When T. Colin Campbell’s The China Study was released in 2006, it quickly rocketed to best seller status primarily propelled by word of mouth given its small, relatively unknown publisher not exactly renowned for works of scientific rigor.
In short order, The China Study became firmly established as the de facto nutritional bible of the plant based diet posse. A similar phenomenon has occurred with the 2017 release of the Netflix documentary What The Health.
“Just read The China Study!” became the new vegan mantra, confidently and often scornfully spoken to anyone who questioned Campbell’s startling contention that all animal foods, regardless of the source or processing, are responsible for the modern epidemics of cancer and heart disease.
No matter whether your animal food of choice is a KFC Value Pack or wild caught salmon, Campbell claims that you would be better off shunning all sources of animal foods and instead embracing a diet of whole plant foods.
Denise Minger of rawfoodsos has suggested that Campbell’s Ivy League PhD and his authorship of over 300 scientific papers combined with The China Study‘s long list of references make it appear credible. With such an impressive list of credentials and sources, the stern warnings against animal foods must be grounded in factual, objective scientific analysis, right?
At first blush, The China Study seems so utterly credible – so bulletproof if you will.
Unfortunately, like much of the nutritional dogma presented today all in the name of supposedly scientific rigor, The China Study is actually far from it with misrepresented data the order of the day.
Perhaps the biggest hole in Campbell’s work is one that he identified himself in one of his own scientific papers published only two years before The China Study. Despite Campbell’s claim that near vegan rural Chinese exhibit superior health to those consuming animal foods, the paper concludes from the epidemiological survey of 6500 subjects from 65 rural counties in China:
“it is the largely vegetarian, inland communities who have the greatest all risk mortalities and morbidities and who have the lowest LDL cholesterols.”
Whoops! Campbell finds that “… the protective effect of fish consumption as validated by red cell DHA is universal.” It doesn’t look like that large epidemiological analysis known as The China Study is so compelling regarding the benefits of plant based diets after all! Pretty hard to get sick if you’re actually already dead, right?
Now, a new study involving over one hundred thousand subjects further bolsters the argument that animal proteins are not the ticking time bomb to your health so erroneously argued by Campbell.
Meat Eating Inversely Associated with Death from Cancer and Heart Disease
The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition published in July 2013 the results of a huge analysis of ecological data from the United Nations comparing country-specific meat consumption in Asia, specifically the countries of Bangladesh, China, Japan, Korea, and Taiwan.
112,310 men and 184,411 women were followed for 6.6 to 15.6 years. During that time, 24,283 all-cause, 9558 cancer, and 6373 cardiovascular disease (CVD) deaths were recorded.
The researchers concluded that while meat intake in Asian countries has increased in recent years, there was no evidence of a higher risk of mortality as a result. In fact, the analysis provided evidence of an inverse association with red meat, poultry, and fish/seafood consumption and cardiovascular mortality in men and cancer mortality in women!
This means that higher meat consumption has actually been correlated with fewer heart disease deaths in Asian men and fewer cancer deaths in Asian women:
“Red meat intake was inversely associated with CVD mortality in men and with cancer mortality in women in Asian countries.”
It seems the vegan bible has suffered yet another blow to its cherry picked conclusions. Unlike The China “Study”, this large analysis of Asian ecological data is a Real Study published in a Real (peer-reviewed) Scientific Journal. Not a blockbuster work of fiction designed to sell books through promotion of outrageous black and white nutritional propaganda.
Sarah, The Healthy Home Economist
Sources:
The China Study Myth
Meat intake and cause-specific mortality: a pooled analysis of Asian prospective cohort studies
Fish consumption, blood docosahexaenoic acid and chronic diseases in Chinese rural populations
Erythrocyte fatty acids, plasma lipids, and cardiovascular disease in rural China
Huuuh…I went this weekend to buy raw milk. It was my turn in the club. And the place did not look to my standards somehow this time. Things looked…more run down. But I told myself…it is hard times and it is ok. My house…is not as shiny as it was a few years ago either. And the milk is fine. And i really believe this second generation farmer knows his stuff.
And so i got milk for everyone. And eggs too. and then came home and delivered the milk and eggs….And the next morning I went to make eggs for my family. I decided to use the eggs as a time to teach my girl about egg cracking. Our nice farm eggs…and then…one by one, the eggs were bad. off color. off texture. really bad. only one of the six we cracked was good.
What do y’all think? Should I worry about this farm? Worry about the milk? Maybe they are just falling down with the chickens, because milk is their mainstay? Maybe these things just happen in the real world? Oh, I really don’t want to give up my milk club, but I am affected by this experience. What do you think is the wise choice here?
Thank you to anyone who responds.
I find that so many of these nutrition/diet blog comments are so polarized. This is a relatively civil one. Check out the nutrition fights on some of the Paleo blogs or low carb/pro carb blogs: some of the discourse is unbelievable! I don’t understand why some people are so angry, self-righteous and combative about a particular food or nutrient. I personally think that it’s more worthwhile to be concerned and angry about industrial farming practices and the impact they have on animal welfare, personal health and the physical environment. Perhaps vegans, vegetarians and omnivores can have a consensus about sustainable farming?
Well said, STG.
Hear, hear!
Also…we eat small amounts of raw milk from a milk club and also as cheese. Even in states where it is not allowed, you can sometimes get it “for pets.”
I have found…it nourishing. Although my well breast fed daughter does not tolerate it.
I think that maybe if we were all properly breastfed, or if studies on properly breastfed kids could show us more info, that there may be a correlation.
For now, I feed it in moderation to my unbreastfed self and feel it nourishes.
How can I unsubscribe from the comments on this post? Too much for me… 🙁
found it…
Well, I have to say this about feeding cats. I have fed cats a raw meat diet for many years. Organic raw meat that I mix with various vitamins, fish oil, and other add ins that are either vital for or healthful for the cats. I use a mix in called Wild Kitty, which is well priced and fabulous for the purpose. And yes, they will still eat milk and actually love it when i will offer it, either raw or pasteurized.
But…I have never had the chance to feed a cat that was properly breastfed from its mother and then fed a truly proper diet after that. I would love to hear how such a cat would respond to milk. I think that would be really telling!
Has anyone breastfed a child until child-led weaning and then had them turn to raw milk and have it work out healthfully? I would love to hear about that too…That to me would be some real support for raw milk’s value for humans.
Just a quick note regarding cats drinking milk. Well fed cats will not drink milk, if offered to them. A starving stray cat will….because he needs to adapt to what food is available, to survive….and most humans offer strays milk, for some strange reason.
If you feed a stray, offer tuna…
This is not my experience. The well fed cats I’ve had will always lap up raw milk quite happily.
i agree, i had very well fed cats that would all sit around to get the first few squeezes of raw goats milk i’d milk out and discard.
Thank you Lisa G. So nice of you to say. It means a lot to me, because…i help people a lot for free and don’t always get thanked or even get to see the results of my support. And I am ok with that. But the occasional recognition really goes a long way.
Yes. The real truth I see is that this is a very helpful conversation. And that everyone in the conversation is contributing to that helpfulness.
A good conversation always makes everyone at least a little bit wrong and everyone learn something new. Otherwise…why are we sharing our best human spirit with each other? We have to believe in…all of us as learners. Or at least that our piece of the truth is just that…a piece. And that we need others for the whole pie, no matter how advanced we are in our subject of knowledge.
Even having students of our knowledge is a form of learning, just in a less obvious way.
So who else has something to say that might be worth all of us reading? I am ready to listen…
Also, anyone want to join me in thanking Sarah? If you are still reading this conversation, then you value it. And you cannot value it without realizing that Sarah is the one to thank. Even if you disagree with some of her methods or conclusions.
Here is mine.
Sarah, thank you for prompting this discussion. Without you, it would not be happening. You are the only one among us willing to stand up as the expert. And this is…a time in nutritional history when…anyone calling themselves an expert is only going to be part way there. But…we still need leaders. Leaders can make mistakes or even prompt disagreement or even only be right for some of the people and still be worthy leaders, especially in times of great growth of awareness…Thank you also for caring enough to shout out your knowledge. I know you mean to help the people making different choices than you, as well as the people easily following your lead. This to me shows a lot of love, actually. I see your “negative or disrespectful” parts of your writing as…an attempt at a kind of tough love. I am not saying that this is the best method. I am not saying your conclusions are right or that they are wrong. Just that your effort is worthy of gratitude and respect. And also that you are helping! Also, I value your knowledge.
I myself…have not yet called myself a teacher… because I have not welcomed this fact about it all for myself somehow. And I applaud your bravery in this regard. Someone has to step up! Thank you for being among the people who are doing so at this time.
Yes! I eat like those peoples, as best I can. Largely vegan but small amounts of meat, fish, dairy. I try to eat fish raw or rare and I also use bone broths, which sarah teaches and which is a great way to ethically get in your animal food needs! Because bone broths come from animal parts that are often just thrown away. And they are so nourishing. I urge vegans to start there….and i support largely vegan eating, just not totally vegan eating, unless you are regularly tested and have reasons why total veganism is super right for you.
And i agree that eating tons of meat, while i try to be gentle about it…is not sustainable and is full of…killing.
We are part of the food chain. But we do not need to abuse this fact by overdoing it all the time. We are not carnivores. We are omnivores who eat largely vegan and small amounts of animal foods.
At least it seems that way to me. I am not an expert. Just someone who has long eaten this way and felt…what it does for me in my body and spirit.
Also, I just have to say this: sometimes i find that people who eat tons of meat…have some aggressive tendencies. i think it may be from the aggressive nature of using meat as your primary food source. Also, sometimes i find…a sort of different kind of anger in vegans and i sometimes wonder if it is deficiency based anger. and sometimes i see vegans who…give more than they should. not in ALL vegans. just sometimes.
i am not claiming to be above all this. we all work on ourselves.
Lets say a prayer that all creatures of the world get their needs met. And recognize that none of us is the expert.
I want to thank everyone willing to be in this discussion. We may not all like what each has had to say but…the conversation to me IS productive. And anyone involved is therefore part of the solution.
Some people are not even talking about food as medicine!!!!!!!!! About food mattering!!!! And are eating totally unconsciously. And are participating in factory farming and GMO, which are the real scourges in our mutual food experience on this planet.
So lets remember that.
Great post, Flora. Yes, I say we just throw out the original topic of how “wrong” Campbell was in the China Study… because something bigger has indeed come out of this. It’s been great hearing all of the different voices and opinions. Of course, we’re not all going to agree, and that’s okay!
If people have time to read just one post in this discussion, I hope that it’s yours.
Well, I’m close to giving up on this, as you barely answered anything I asked, Sarah. I am wondering if you also think Drs. Esselstyn, Neal Barnard, and/or Dean Ornish (I guess I give my examples in 3’s).
I guess you “proved me wrong” on those peoples not being vegan if they only ate a 99% plant based diet. You’ve got me there. You totally missed the point.
But let’s start with just how insulting the title of this post is. I guess that’s what really got me going. Not a cool way to approach a topic which we could all benefit in discussing. But then you follow with, “The China Study became firmly established as the de facto nutritional bible of the plant eating posse.” Seriously? Do you not see that this language is offensive?
But the original intent of your post, I do believe, that Campbell was wrong, and that animals proteins are two thumbs up for our health. It is only later you get into the “raw vs. pasteurized”. That is a whole different topic altogether. Originally you did not specify pastured, or not feed lot cows, or even cows! Just animal protein.
So, to answer Beth, you probably don’t want to know how we steal milk from cows (hint: get them pregnant and then kill their babies or turn them into veal). And that’s just covering dairy cows. Other factory farmed animals are turned into pet food when they’ve lost their purpose. But if anyone did get anything out of this discussion, as a lot of people expressed wanting to do, then take Sarah’s advice… if you’re going to drink milk, or eat cheese or butter, follow what she advised on these topics. She’s right on with those things.
I guess my point is, instead of backhandedly and absentmindedly bashing The China Study, if your actual point was on pastured, cultured food, perhaps you should have written your blog about that. You do seem knowledgeable to an extent in this department. And I can respect and have respected many things you’ve shared here, even if my feelings don’t always mesh with them. For example, I don’t fight with my meat eating friends because of their choice. But if they ever started spouting this kind of nonsense and kept defending it, then yeah, I’d point out the facts and try to educate them. It seems a lot of your readers have common sense and have done the legwork. Shane and S make valid points…. so many that I won’t reiterate them. Kudos for your logic!
Well said, Lisa G.
I don’t appreciate being attacked as though I am an idiot Lisa. I am well aware of modern farming practices, and I clearly stated that I don’t support them. Older practices tended to be more humane. As we live in an imperfect world, all we can do is try to find the best solution. I simply stated what I believe that solution is and gave some of my reasoning. You backhandedly and absentmindedly bashing everyone who disagrees with you is no better than Sarah demonizing The China Study, which as I already stated, I disapproved of. Also, I may not have spelled it out, but I did specify that all foods should be produced-as-nature-intended by which I meant organically grown, pastured, and as unprocessed as possible.
My apologies, Sarah. I thought you were genuinely asking about “What is to be done with the animals that no longer produce”. Because that’s a valid question, and not everyone does know the answers. I guess I missed your point (and still kind of am, to be honest). In rereading your post, I’m not sure what you mean by “cull the herd”. I mean, I get that you mean kill and eat them. Am I missing something more?
I definitely do not think I backhandedly OR absentmindedly bash anyone, and I am sorry you see it that way. I don’t say anything “backhandedly”. I’m pretty sure I’m quite direct. And trust me, “absentmindedly” is a word you’d never use if you knew me. I give every sentence a lot of thought. I’m confused whom I “bashed” for not agreeing with me…?
First, I am, in general, a fan of this blog. It also does look like there are considerable flaws with the research behind the China Study, but demonizing it is neither professional nor helpful in generating productive discussion. Shane makes excellant points about both studies. There really are so many factors to consider that neither study paints a clear picture.
I do, however, see logic behind eating traditionally; if many generations have been eating a certain way and they are largely healthy, clearly their diet is okay.
**It seems to me that eating local, in season, produced-as-nature-intended foods, including moderate amounts of animal products, is the healthiest and most sustainable option.**
This comes, by the way, from someone who spent 7 years as a vegetarian.
From the sustainable pov, vegetarianism has faults just as does rampant meat consumption. Some nutrients are quite difficult, if not downright impossible, to obtain as a vegan without supplementation. And if you include some animal products such as eggs and/or dairy to help with this, what is to be done about the animals that are too old to produce these things? They cannot sustainably be supported until they naturally die. The most sensible, sustainable solution is to cull the herd (in a humane manner), and honor the life of the animal by using everything it has to offer.
The modern American system is so completely unsustainable and unnatural that most of us have no perspective on how to realistically feed so many in a healthy, sustainable way.