|
[ Diets other than Robert's Archive ] [ Main Archives Page ] [ Glossary/Index ] [ FAQ ] [ Recommended Books ] [ Bulletin Board ] |
Search this site! | |
This book has been mentioned and referenced by some as an authoritative source of information that dispenses absolute laws. As a food for thought, I would like to suggest reading the following review of the book.
In Reply to: Interesting review of the Eat Right 4 Your Type Hype book posted by R. on March 19, 2001 at 20:15:07:
In Reply to: Interesting review of the Eat Right 4 Your Type Hype book posted by R. on March 19, 2001 at 20:15:07:
I have a pretty good feeling of who R. REALLY is, and it would be very typical of him to put the word "hype" in, and then say it was an accident. They call that passive aggressive. And it would also be very typical of him to dig up an article such as this, and ask you to read it, he loves that kind of stuff. He was accused by Rich not so long ago of following him around and picking on him.
Anyways, folks, I don't have the time anymore for this. I innocently tried to point out to someone earlier that she might want to look at the blood type diet, and now that I have been picked to the bone by vultures here, there is this article. Well, I need to do other things and choose my endeavors carefully, so let me leave you guys with a reference to the "real thing", Dr. D'Adamo's website. He has written three books, has his own practice, a huge following around the world, and has lots of credentials. He lectures in Europe and within the US, and I have even met him. Most of all, he has lots of people that are on the diet, and it works, and that is certainly better proof than a bu*lsh*t article like this. There are lots of doctors and people in the health field that are jealous of him, and feel threatened that he is on to something. Well he is. And he is also working very hard, consistently researching and improving the diet, and in many, many cases it has worked for people, or they wouldn't stick with it.
Here's his website, and good luck for any that try it.
www.dadamo.com
In Reply to: Re: Interesting review of the Eat Right 4 Your Type Hype book posted by d.d. on March 19, 2001 at 22:05:43:
I don't know who you think R. is, but I can tell you how "hype" got into the subject line. The article he linked to is called "Eat Right 4 Your Type Hype." He probably cut and pasted that into the subject header without realizing that he left Hype in.
R. is probably the most objective person here. You need to calm down.
In Reply to: Re: Interesting review of the Eat Right 4 Your Type Hype book posted by d.d. on March 19, 2001 at 22:05:43:
I believe in considering different sources of information and opinions including diametrically opposite ones. Sometimes it is difficult to see other things, which may happen to be the true ones, if one has a tunnel vision focused on one thing. That is why I posted the link to the article. You are obviously emotionally attached to Adamo's work, and that is probably why you jumped to wrong conclusions about me and my intentions. I didn't even say that Adamo's theory is wrong. He might be right. I just provided a different view at the theory so that other people can have a broader ground to base their opinion on about the theory.
Now regarding blindly trusting someone with "lots of credentials"... If everybody had done that, then we wouldn't have airplanes now because many "scientists" with lots of credentials and respect used to say that objects that are heavier than air could not fly.
d.d., if you were a little calmer, you would easily understand why I got "hype" in the subject line. Lina did. And you already picked a name for me -- passive aggressive. You are very amusing.
In Reply to: Interesting review of the Eat Right 4 Your Type Hype book posted by R. on March 19, 2001 at 20:15:07:
"No conscious reader can complete this book without considering much more thoughtfully how their genetic inheritance relates to their needs for specific food, lifestyle and environmental factors to improve their health."
Jeffrey Bland, PhD
Founder, Institute for Functional Medicine
....on D'Adamo's "Live Right 4 Your Type."
In Reply to: Are you familiar with a "truth is born in a discussion" principle? posted by R. on March 20, 2001 at 01:29:58:
Hello.
I've been a follower of Dr. D for a long time. But never quite so rigidly as others on his site. I thought (e.g.) not shampooing with a particular brand because "it contained something bad for us Os" was so ridiculous that I felt sorry for the people. They didn't appreciate the stress they were putting themselves through that following anything so rigidly causes. And we all know about stress and the effect on the immune system. (that has been proven)
I also never said that I really understood how the blood type diet worked. I did know that I liked the A diet. I recommend that people read the book. Many people on this site have critized the diet without ever reading the book.
And it ALWAYS made perfect sense that if you follow ANY good diet, you will benefit. Most people eat like s@#t.
I think the correlation between LGS and diet mentioned in the article may be the real key on how it works. But, if most people have some form of LGS, the diet isn't so bad.
Thanks for posting.
Pete Reinhard
In Reply to: I like this one better posted by Here's Johnny~! on March 20, 2001 at 08:00:50:
...the keyword being "conscious".
Thanks.
In Reply to: Are you familiar with a "truth is born in a discussion" principle? posted by R. on March 20, 2001 at 01:29:58:
...a discussion for discussion sake, and an attack. Calm, you're darn tootin I'm not calm, because of your earlier attack on me, which was so obviously an attack. You had nothing to go on, so you tried to twist a few of my words around and make me look faulty and a fool, it was so nit picking and so obvious. I don't appreciate that, and I can see right through it. And in the same context you have now hunted down this negative article about the diet. Sorry, but you have no credibility with me after your first move. People can very easily hide their true intentions behind information, and I can see you're good at that. Why didn't you link to a positive article as well? Anyway, go ahead, dig up all the negative articles you can find, however, if "truth is born in discussion", then you'll have to find the positive articles and books in order to balance it out. Better yet, try the diet, put your money where your mouth is!
In Reply to: Interesting review of the Eat Right 4 Your Type Hype book posted by R. on March 19, 2001 at 20:15:07:
nmi
In Reply to: Re: Interesting review of the Eat Right 4 Your Type Hype book posted by d.d. on March 19, 2001 at 22:05:43:
I liked the article. It doesn't convince me that Dr.
D'Adamo's book is 'hype' tho. Just cause I have tried
the diet before and gave up doesn't mean that it
wouldn't have worked for me either. It just meant it was
too hard for me in my state at the time. What I gleaned
from the article was the interesting part about 'leaky gut
syndrome' . If you follow the ER4YT diet and you/your
leaky gut is healed from it, or you heal you/your leaky
gut another way...or use a dozen techniques-what's the
hurt? If I could prove that after using SR, following the
whole foods diet, massage, and all the other
suggestions Dr. Stoll suggests that it was really the
Diet that helped me the most, what's the chance 1,000
other people were healed mostly because of SR?
Please don't focus on the fact you think people are
picking on you. You're not that important, neither am I.
If the intent of the person who placed the article here
was only to pick on you, then they lost the game-I got
more out of it than that. That's what causes all sorts of
problems on this board. I appreciate any advice
someone gives me and would never discourage it- I
look for choices and info all over this board. The
person who wrote the article may be right, may be
wrong, and if someone is convinced one way or the
other, that's their business. No body on this board has
the ability to put on another's shoes and walk a mile in
them-'one person's trash is another person's treasure'
and criticism could be expressed more gently for sure,
but if you can't let go of your perceptions-accurate or
not-of negative focus, you're only hurting yourself, and
depriving others of all your wonderful helpful energy.
As someone on this board said to me....
Hugs :-)
Lauri
In Reply to: Re: Are you familiar with a "truth is born in a discussion" principle? Yes I am, and I also know the difference between... posted by d.d. on March 20, 2001 at 10:27:56:
It was an attack on you only in your own mind. I don't know what you can "see right through", but it's definitely not what you are talking about. I know what my intentions were and are and they are not what you think they are.
I don't need to post anything for the diet because you did that. I actually tried to balance out information given by you. That is how discussions are usually conducted -- people express different opinions. They should not be interpreted as personal attacks. My first reply to you about your words was a joke, by the way. If you read it again, you may notice something like this: "that is funny; you probably didn't mean for that to sound this way". Remember? I was hoping for that to be taken as a joke, and I am sorry it wasn't.
Better yet, try the diet, put your money where your mouth is!
This didn't make sense to me at all. It would have if I were the one promoting the diet.
And as far as my credibility with you is concerned... I am sorry, but I couldn't care less.
In Reply to: Are you familiar with a "truth is born in a discussion" principle? posted by R. on March 20, 2001 at 01:29:58:
Thanks, R.
My take is that Peter has a piece of the truth. His error, if there IS one, is that he thinks his discovery is a bigger piece than it is. Only future history will tell.
Namaste`
Walt
In Reply to: Re: Are you familiar with a "truth is born in a discussion" principle? posted by Walt Stoll on March 22, 2001 at 09:03:52:
can you please elaborate on that, because I don't feel I have enough information from your post to know exactly what you mean.
In Reply to: Re: Are you familiar with a "truth is born in a discussion" principle? posted by d.d. on March 22, 2001 at 13:08:56:
Hi, dd.
If you notice, all the books about anything promise more than they can deliver for most people. That is because IF they are valid, they only focus on a small part of what we are learning about the complexity of the human being.
I have spoken to Peter about this and he knows what I think.
My guess is that only about 20-25% of people who do what his book says will get lasting benefits. That means, however, that he has it right for at least that many people. I even believe that a lot more than that % will get temporary benefits. Thus means that, for those, this is a part of the truth.
The human genome project says that we must match the diet with the person and there are few general rules that will help everyone. Tests to predict the right diet for THAT individual, BEFORE they try it, are not yet available SO, the only thing is for the person to use their personal laboratory (how does it make me feel) to determine the truth for THEM.
Hope this helps.
Walt
In Reply to: Re: Are you familiar with a "truth is born in a discussion" principle? (Archive in diet.) posted by Walt Stoll on March 24, 2001 at 10:52:48:
Hi Walt,
Thanks for your comments. It helps me know a little more where you're coming from. IMHO, the diet still has a lot to offer. It's evolving and improving constantly, and keeping up with scientific changes and discoveries. You say it might only help 20-25% in terms of lasting benefits. I don't know what the statistics are, but with it's worldwide popularity and satisfied participants, there are a lot of people who feel they're getting something out of it.
As for tailoring the diet to the person, I would just like to mention several things. Most diets, with the exception of the elimination diet, have a one-size-fits-all philosophy. ER4YT certainly does better than that. There are 4 major diets based on the 4 blood types, but there is a lot more tailoring of the diet to the person than you might realize. Within those 4 broad blood type categories these are some of the ways in which the diet can specifically be tailored to the person based on:
their SUB blood type
their secretor status
their personal allergies
their weight
their particular illnesses
So for example type A's might be AA or AO and this will impact their food choices. If their secretor status is non-secretor, they might need more animal protein than A's with positive secretor status. If they are overweight, then they should reduce the amount of grains they take in, compared to those type A's who don't need to loose weight, and are just on the diet to eat healthy. If they have a particular illness, then several herbs and supplements are recommended to address that. If there is a food allergy, then obviously that food would be eliminated. Also, some people find that it is very advantageous to do food combining as well, such as keeping starches and proteins separate, and eating fruit all by itself. There are more ways in which the diet can be fine tuned, but I won't delve into it any further, because by now you probably get the gist.
I have been practicing this diet and the three legged stool for years now, and it's all quite compatible. And that's another thing I wanted to mention, this diet also discusses exercise, personality, SR, and I feel is quite comrehensive and accurate in many of these ways. Frankly, I always thought you and Peter were basically on the same page. Four years ago there was a link to your site on his website.
Anyway, I hope this helps too, and as you said in your other post, time will tell. I guess people just have to do what feels right for them, and then have some faith.
d.d.
In Reply to: Re: Are you familiar with a "truth is born in a discussion" principle? (Archive in diet.) posted by Walt Stoll on March 24, 2001 at 10:52:48:
"My guess is that only about 20-25% of people who do what his book says will get lasting benefits."
"Only" 20-25%? I've not read the books but it would seem to me that 20-25% percent of those trying it and getting permanent results should qualify this doctor for the Nobel Prize.
In Reply to: Re: Are you familiar with a "truth is born in a discussion" principle? (Archive in diet.) posted by d.d. on March 25, 2001 at 14:31:22:
Hi, dd.
I think we ARE on the same page. It is just that the "page" is much larger than EITHER one of us realizes.
Remember that 20% of 8 billion people is STILL nearly 2 billion people.
Hope this helps.
Walt
In Reply to: Re: Are you familiar with a "truth is born in a discussion" principle? (Archive in diet.) posted by Walt Stoll on March 27, 2001 at 08:53:17:
Hi Walt,
Glad to know we are on the same page, as I truly believe in the three legged stool, and your concepts.
As for the numbers, 2 billion is a lot of people alright and that's great if it's somewhat representative...With numbers and statistics though it's always a guess, because there might be lots of people engaged in the activity that are not counted. Actually, I feel it's quality and quality of life that counts the most, and even if a smaller number of people were on the diet, and most of them were healthy and happy, that would still say it all. And for example, if just a very few people followed the three legged stool, and they were extremely happy and healthy, the three legged stool still proved what it needed to anyway. The numbers didn't matter, the quality of life for those that participated did.
One last thought...could this "large page" that you mentioned be a metaphor for life?
d.d.
In Reply to: More confused than ever posted by Archie G. on March 26, 2001 at 09:00:00:
Hi, Archie.
I agree that he has something! I only hope that overselling it will not cause the public to "throw out the baby with the bathwater" that has happened to SO MANY theories in the past that had to, then, be rediscovered many years later.
Perhaps you could but in a good word for me (with the Nobel Prize committee) since my approach to Interstitial Cystitis (alone) resolves the problem in at least 80% of those who follow it and significantly helps the rest (grin). Since this condition is totally unresolvable by the allopathic paradigm........
See the testimonials and the IC archives.
Walt
In Reply to: Re: Are you familiar with a "truth is born in a discussion" principle? (Archive in diet.) posted by d.d. on March 27, 2001 at 13:29:03:
Thanks, d.d.
No doubt about the "metaphor"!
Also, no doubt about the "quality of life". Nearly all aging research is now beginning to call their work "Healthy Aging" with only a few working exclusively on life extension. The see extending the quality of life as a much easier and more immediate goal.
Namaste`
Walt
In Reply to: Re: Are you familiar with a "truth is born in a discussion" principle? (Archive in wellness.) posted by Walt Stoll on March 29, 2001 at 10:40:49:
Hi Walt,
Yes, I see that the more society practices healthy techniques and becomes healthier, there isn't quite the same obsession with longevity. Maybe it's now just assumed to be an automatic repercussion of healthy living, or maybe that goal becomes less crucial when one is happier and healthier "in the moment".
Well then let this be a toast to "the quality of life" for as many as possible!
namaste`
d.d.
In Reply to: Whoa posted by Lina on March 19, 2001 at 23:31:06:
There is an article in the current issue of Scientific American on page 96 that describes a spectrum of personality responses, including narcissism. This is not portrayed as a mental disorder, as far I could tell. But it describes the tendency of some people to feel they are more important than they are, and to over-interpret the comments or words of others. I recently had to work with someone like this, and it wasn't easy. I was reminded of life at home with my older brother! I know this wasn't anyone's orginal subject or question, but think about it: these are things that might cause stress, bracing, even Magesium depletion while participating on a bulletin board. I know I've been up too long now. DD, you are no doubt a really great person who wants to do some good and share what you know and think...that's cool. Try not to assume that people are somehow looking to take you down or make you feel unwanted. Often, just the opposite is true.
In Reply to: What is it, really, with "R" and "dd"? posted by Peter (new kid here) on April 07, 2001 at 01:35:06:
As per your title, you asked what was up with R and dd but you didn't mention R at all, so it sounded to me like this post was intended for me only. You claim you are new to this board, and yet every other post you've written so far has been scientific, health related, and impersonal, except about your mother. I am the only person from this entire board who you have chosen to psychoanalyze, so to speak, and I highly resent it. It makes me wonder if you're really new here after all, or who your friends are, maybe someone here perhaps. With all that you could write and ask, you have to go into this old thread and stir things up, how very suspicious indeed. I have seen people say things on this board that are so incredibly outrageous and you pick on me, hmmmm.
Anyway, your allusions to the article in Scientific American in association with a discussion about me are very daring and incorrect indeed. I am none of those things you regurgitated from your article, and pardon me, but you are making very dangerous assumptions for someone who has just arrived here. I have been here for four years. I have tried to help out here and put in my time. I know the drill. I the know patterns, the personalities, my enemies, my supporters, and everyone inbetween, and I know a lot more about the interactions on this board than you presume to. I have been quite comfortable for most of my time here, until the last several months, where I have been a subject of some attack. Some of it is very subtle, but exits just the same, and some, not subtle at all. It is now happening in almost every thread I enter, and that never happened before, ever. I am also quite aware of how different the three and a half years were prior to this felt, and I do know the difference. It's huge. I can see it quite clearly. How you could you possibly know this. And if you tell me the sky is purple and green plaid should I believe you, just because you say so and bring along your reading references. In terms of self-importance, I find this post of yours utterly condescending and erroneous.
But Peter, this is the end for me, so don't bother continuing on with this thread, I am not going to post on this board any more. It's over and I'll be making a general announcement right now.
|
[ Diets other than Robert's Archive ] [ Main Archives Page ] [ Glossary/Index ] [ FAQ ] [ Recommended Books ] [ Bulletin Board ] |
Search this site! | |