FORA.tv

Watch, Shout, Share

The Kind Diet: Alicia Silverstone

Kepler's Books
Rate It
20,270 Views
  • Info
  • Bio
  • Full Program
  • Highlights
  • Transcript
  • Download
  • More
Page 2 of 2 1 2
TinyCub Avatar
TinyCub
Posts: 1
Posted: 12.23.09, 12:34 AM
I will continue with this beautiful diet and I will ignore the clueless naysayers (some who have posted already).
Permalink
JDHaddad Avatar
JDHaddad
Posts: 1
Posted: 02.14.10, 08:02 PM
What a joke!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peacem0nger
A young Hollywood actress selling her diet book is not science by any stretch of the imagination. The claims she makes for this book, which also appears to be a political manifesto, may belong on an infomercial. It does not deserve to be categorized as science on this website.
I totally agree. It's really fascinating how celebrities attain such unquestioned credibility. I especially liked her response to "critical non-vegans" - show them pretty pictures!

Unfortunately, I fear I may be considered one of those "critical non-vegans" - but my argument against veganism is footed solely in rationality, and not in some distaste for vegans (or the trendiness of veganism, which I find is often the case). Indeed, I have many friends who are vegetarians and vegans, but I'm strongly opposed to any diet that completely restricts any element of natural, nutritious foods (meat certainly being one of them).

There is overwhelming biological, genetic, evolutionary, anthropological, and biochemical evidence that we are, on the whole, omnivores; as such, we should strive for balance and moderation in all things, rather than seek to eliminate entire food groups.

There's really nothing wrong with a celebrity "coming up" with a diet or lifestyle plan; to argue against that would be a waste of energy. What's wrong is presenting this collection of "cliff notes" and pseudoscience as something worthy of appearing on the same platform as real science.

It's not all wrong, of course, but the meager number of credible recommendations simply cannot outweigh the misinformation I gathered from a simple skimming of this book:
  • "Don't eat nuts or nut butters - too fatty." Yes, and what exactly is the implication there? At another point in the book, she mentions the importance of mono- and polyunsaturated fats in the diet - nuts are an excellent source of beneficial fats! Contradictory.
  • Her claim that plant based omega-3s are "much more stable" than fish oil is simply false. Her argument about toxicity is discredited by the fact that you can buy molecularly distilled fish oil. Finally, she neglects to mention that the conversion rate of plant-based omega-3s is awful (in the ballpark of 15%), and her claim that we should "make [our] omega-3s from the plants [we] eat" just like fish demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding on the topic.
  • The whole issue of avoiding fruit that's not grown in your area is absolutely ludicrous. She uses some silly example like if you're from Manhattan, you shouldn't eat tropical fruit. This, to me, demonstrates another fundamental understanding of the way our bodies have evolved over time. Heritage and genetics are indeed important in diet, but where you were BORN has no influence on the type of foods you should be eating, and certainly doesn't negate the multitude of positive effects gained through an omnivorous diet.
  • Her demonization of saturated fats in the face of current research again reflects a lack of honesty (or comprehension, or awareness: you choose).
  • Weak blood? How about that megaloblastic anemia you'll develop if you stop supplementing with B12.
And by the way, claiming you want to make something "easier" for the reader by leaving out things like credible research and scientific evidence isn't helpful, it's condescending.

In short, there's simply no room for this "touchy-feely" anecdotal bullshit in reputable nutrition literature.
Permalink
type318 Avatar
type318
Posts: 1
Posted: 02.22.10, 06:36 PM
i don't have any science credentials involved in chemistry or medicine to contradict her claim about health benefits involved vegan. But i can make good conclusion based only on her controversial reasoning and so called proofs what are mostly from her private life and can't be applied to majority as "good science source" that she is dumb as am I on this subject.

love form russia
( how's my english ? )
Permalink
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Please log in or register to post a comment.
Advertisement

Related Programs

The Good Food Good Jobs Coalition The Good Food Good Jobs Coalition
00:00:00 min | 544 Views
My Life As An Experiment: A.J. Jacobs My Life As An Experiment: A.J. Jacobs
01:04:12 min | 44,141 Views
Wayne Clough: Smithsonian Forever Wayne Clough: Smithsonian Forever
01:26:37 min | 18,936 Views
T.R. Reid: The Healing of America T.R. Reid: The Healing of America
01:01:15 min | 15,280 Views
Dr. Nadav Ahituv: Future Genomics Dr. Nadav Ahituv: Future Genomics
00:42:32 min | 1,647 Views

Browse Programs by Tag

Arts Books Climate Change Conflict Credit Crunch Defense Democratization Economic Policy Education Election 2008 Emerging Markets Energy Entertainment Entrepreneurship Environment Film Food Globalization Health & Wellness Healthcare History Internet Investing Journalism Law Medicine Music Muslim World Natural Sciences New Media Personal Technology Philanthropy Religion Social Issues Social Sciences Sustainability Terrorism The Bailout U.S. Foreign Policy White House 2009

Advertisement