FacebookTwitter
Hatrack River Forum   
my profile login | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hatrack River Forum » Active Forums » Books, Films, Food and Culture » Nutrition and Health: Explaining the works of Dr. Price (Page 2)

  This topic comprises 16 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  ...  14  15  16   
Author Topic: Nutrition and Health: Explaining the works of Dr. Price
katharina
Member
Member # 827

 - posted      Profile for katharina   Email katharina         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Age does affect bone density and so the skeleton.
So you're claiming that it halts the aging process?
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
pH
Member
Member # 1350

 - posted      Profile for pH           Edit/Delete Post 
I still don't understand how teeth have anything to do with this. Some people are born without wisdom teeth. Some people are born without certain adult teeth.

-pH

Posts: 9057 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
KarlEd
Member
Member # 571

 - posted      Profile for KarlEd   Email KarlEd         Edit/Delete Post 
I'm one of them. Never cut wisdom teeth and I have one other adult tooth that never formed.
Posts: 6394 | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Primal Curve
Member
Member # 3587

 - posted      Profile for Primal Curve           Edit/Delete Post 
Might I point out that few people are born with teeth and that adult teeth form later?

Not siding with steven, it just seems rediculous to be talking about being born with teeth.

Posts: 4753 | Registered: May 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
BaoQingTian
Member
Member # 8775

 - posted      Profile for BaoQingTian   Email BaoQingTian         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
Hey, seriously, steven has a point: I would be the wrong person to approach for nutritional advice. Luckily, I'm not offering any. And I DO have the physical profile of a congenital skeptic.

While I really, really respect your gracious response to steven after his unbelievably rude comment, I don't think that steven had a valid point. If you have the knowledge, then there's no reason not to approach you for nutritional advice. For example, the fact that Bob chooses to use a more inherently unsafe mode of transportation (a motorcycle) is not a sufficient reason to disregard his comments on traffic safety.
Posts: 1412 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
steven
Member
Member # 8099

 - posted      Profile for steven   Email steven         Edit/Delete Post 
Bob, are we done yet? Clearly we've strayed from the main topic.

As far as the teeth thing goes, Price noted, as well as Pottenger, that a better diet tended to cause bone structure to be more similar among members of the same race/family.

Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
KarlEd
Member
Member # 571

 - posted      Profile for KarlEd   Email KarlEd         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Primal Curve:
Might I point out that few people are born with teeth and that adult teeth form later?

Not siding with steven, it just seems rediculous to be talking about being born with teeth.

Well technically while we are not "born with teeth" we are born with the buds from which they form. (Or not, depending on the tooth in question.)
Posts: 6394 | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
twinky
Member
Member # 693

 - posted      Profile for twinky   Email twinky         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by steven:
If it gives straight teeth, it gives dense bones.

I knew I should have gotten braces!

[Wink]

Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
ClaudiaTherese
Member
Member # 923

 - posted      Profile for ClaudiaTherese           Edit/Delete Post 
steven, there are reasons to consider whether or not age was factored into the analysis. Price notes conclusions about such things as tooth decay, arthritis, and straightness of stature.

The rates of all these diseases/"disorders" are each affected by age. For example, it is developmentally appropriate for children of one age group to be bow-legged (that is, they are supposed to be), another to be straight-legged, and another age range to be knock-kneed before they straighten out again.

I did read some exerpts from Price's writings -- although not the full text -- and I did not see good variable control for age. Is it documented elsewhere in his work, or did he not control for age?

Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
steven
Member
Member # 8099

 - posted      Profile for steven   Email steven         Edit/Delete Post 
Price found crookedness of teeth and narrowed ribcages among people of all ages, and his pictures prove it. What else are you looking for? Crooked teeth are abnormal at any age.
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
King of Men
Member
Member # 6684

 - posted      Profile for King of Men   Email King of Men         Edit/Delete Post 
That's not the question asked. The question is, did he control for age when he wrote down his statistics? The answer is, no he didn't, he considered only the two categories of primitive-eaters and modern-eaters. No other variables were looked at, and he was pretty binary even in that one - you were either a primitive-eater or not.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
ClaudiaTherese
Member
Member # 923

 - posted      Profile for ClaudiaTherese           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by steven:
Price found crookedness of teeth and narrowed ribcages among people of all ages, and his pictures prove it. What else are you looking for? Crooked teeth are abnormal at any age.

When comparing two groups to test whether a given variable (here, "diet") is responsible for a given effect (here, "bone changes"), you need to have the groups otherwise matched for all likely confounders. Otherwise, selection bias can make it look like there was a difference when there was not.

So, I take it that you, steven, do not hold that he controlled for age as a confounding variable? (just checking)

Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
steven
Member
Member # 8099

 - posted      Profile for steven   Email steven         Edit/Delete Post 
OK, CT, WHICH AGE is it that my TEETH are supposed to be CROOKED?
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 124

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson         Edit/Delete Post 
Everyone, can we let this go back to Bob and steven? I don't want to overwhelm steven with questions in a volume he can't possibly answer.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
ClaudiaTherese
Member
Member # 923

 - posted      Profile for ClaudiaTherese           Edit/Delete Post 
steven, please don't yell. Instead, please answer the simple question.

In answer to your question, I am not talking just about crooked teeth, but about other things as well. Regardless, teeth are often "crooked" when there are not other surrounding teeth to hold them in alignment. This happens naturally when someone is just getting in a new crop of teeth or when other teeth have been lost (again, both are age-related). Thumb-sucking (also age-related) is another reason. Other reasons, such as heredity, may or may not be age-related.

Now, your turn. And please don't go for the all-caps yell again -- it isn't necessary.

Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
ClaudiaTherese
Member
Member # 923

 - posted      Profile for ClaudiaTherese           Edit/Delete Post 
Fair enough, Tom. I'm happy to defer my question about age as a confounder until such a time as it is appropriate for non-Bob-initiated questions. [Smile]
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
steven
Member
Member # 8099

 - posted      Profile for steven   Email steven         Edit/Delete Post 
age is not a confounder. This is utter crap. Would someone tell her this?
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
katharina
Member
Member # 827

 - posted      Profile for katharina   Email katharina         Edit/Delete Post 
Maybe we can get back to Bob. CT's cogent point is derailing steven from Bob's questions.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
BlackBlade
Member
Member # 8376

 - posted      Profile for BlackBlade   Email BlackBlade         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by steven:
age is not a confounder. This is utter crap. Would someone tell her this?

Oh hoo so now you want us to argue for you?

Steven I think you have indeed been given so many questions that it would be daunting to answer them all.

Are you suggesting that as we eat according to Dr Price, "Better" that our teeth will then grow straighter?

Ill let this thread go back to Bob and Steve.

Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
steven
Member
Member # 8099

 - posted      Profile for steven   Email steven         Edit/Delete Post 
The reason that it's utter crap is simply this:

Teeth are crooked because the bones of the lower and mid-face are underdeveloped or distorted in some way.

Dr. Price's book has dozens of pictures of people of all ages with these distortions.

The usual pattern is flattened cheekbones, an undersized jaw, and general narrowing of the skull, skeletorn, and face, as well as a narrowed nose.

That said, you can have crooked teeth with or without these patterns. The point being....ta daaa....distortions are clearly a result of nutritional deficiencies. The proof of this is that you can produce the same patterns in animals by restricting their vitamin and mineral intake.

It's so good to speak with you again, kat.

Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
ElJay
Member
Member # 6358

 - posted      Profile for ElJay           Edit/Delete Post 
Just a reminder, or for those who don't know -- Bob can't post on Hatrack during business hours. So anything from him will come before or after work.

Also, steven, I think he asked for a couple of assurances from you in his post yesterday, before he would begin discussing the matter. Maybe you could re-read that and post if you agree, so that when he gets back here he can start addressing your points?

Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
ClaudiaTherese
Member
Member # 923

 - posted      Profile for ClaudiaTherese           Edit/Delete Post 
(steven, we can discuss whether age can be a confounder at another time. I will set aside my response until then -- it can wait until an appropriate time, if it comes. Meanwhile, back to Bob. After business hours. [Smile] )
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
mr_porteiro_head
Member
Member # 4644

 - posted      Profile for mr_porteiro_head   Email mr_porteiro_head         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Well technically while we are not "born with teeth" we are born with the buds from which they form. (Or not, depending on the tooth in question.)
I know a girl who was born with a tooth already in. They had to remove it since she kept rubbing her tongue raw with it.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MightyCow
Member
Member # 9253

 - posted      Profile for MightyCow           Edit/Delete Post 
You all realize, I hope, that nothing good can come of this.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 8576

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by KarlEd:
I'm one of them. Never cut wisdom teeth and I have one other adult tooth that never formed.

Hey! Me, too. I still have one "baby" tooth. A premolar on the top right. And my wisdom teeth are still dormant.

Maybe we are related!

Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
BannaOj
Member
Member # 3206

 - posted      Profile for BannaOj   Email BannaOj         Edit/Delete Post 
There's the other side where I had a perfectly fine dental bite as a child until my adolescent molars started crowding my mouth. Although I don't know where Dr. Price would place my facial features on his scheme, I could be undernourished and all.
Posts: 11265 | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Rabbit
Member
Member # 671

 - posted      Profile for The Rabbit   Email The Rabbit         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by steven:
age is not a confounder. This is utter crap. Would someone tell her this?

Steven, Age can indeed be a confounding factor which must be controlled for in any medical study. The parameters you refer to, straight teeth, bone density, narrow rib cage and pelvis etc, vary dramatically within any population with out reguard to diet. If Price found a perfect correlation between straight teeth and bone density then I can assure you that his results are a load of crap.

Assuming that his research has any integretty at all, he would have to have a statistically significant number of subject to rule out the possibility that his results occurred by random chance. In addition, it would have to be shown that the populations in each study group were essentially identical in all ways except diet. That means that he would have to have controlled for age.

Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Bob_Scopatz
Member
Member # 1227

 - posted      Profile for Bob_Scopatz   Email Bob_Scopatz         Edit/Delete Post 
steven,

1) are you ready to make the promise?

2) what are your alternate screen names -- other than c.t.t.n., of course?

3) Your synopsis of Price's methods is not sufficient, as you well know from past exchanges here. Nobody with any grounding in scientific methodology is going to make the leap from nutritionally deprived animals in an experimental setting to observations of humans. There are just too many holes. I suspect that Price was more careful than what you make him out to be, so, rather than rely on further "explanations" from you, I think it would be most fair for me (or maybe someone else -- KoM has already read this stuff and could no doubt do a decent job), to read the relevant passages and come back here with an explanation of the methods used by Dr. Price and then, separately, a critique thereof.

Not having read the book yet, I can only say that the idea of going a chapter at a time, starting with 15 or wherever you prefer, is going to be the best bet for an accurate portrayal that doesn't involve use of Hatrack webspace for wholesale copying of the material from the book.

So,

A) do you agree we can just start with a chapter in its entirety -- you pick which one.

and

B) will you agree to stay to discuss this even when (as I feel is practically inevitable), I point to serious flaws in the methodology that make it impossible for Price to have drawn at least SOME of the conclusions you have presented to us as his?

In other words...will you listen and interact respectfully? Will you make an honest effort to accept it when I (and others) point to serious flaws in Price's work, and will you, at the very least, take that as an indication that further defense of those particular conclusions is not supported by the research presented in the book?


For my part, I promise to be very careful in my critique to say when I know something is flawed methodologically and distinguish those cases from other points where I either can't draw a conclusion or conclude that the method is in fact, sound.

My intention, then, is to point to the things that we can all agree are done well, and upon which conclusions may be drawn, and what those conclusions might be.

Then, for everything else, I'll point out the flaws in methods and conclusions and give at least one alternative explanation that is both simpler, and supported by the data.


Is this going to work for you?

If so...all you need to do to start the process is do #1 above -- state your promise in clear declarative sentences.


I would prefer that you also list your alternate screen names, but I'm not going to make that a pre-condition for my spending more time on this.

It's worth it if you'll simply come here each day with an open mind and a willingness to follow the logic of my critique. If you find flaws in the logic, you should feel free to correct them, or ask questions about stuff that is unclear.

What I really DON'T want is for you to fall back on your prior tactic of simply reasserting the stuff that's already been discussed and judged invalid. If you disagree that I've pointed to a fatal flaw in the methods, it is up to you to explain WHY you think that flaw is not a flaw afterall. No good just saying "but what about the cats?" or "look at the observations!" like you have so many times in the past. Once I critique it, you either have to refute my critique or otherwise state why you disagree with it. I promise to be thorough and answer every one of your questions in as much detail as I can in order to aid in a mutual understanding of terms and what each of my critiques really means.


Okay?


Does this work for you?


NOTE: I do not come to Hatrack during working hours, so my involvement here is taking away from leisure time that would be better spent with my family. If you really aren't able to do agree to these conditions, it's really not worth me bothering.

I will, however, point to this thread every time you come back to hatrack trying to get people to listen to you about Dr. Price. Ay the very least, the purpose of having a more permanent record of this issue will be served.

So...

promise and we shall commence.

Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
pH
Member
Member # 1350

 - posted      Profile for pH           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by BannaOj:
There's the other side where I had a perfectly fine dental bite as a child until my adolescent molars started crowding my mouth. Although I don't know where Dr. Price would place my facial features on his scheme, I could be undernourished and all.

See, my teeth grew in crooked because the adult teeth grew in BEHIND the baby teeth, not under. So I had to pull out the baby teeth on my own, and then the adult teeth got to race to the front.

I got braces though. So I guess my bone density is cool.

-pH

Posts: 9057 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Rabbit
Member
Member # 671

 - posted      Profile for The Rabbit   Email The Rabbit         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by BannaOj:
There's the other side where I had a perfectly fine dental bite as a child until my adolescent molars started crowding my mouth. Although I don't know where Dr. Price would place my facial features on his scheme, I could be undernourished and all.

I have no idea whether Dr. Price would place me based on facial features but I do know that I am undernourished (or at least was). I suffer from a maladsorption disorder (Celiac/Sprue). Until I was diagnosed in my mid thirties, I was unable to properly adsorb iron, calcium and other important minerals and nutrients from my diet. I was chronically anemic, had low bone density and was extremely thin. Nevertheless, I have natually straight teeth.

If Dr. Price is claiming that diet is the only factor, which I sincerely doubth, then I clearly disprove his results. If he admits that other factors are involved, then he must control for those factors.

Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
KarlEd
Member
Member # 571

 - posted      Profile for KarlEd   Email KarlEd         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by kmbboots:
quote:
Originally posted by KarlEd:
I'm one of them. Never cut wisdom teeth and I have one other adult tooth that never formed.

Hey! Me, too. I still have one "baby" tooth. A premolar on the top right. And my wisdom teeth are still dormant.

Maybe we are related!

Hey, my other missing tooth was a molar on the top left! I had a root canal on an adjacent tooth when I was 14 and the x-ray showed I still had a baby pre-molar next to it with no adult tooth at all above it. They pulled it and I've had a space ever since.
Posts: 6394 | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Juxtapose
Member
Member # 8837

 - posted      Profile for Juxtapose   Email Juxtapose         Edit/Delete Post 
I had to get braces for crooked teeth because, according to my orthodontist, I was swallowing incorrectly.

Apparently, when most people swallow, they push their tongues to the roofs of their mouths. I, on the other hand, was pushing my tongue against the back of front teeth. One way to test for this is whether or not the top and bottom rear molars are touching when you swallow. If they're not, it could be because you're swallowing incorrectly.

Most young kids do this, I was told, but develop the correct behavior by the age of six or so. I didn't, and by the time I was in middle school, my front teeth were bucked out, and the resulting space allowed my other teeth to grow as they saw fit. I had a hell of a time trying to retrain the way I swallowed, but it was that or a retainer for the rest of my life.

FWIW.

Posts: 2907 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Nell Gwyn
Member
Member # 8291

 - posted      Profile for Nell Gwyn   Email Nell Gwyn         Edit/Delete Post 
Interesting, Juxtapose. I have never heard that before, but I guess you can add me to the list of people who swallow incorrectly.

That would also probably explain why the gap between my front teeth has a tendency to reappear if I neglect to wear my retainer for a few nights, despite the fact that my braces were removed almost eight years ago. [Frown]

Posts: 952 | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Juxtapose
Member
Member # 8837

 - posted      Profile for Juxtapose   Email Juxtapose         Edit/Delete Post 
There are exercises you can do to fix the problem, aside from just thinking about how you swallow every time you eat a meal, which is what I did. I have some very diligent parents.

I couldn't find any programs with a quick Google search, but your dentist could probably point you in the right direction.

Posts: 2907 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Kwea
Member
Member # 2199

 - posted      Profile for Kwea   Email Kwea         Edit/Delete Post 
steven....do you think I started this thread to pick on you? To slam or insult you?


I started it to allow you the chance that you always CLAIMED to want...a fair chance to present your views and answer questions.


Not for a slam fest. You really don't want to go there.


Trust me.


CT is a doctor, BTW. If she comments on reasonable controls for medical research, she MAY have a little more experience with it that you. I worked in a bio-hazard lab setting (in the safety office though) for 3 years at USAMRIID, and I founded the MRVS's council. I also helped draft the MRVS's ethical statement and compensation rules that were presented to the Congressional Oversight Committee, and the suggestions we presented were adopted wholesale right after I left the Army. The MRVS program is world renowned as THE model for informed consent medical experimentation with Humans.


We are all taking time out to discuss medical issues with you, and to listen to what you have to say...and you are doing nothing so far but bitch about getting "off-topic" and make insulting comments.


As a prime example of why age is a primary variable that should not be ignored.....consider osteoporosis. As women age they lose bone density automatically. The amount each woman loses varies, of course, but after menopause women usually have to be very careful and watch their diets to prevent dangerous bone loss.

This was not well known at in in 1939, and therefore could not have been factored in by Dr. Price. However it is a true fact, proved many times over by modern science and testing. If Dr. Price didn't factor it in, it would without a doubt skew his results.


It may or may not ruin his study....we don't know yet. But it does increase the chance of error in his findings.

[ December 06, 2006, 10:28 PM: Message edited by: Kwea ]

Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Adam_S
Member
Member # 9695

 - posted      Profile for Adam_S   Email Adam_S         Edit/Delete Post 
I've been interested in Price's work for a few years, I've read his book and got a digital version from an Australian public domain online library (I can look up the location later). But I've never had the oppurtunity to really analyze it in the manner that Bob laid out in this thread. I'd love to see this thread go on civilly, or at least the links to the old threads when this was discussed. A big part of my motivation for going into Price's methods, is my on unfamiliarity with science in general and--after reading the book--some serious qualms I had with the conclusions the Sally Fallon and the WAPF (weston a price foundation) made from his research. Also I think some of Steven's generalizations are slightly inaccurate, but I'll have to get home before I can post the excerpts that say why.

I think I also have some digital copies of some of his peer reviewed published studies from before the book was published, I'll have to pull those out as well.

I don't know if this counts as controlling for age in the modern sense, but in his study of the Swiss Loetschental Valley he presents multiple data sets for children of varying ages and adults in the valley.

quote:
In answer to your question, I am not talking just about crooked teeth, but about other things as well. Regardless, teeth are often "crooked" when there are not other surrounding teeth to hold them in alignment. This happens naturally when someone is just getting in a new crop of teeth or when other teeth have been lost (again, both are age-related). Thumb-sucking (also age-related) is another reason. Other reasons, such as heredity, may or may not be age-related.
what I would say is that Price's research suggests the possibility that heredity has very small impact, and the possibility that poor nutrition is a reason the jaw and teeth might grow in a non-ideal fashion, causing the mis-alignment, crookedness or too narrow a palate (to hold all teeth).

Adam

Posts: 128 | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Adam_S
Member
Member # 9695

 - posted      Profile for Adam_S   Email Adam_S         Edit/Delete Post 
EDIT: cut this done when I saw how long it appeared on the actual page (I got carried away last night)

Here's the first two paragraphs of chapter fifteen of Nutrition and Physical Degeneration. relatively easy to tear apart with modern approaches to data collection I imagine. Bear in mind that the assumptions he's making in these opening paragraphs are based on the presentation of thirteen chapters of detailed comparative data. The first chapter laid out his hypothesis and this chapter is where he restates it clearly:

quote:
IF PRIMITIVE races have been more efficient than modernized groups in the matter of preventing degenerative processes, physical, mental and moral, it is only because they have been more efficient in complying with Nature's laws. We have two procedures that we can use for evaluating their programs: first, the interpretation of their data in terms of our modern knowledge; and second, the clinical application of their procedures to our modern social problems. Specifically, since the greater success of the primitives in meeting Nature's laws has been based primarily on dietary procedures, it becomes desirable first, to evaluatetheir dietary programs on the basis of known biologic requirements for comparison with the foods of our modern civilization; and second, to test their primitive nutritional programs by applying their equivalents to our modern families.

The advance in our knowledge of body-building and body-repairing materials from a biochemical standpoint makes it possible even with our limited knowledge of organic catalysts, to draw comparisons between the primitive and modernized dietaries. If we use the generally accepted minimal and optimal quantities of the various minerals and vitamins required, as indicated by Sherman, (1) we shall have at once a yardstick for evaluating the primitive dietaries.

From later in the chapter, Price's understanding of how diet and nutrition operate:

quote:
... In planning an adequate diet, a proper ratio between body building and energy units must be maintained. It is important to keep in mind that while the amount of body-building and repairing material required is similar for different individuals of the same age and weight, it is markedly different for two individuals, one of whom is leading a sedentary, and the other, an active life. Similarly, there is a great difference between the amount of body-building and repairing material required by a growing child or an expectant mother and an average adult.

There are certain characteristics of the various dietaries of the primitive races, which are universally present when that dietary program is associated with a high immunity to disease and freedom from deformities. In general, these are the foods that provide adequate sources of body-building and body-repairing material. The use by primitives, of foods relatively low in calories has resulted in forcing them to eat large quantities of these foods, in order to provide the heat and energy requirements of the body. The primitives have obtained, often with great difficulty, foods that are scarce but rich in certain elements. In these rare foods were elements which the body requires in small quantities, including minerals such as iodine, copper, manganese and special vitamins.



[ December 07, 2006, 02:49 PM: Message edited by: Adam_S ]

Posts: 128 | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
beverly
Member
Member # 6246

 - posted      Profile for beverly   Email beverly         Edit/Delete Post 
Bob, might I suggest that since steven is extremely emotionally attached to the conclusion that Price is correct that you very carefully point out that just because you may expose faults in Price's scientific method that that doesn't necessarily mean that you are proving him wrong? He could've reached the correct conclusion by flipping a coin. (To give an extreme example.)

I remember when reading the book myself noting that the research could not be done today because that time was a sort of "golden era" where world-wide travel had become much more feasible while there were yet many groups of people that ate their traditional diet untained by the refined foods so ubiquitous today. The window opened and closed before we were born and Price was there to step into it. There is no revisiting this now, we can only examine the evidence that he found. And I personally find much of the evidence compelling.

As I have said before on this board, it was reading his studies that started me on an odessy of sorts and could be stated to be a large part of the reason why I now find myself on 6 acres in Oregon preparing to raise animals for grass-fed meat, eggs, and dairy products. I am a bit emotionally invested myself. [Smile] And I think it is a mistake to remove that human passion and become cold, calculated, machine like beings. So I like to approach things a bit more delicately.

I suggest that one of the reasons why no one has been able to successfully have this conversation with steven is because he gets defensive whenever he feels that people are out to prove his *hypothesis* wrong. All *I* see people trying to do is explain why *they* are unconvinced by Price's less-than-thourough methods and why the bar of skepticism is so high. But he isn't going to see that, not being as emotionally invested as he is, and being (ahem) a tad bit illogical in his thought processes to begin with.

Also, now and in the past, I see too many people asking steven if he does not see the flaws for himself and that he must find them for himself. Don't you see that he does not *want* to find flaws? Getting him to reach that conclusion on his own just ain't gonna happen. Certainly not when he perceives you as hostile! If you want this to be a productive discussion, you have got to find a way to keep steven *off* of the defensive.

<---is very interested in this discussion being productive

Posts: 7050 | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Bob_Scopatz
Member
Member # 1227

 - posted      Profile for Bob_Scopatz   Email Bob_Scopatz         Edit/Delete Post 
beverly,

I think you've really hit on some fundamental facts. I have regretted for months the stronger tones I took with steven in earlier threads over the past couple of years.

My offers to help him understand the scientific method, and why his entreaties for us to simply read Price's book and we'd all be believers weren't realistic.

I am willing to participate in this conversation not out of an interest in Price's work, but to make up for past bad behavior of mine when it comes to steven. I was brusque and dismissive.


steven, you may not trust me. That's fine. Someone else here can do just as good a job, no doubt. If you'd prefer that I not be the one to go through this I'll back down. Others have not asked for any promises from you. That's just between you and me.


Adam_S:

As I said above, I'm not really interested in a general discussion of Price's works. And I'm not participating in this thread unless steven is, and under certain conditions that I proposed to him.

Others may be interested, but I'd ask you to at least let steven start the ball rolling by making a decision as to whether or not he wants my participation.

Also, please be careful of copyright restrictions urged on us by our host. quotations including long passages from published work still under copyright protection is a violation of the Terms of Service here at Hatrack.

In order to engage in this discussion, we'll probably have to refer to passages of documents that are available "elsewhere." I personally don't want to be involved in reading pirated copies of something, so whatever we end up reviewing it'll either have to be a free-use copy or I'll have to find a way to purchase my own legit copy.

By the way...out of print does not cancel a copyright. It just makes the stuff more difficult to obtain.

Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Adam_S
Member
Member # 9695

 - posted      Profile for Adam_S   Email Adam_S         Edit/Delete Post 
gotcha Bob, longtime lurker and I definitely respect your posts. Editing the post down just to the first two paragraphs. fwiw, the book is public domain in australia, where I got my copy, it's not pirated, it was freely available for download through a library.

like Beverly, from a modern perspective I see flaws in Price's method, and some of his conclusions. However from my memory of reading the book, Price himself often expresses skepticism as well as frustration at the limitations of knowledge, and how he tried to overcome this with controls, analysis and experimentation. It's the WAPF that have transformed his research into something iconoclastic.
I must say that simply as an anthropological text the book has been an invaluable resource to building a mileau I've been working on off and on for years.


Adam

Posts: 128 | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
steven
Member
Member # 8099

 - posted      Profile for steven   Email steven         Edit/Delete Post 
Bob, if you lecture me again on copyright issues.....


You might want to read the chapters in this order: chapters 18, then 15, then 17, then 19, then 16.

Please say no more on this thread until you've done that reading.

Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TheGrimace
Member
Member # 9178

 - posted      Profile for TheGrimace   Email TheGrimace         Edit/Delete Post 
steven,
Bob was not talking to you about copyright issues, he was very clearly and rightfully talking to Adam_S...

secondly how many times does the issue need to be raised that Bob would like some sort of assurances from you as to your respecfulness etc in this discussion. He has listed the terms a number of times now very clearly and fairly and you continue to ignore his conditions.

Posts: 1038 | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
KarlEd
Member
Member # 571

 - posted      Profile for KarlEd   Email KarlEd         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
age is not a confounder. This is utter crap. Would someone tell her this?
quote:
Kwea, do you actually think I don't know about age-related osteoporosis? Wow.
It seems clear that people would have reason to believe you didn't, or at least didn't take it into account in your first quote above. Now, you may have taken that into account, and a little thought in your post could have made that clear by actually addressing the substance of the objection rather than dismissing it out of hand. As it is, I'm inclined to believe you didn't take it into account because you still haven't answered it as an objection but again simply dismissed it (or ignored it).
Posts: 6394 | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Adam_S
Member
Member # 9695

 - posted      Profile for Adam_S   Email Adam_S         Edit/Delete Post 
steven, your tone is really annoying in the context of this thread, as others have said, tone it down and turn on the respect, people are trying to be respectful of you, plese reciprocate. I'd like to see this topic continue.

quote:
Price is right, or he's wrong.
Not really, there are variations in between, degrees of correct conclusions. Price was working with severely limited (by comparison to today) understandings of biochemistry and he was working on the cutting edge of that field in some respects (no one ever really followed up on some of his investigations into what he called Activator X for instance). anyone working at the limits of knowledge is not going to always come to right conclusions, but we can still look at Price's data and try to understand where his scientific investigations took logical, empiracally verifiable turns and where he made leaps and hypothesis because the limitations of knowledge forced him too. Sometimes he may have jumped to the right conclusion, sometimes he may have been way off base.

But you can't say he was definitively right about 100% of the conclusions he presents in Nutrition and Physical Degeneration, even he revised some of his conclusions in later editions, if my understanding is correct. Price made some unique contributions to science and we all need to have an open mind about his contributions if this discussion succeeds.

Adam

Posts: 128 | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
steven
Member
Member # 8099

 - posted      Profile for steven   Email steven         Edit/Delete Post 
Karl, the idea that anyone here has anything to teach me about nutrition is laughable.
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
ElJay
Member
Member # 6358

 - posted      Profile for ElJay           Edit/Delete Post 
[ROFL] [Laugh] [ROFL]

Okay, I laughed. If you feel that way, what exactly is your purpose in having this conversation?

Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dagonee
Member
Member # 5818

 - posted      Profile for Dagonee           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by steven:
Karl, the idea that anyone here has anything to teach me about nutrition is laughable.

Then go away and find a nice little echo chamber. I'm sure there are plenty of places you will get virtual standing ovations for describing the poor duped souls who populate the less enlightened areas of the Internet and how miserably they treated you when you attempted to share this great truth with them.

If you honestly think the idea that you could learn something about nutrition here is laughable, then you clearly have no interest in discussing anything.

Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Adam_S
Member
Member # 9695

 - posted      Profile for Adam_S   Email Adam_S         Edit/Delete Post 
nevermind. already said better

does anyone know the titles of the old threads? I'm very curious to read Bob's past critiques.

Posts: 128 | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
BannaOj
Member
Member # 3206

 - posted      Profile for BannaOj   Email BannaOj         Edit/Delete Post 
Steven said:
quote:
Karl, the idea that anyone here has anything to teach me about nutrition is laughable.
So you really know everything there is to know about nutrition???

Woah.

Posts: 11265 | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Noemon
Member
Member # 1115

 - posted      Profile for Noemon   Email Noemon         Edit/Delete Post 
Adam, I may be mistaken, but I believe that steven deleted them when they didn't go the way he'd hoped.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 16 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  ...  14  15  16   

   Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Hatrack River Home Page

Copyright © 2008 Hatrack River Enterprises Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2