

  • Peter

    7/13/2010 1:08:44 PM |

    Campbell, in his response, thinks Minger is probably an undercover agent in a larger conspiracy.  The  debunking epidemiologist, in his, points out that correlation and association aren't the same, which will probably not come as news to Minger.  Could be Minger has kicked the hornets' nest.

  • Anonymous

    7/13/2010 8:28:57 PM |

    What I'd like to know is how correlations > 1 and < -1 are being generated, since that's impossible.

  • EMR

    7/14/2010 3:56:15 AM |

    Thanks for sharing the research point of view,yes with the obesity that is hitting America it is necessary to learn that the cause of obesity is eating more of high protein diets and fats over vegetables and fruits.

  • Peter

    7/14/2010 4:50:54 PM |

    Gary Taubes says Campbell's co-worker on the original study, Oxford professor of epidemiology and statistics Richard Peto also thought the data did not support Campbell's hypotheses.

  • Pallav

    7/14/2010 5:51:15 PM |

    Dr. Davis

    The way wheat is consumed  in the west is very different from the way it is consumed in the east(fermenting/sprouting/sourdough etc.).

    This post might be helpful to 300 million americans but mislead 4 billion asians.

    With due respect I'd suggest you consider the above before going all guns blazing against global wheat consumption.

  • Martin Levac

    7/14/2010 6:12:43 PM |

    But Pallav, how can the Chinese be mislead when it's the Chinese's own wheat consumption that is being looked at in The China Study?

    In reality, that study can only generate ideas, it can't test them. So even if it generates the idea that wheat is bad for humans, we must test that idea before it becomes the truth. As far as I know, Dr Davis did test this idea and came with the conclusion that it was the type of wheat that made the difference. Maybe the Chinese ate the bad wheat and that's why it shows up that way?

  • Anonymous

    7/14/2010 6:45:47 PM |

    Anonymous wrote: "What I'd like to know is how correlations > 1 and < -1 are being generated, since that's impossible."

    Denise says right in the post that she gave the numbers in percentage rather than decimals to make it easier to read. I.E. +33 = 33% = .33

  • Pallav

    7/14/2010 7:00:16 PM |

    Martin,
    The way Dr. Davis tested einkorn and wheat currently generally available in usa (http://heartscanblog.blogspot.com/2010/06/in-search-of-wheat-einkorn-and-blood.html) is probably is what brings real value to this blog.
    The subhead Europe:Sourdough bread http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2010/06/fermented-grain-recipes-from-around.html is very close to how wheat is consumed in India. This process very likely breaksdown a large part of the offending ingredients such as gluten and phytic acid from a cursory search i did on google scholar.
    I would trust a test on this process by Dr. Davis than on statistics, which as you rightly said generate ideas but need testing.
    However, when Dr Davis goes on to implicate wheat in general for all sorts of diseases like in this blogpost, that applies to americans (the specific way of consuming wheat) and not necessarily to those who process grain differently like in asia.
    That is the point where things get icky and can be misleading for those consuming wheat in asia and reading such posts.
    Perhaps we can all come to a better way of processing grains than cutting them out from the diet altogether?

  • David M Gordon

    7/15/2010 11:23:28 AM |

    "a diet high in animal protein, especially casein"

    Quickly, briefly, because my story is only tangentially related to this post by means of Dr Davis's almost stray remark I quote above...

    I am ~5 weeks into my wheat free diet -- to zero success. I do not measure myself daily in any way, but the obvious one: do I lose weight? Yes, but only ~5lbs, which represents 2% of my total body weight. I should have lost that amount easily within 1 week, if I were proceeding on this diet correctly.

    And then the other stray remarks began to pile up:
    1) The 20 year old girl with celiac disease who dropped wheat AND 20lbs in 2 months. (What about me?!)
    2) The dinner at PF Changs. I ordered the chicken lettuce wraps and skip the rice noodle thingees. Good job, I thought. Then I lingered over the menu, saw the restaurant offers an entire page of gluten free items, and the dish I just ordered was not one of them. I called for the waiter. He explained the sauce...
    3) I drink protein shakes. A lot. As fate would have it, I migrated to casein protein because it broke down more slowly thus causing satiety to last longer. Until I read this post from Dr Davis with his stray remark, did my homework, and discovered to my chagrin that on a cellular level casein protein is so similar to gluten that it might as well be the same. (In essence.)

    Okay, lesson learned. This gluten free, wheat free, grain free, carb free diet is not as easy as it looks at first glance. There is way more to it than skipping bread, and pasta, etc. But now I think I have it. So Sunday is Day 1. Shame I lost those first 4 or 5 weeks, but this time...

  • Peter

    7/15/2010 12:23:12 PM |

    It may be true that wheat is a major cause of heart disease, but I'm not sure the high correspondence between wheat and cvd in this study makes that case.  Richard Peto, the Oxford professor of epidemiology who was part of the original study said what the data showed was that in places where people started adopting more of a western diet their health deteriorated.  I doubt the study spells out which parts of the western diet did the harm, wheat might be a marker for western diet.

  • lassen

    7/15/2010 9:52:47 PM |

    People feel threatened when facts are released that go against the standard, cultural beliefs. We are raised as children to eat animals and animal secretions and so it is understandable why so many people feel threatened when they find out that the food mama gave them is helping to promote heart disease, cancer, diabetes, obesity, autoimmune diseases, digestive disorders, etc. The China Study is the longest, most unbiased studies ever conducted and show statistically significant results, worldwide, that ingesting animal foods create chronic ill heath in humans. I have helped 400 people in the last 4 years to eat a healthy, low fat, plant based diet and they have all rid themselves of the diseases listed above. Now, I have also some Kaiser doctors who, instead of handing pills or surgery, are handing out this book and getting the same results. Thank you Dr. T. Colin Campbell for your 35 year long work. And, I know that you went into this study trying to prove the opposite results!
    When people hear that their upbringing needs to be challenge, they lash out with untruths….just as yound, 23 yr old Mindy has done.

  • lassen

    7/15/2010 9:53:10 PM |

    People feel threatened when facts are released that go against the standard, cultural beliefs. We are raised as children to eat animals and animal secretions and so it is understandable why so many people feel threatened when they find out that the food mama gave them is helping to promote heart disease, cancer, diabetes, obesity, autoimmune diseases, digestive disorders, etc. The China Study is the longest, most unbiased studies ever conducted and show statistically significant results, worldwide, that ingesting animal foods create chronic ill heath in humans. I have helped 400 people in the last 4 years to eat a healthy, low fat, plant based diet and they have all rid themselves of the diseases listed above. Now, I have also some Kaiser doctors who, instead of handing pills or surgery, are handing out this book and getting the same results. Thank you Dr. T. Colin Campbell for your 35 year long work. And, I know that you went into this study trying to prove the opposite results!
    When people hear that their upbringing needs to be challenge, they lash out with untruths….just as yound, 23 yr old Mindy has done.

  • Anne

    7/16/2010 3:22:40 AM |

    To David M Gordon - how much of the lettuce wraps did you eat. PF Changs has nutritional info on the website and says this dish has 4 servings of 5oz. Each serving is 11 carbs so if you ate the whole thing yourself, that was 44 carbs.

    It is very easy to underestimate carb counts. I have found a scale can be very useful. Mine measures carbs and other stuff.

  • David M Gordon

    7/16/2010 3:27:05 PM |

    That little dish is 4 servings?  C'mon! You bet, I bet I ate the whole thing, Anne. Smile

    What is in it that weighs so much? Some iceberg lettuce leaves, chicken, the rice noodle thingees I did without, and the sauce -- which is NOT gluten free, but I changed to a gluten free sauce. I bet that swap changes the calorie count etc. (Hey, I can hope! Smile

    Sure I want to lose weight -- okay, I must lose weight -- but my issue is visceral fat and its resulting potential problems: diabetes and heart issues (inflammation).

    Thank you for your comments.

  • MikeTee

    7/16/2010 5:26:31 PM |

    Instead of driving yourself with all these numbers why not just look for visable proof in REAL people.  I decided to try plant based eating and here is what happened:  (the numbers have actually gotten better since this was published last October)  Why I'm a believer in Dr. Campbell's advice:
    http://www.drmcdougall.com/stars/mike_teehan.htm

  • MikeTee

    7/16/2010 5:26:56 PM |

    Instead of driving yourself with all these numbers why not just look for visable proof in REAL people.  I decided to try plant based eating and here is what happened:  (the numbers have actually gotten better since this was published last October)  Why I'm a believer in Dr. Campbell's advice:
    http://www.drmcdougall.com/stars/mike_teehan.htm

  • Martin Levac

    7/17/2010 12:51:43 AM |

    Mike, good for you. See this:
    http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/ketones-and-ketosis/low-carb-gaining-a-foothold-with-the-mainstream/

    If Campbell is right that a plant-based diet is best for most humans, why did the low carb group do better than the other two groups (Ornish and LEARN diets) in the intervention study above? Not only did the low carb group do better in weight loss, they did better in all things measured.

  • Anonymous

    7/17/2010 1:45:09 PM |

    Denise Minger wrote:

    "Here we have evidence that areas in China with the highest rates of Western-type diseases also eat the most processed starch and sugar. Maybe not in the grotesque amounts that Americans eat them, but then again, China’s “affluent disease” rates were also lower than America’s"

    This could easily be the headline "Minger accuses Americans of grotesque eating habits"

    Debate is good but be healthy, not paranoid
    Trevor

  • Anonymous

    7/22/2010 5:18:41 PM |

    How can anyone tell anyone else what to eat?  We all NEED plants to survive.  However, some do better with wheat in their diet and some do better with meat in their diet.  It all depends on the person.  I wouldn't go bashing The China Study until you try the whole foods plant-based diet.  Dr. Campbell also stresses that nutrition is NOT about a single nutrient or food group.  It's all about the synergy of everything working together.  I would love to see Denise's analysis of the aflatoxin rat studies.  Everyone needs to take control of their own health.  No one should rely solely on the china study as what they should do.  I personally believe in what the china study is saying, but it might not work for everyone - especially when people are raised to eat animal protein.  I know I have issues with animal protein, but others might be able to tolerate it.  Don't go bashing Dr. Campbell for trying to help people.

  • Bill

    7/22/2010 5:58:09 PM |

    Dr. Bill Misner Ph.D. said:
    The BMI body mass index of rural Chinese is 21.0 supported by a daily calorie intake of over 2600k/cal/day from largely plant foods.
    Americans on the other hand consume largely animal sourced foods of 1989 calories per day resulting in an obese BMI of over 27.0! All one has to do is compare the source of total calories with resulting BMI.

    Eating 2600 calories whole plant foods that contribute to a lean healthy BMI of 21.0 is preferred to eating 1989 calories from largely animal sources resulting in an obese 27.0 BMI.

    Elevated Body Mass Index associated with food category choice are also associated with the typical disease patterns in obese persons.  The China Study shows these numerical correlations precisely.

    I confirm the report that overweight exists more in cultures consuming largely animal source calories than in those whose diet is primarily whole plant foods.

    Interestingly, I have observed all of the above in Americans who change their menu from animal source to whole plant source food protocols.

    Warm regards,

    Bill Misner Ph.D.

  • Alex

    7/22/2010 11:31:11 PM |

    "I would love to see Denise's analysis of the aflatoxin rat studies."

    You can read an excellent analysis HERE. In a nutshell, what those rat studies prove is that complete protein provides better nourishment than incomplete protein. Wheat is naturally deficient in lysine, and when lysine was added to the wheat protein diet, it behaved just like the casein.

    Cancers are very fast growing cells, so of course they're going to grow a whole lot better if they're better nourished. I'd wager that if the rats had been fed a complete vegetable protein blend, e.g. rice and pea protein in the correct ratio, the tumor growth would have matched both the casein and wheat plus lysine.

  • Parag

    7/27/2010 12:07:56 PM |

    Friends,

      You don’t need to believe Dr. Campbell. Just read The China Study, slowly and completely, and figure out the truth for yourself. Facts speak for themselves.

      I, and a few of my acquaintances, tried a whole-foods plant-based diet (coupled with biweekly exposure to sunlight in noon and some physical activity) for a few months (strict compliance), and it is working wonders for us, so we continue to be on it. Some of my friends failed, because they were mostly eating junk (plant-based) foods.

      The China Study book is not just about Dr. Campbell’s work, but more than that it describes the work and results of numerous other research studies, independent and unbiased, that point to the undeniable benefits of a whole-foods plant-based diet.

      Denise has adopted a detailed but very narrow view that is insufficient to relate to the larger context. This approach will only add to confusion and misleading conclusions.

  • Anonymous

    7/29/2010 6:52:54 PM |

    As a physician with the health of your patients at stake, Would you accept conclusions that were not peer reviewed?

  • Jay

    9/3/2010 3:02:01 AM |

    Wonderful post... Very informational and educational as usual!

    Acai Berry Optimum

Add comment

Loading