I like random facts. That's just the way it is. That's probably why when I blog you can get anything ranging from my inordinate love of Star Wars to Heidi Klum's Workout to Hollywood's Hall of Creepers (which, ps, it's totally that time of year again. God bless the rain for keeping them inside).
The proof is in the pudding. So to speak.
All this to say, I got a book from the library. Not because I'm a super health nut or against practiced medicinein any way, but simply because I like facts. It's a fact. I like facts. Facts facts facts.
(I'm saying that like Hobbes from Calvin and Hobbes. I just went to find a link to the comic I'm talking about and holy cow. There's a site just for the comic I want. Don't Knock My Smock or I'll Clean You're Clock. Seriously. )
So in the pursuit of (sometimes) useless knowledge...presenting... (dun dun dundun duh dun duh dah!!!):
4 Blood Types, 4 Diets. Eat Right for Your Type: The Individualized Diet Solution to Staying Healthy, Living Longer and Achieving Your Ideal Weight by Dr. Peter J. D'Adamo with Catherine Whitney
I'm assuming they had a real crack book jacket writer and had to include a summary of the book as part of the title. That really can be the only acceptable reason for having a title that long.
Simply put, different blood types require different diets. Not like "lose weight" diet. But "eating properly" diet. For me--type A--it seems fairly accurate. I'm what you could call dainty. Or a weak gazelle if you're out in the wild. It seems to make sense thus far. If animals range from carnivores to herbivores to whatever you call an animal that eats plants and little bugs (e.g. Timon and Pumbaa) why shouldn't people? Yes, this is a faulty argument, but what are you going to do? Kill the poor sick gazelle? How dare you.
Enough blithleblathling.
Here's the site
I recommend the book, however. It actually explains the science behind it, rather than being some bizarre alternative medicine with no scientific proof to back it up. I'm going to try it. See how I feel. If I grow a couple extra legs or antlers or anything I'll be sure to let you know.
The proof is in the pudding. So to speak.
All this to say, I got a book from the library. Not because I'm a super health nut or against practiced medicinein any way, but simply because I like facts. It's a fact. I like facts. Facts facts facts.
(I'm saying that like Hobbes from Calvin and Hobbes. I just went to find a link to the comic I'm talking about and holy cow. There's a site just for the comic I want. Don't Knock My Smock or I'll Clean You're Clock. Seriously. )
So in the pursuit of (sometimes) useless knowledge...presenting... (dun dun dundun duh dun duh dah!!!):
4 Blood Types, 4 Diets. Eat Right for Your Type: The Individualized Diet Solution to Staying Healthy, Living Longer and Achieving Your Ideal Weight by Dr. Peter J. D'Adamo with Catherine Whitney
I'm assuming they had a real crack book jacket writer and had to include a summary of the book as part of the title. That really can be the only acceptable reason for having a title that long.
Simply put, different blood types require different diets. Not like "lose weight" diet. But "eating properly" diet. For me--type A--it seems fairly accurate. I'm what you could call dainty. Or a weak gazelle if you're out in the wild. It seems to make sense thus far. If animals range from carnivores to herbivores to whatever you call an animal that eats plants and little bugs (e.g. Timon and Pumbaa) why shouldn't people? Yes, this is a faulty argument, but what are you going to do? Kill the poor sick gazelle? How dare you.
Enough blithleblathling.
Here's the site
I recommend the book, however. It actually explains the science behind it, rather than being some bizarre alternative medicine with no scientific proof to back it up. I'm going to try it. See how I feel. If I grow a couple extra legs or antlers or anything I'll be sure to let you know.
6 comments:
I'll resist the urge to comment on the title. Let's just say I've expected this post for a long time.
If there's one thing I've learned, it's that just because something sounds scientific and has data to back it up doesn't mean it's scientifically accurate or even plausible.
Not to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but there are three main reasons why alternative medicine has little or no data to back it up:
1) Because it is regarded as voodoo or a sham by most of traditional medicine.
2) Because money for medical research comes from government grants (Which will only be awarded to those whom the experts approve of. See reason 2.) and from pharmaceutical companies (who are only interested in performing studies that can be leveraged to sell their products. Naturopathic treatments are the bane of pharmaceutical companies, so they naturally will not fund any research there).
3) Because much of it is unscientific BS and placebo effects. That said, because of the prior two reasons, virtually no one is attempting to separate the lies from the truth.
But like you said, the proof is in the pudding. Every body is different, and I'm a big proponent of placebo effects. If you find a diet or treatment works for you, then by all means, keep on. Even if the science is atrocious, what works works.
I admire your self-control, Seth haha.
I love having you as my smart friend.
I'm generally quite skeptical of, well, everything. The real reason I was even initially intrigued by this theory is because I have such a horrible immune system that I've really had to examine every single thing I eat and find out what makes me feel better or worse. A lot of what D'Adamo suggests I eat aligns with what I've discovered for myself. So I was like "Heh. Why not?"
I totally agree that every body is different and a lot of it is psychological. All that to say...Seth you have to follow this diet or you'll die. Seriously. (Or not).
Yeah, I'm a first rate skeptic as well. I tend to not believe in anything that I can't see or touch (with obvious exceptions, such is biblical truth). Even as a biochemistry person, I often don't believe in bacteria or viruses if I can't see them.
What are some of the diets you've found to work well for you with your immune system? I have a friend with lupus who has found that the raw food diet enables her to actually function, where without it she can barely get out of bed.
I think people with unhealthy bodies are super valuable to us as a culture. In my case, my body is generally pretty healthy no matter what I put in it. But obviously, poor diet, toxins, and overall unhealthy eating will likely result in negative benefits over the course of a lifetime. However, over decades, it would be next to impossible for me to identify all but the most drastic influences.
But people with unhealthy bodies have often immediate and strong reactions to harmful things in their diets and environments, so they act as a sort of nervous system for society to hint at what is harmful for us.
This is why I tend to perk up when people who sound like quack dieticians speak up. Their often proposing diets that work for the extremities of society, and there are usually enough grains of truth (get it?) for the average person to glean from in finding out how their body works.
This idea of eating according to a blood type (I'm assuming this is literal: A, B, AB, or O) is interesting, though it sounds quite far-fetched. Biochemically, blood type is only related to little receptors on the outside of blood cells. I'm A+ blood type, so I'm wondering what he'd say about me. I have an insanely high metabolism but can subsist (miserably) on very little if need be.
That's why I didn't used to believe that diet affected my body at all (skeptic). And then I went on a 10 day lemonade fast. Let's just say I believe food matters now. =P
And was that a threat or a warning? Your post's title kind of leaves it a bit ambiguous. o_O
Bleh, I ramble.
Ramble away Seth! I'll totally listen (read)! (Plus now you have to listen to my ramblings. Ha!). And don't worry. I'll set my vampirical tendencies aside for now.
I know for me, I thrive better on a fairly vegetarian diet. The less processed foods, the better. Plus, I have a rather long string of health issues in my family, so it's probably best if I stick to more natural foods just to be safe.
I've been trying to figure out why different dietitians health theories appeal to me, and I think it has to do with really enjoying the blessing of taking care of our bodies. If our bodies--which God has created so wonderfully and intricately--are here for the primary purpose of being vessels of Christ, I think it's rather presumptuous of us to not take care of them! I don't want to be sitting there going "Sorry, God. I'm sure you had some plan for me today, but I feel like eating a giant steak right now, even though I know it will leave me incapacitated and unable to do anything you want me to do."
So...all that to say...the "why" isn't so important to me as the "how." I don't care if it has to do with my blood type or because I have green eyes or because I'm part Norwegian (which, hello. Let's take a moment to forever deny an all Norwegian diet. Fish by-products? I don't think so, friends). If medical researchers have suggestions for me, I might try them out and see how they work. But let's not get ridiculous. D'Adamo, for example, says I shouldn't eat black olives. Please. Like that's going to happen. But peppers? I hadn't really thought about those before, but now that he brought it up, I'm realizing those really don't make me feel so hot (Ha. Peppers. Hot. We're on a roll with puns, Seth).
So really I guess a lot of it has to do with moderation, wisdom, and good stewardship.
Belated reply:
I'm totally agreed that stewardship of our bodies is important. Where difficulties, at least for me, tend to come up is when balancing stewardship with life on mission. As Christians, God has given us the charge and the fantastic privilege of being his frontline warriors for bringing the gospel to the world and making disciples. This is our greatest function on this earth and perhaps the key reason why we're still here and not with the Father. And so our bodies, in addition to being the property of God, are given to us as stewards to use for the furtherance of the Kingdom. And we seek to be good stewards of our bodies chiefly to that end. To Paul, stewardship of His body meant being beaten and flogged until he was probably severely malformed because that was the greatest cause for the kingdom. For John it meant as a very old man sleeping on stone floor of a cave on Patmos for being faithful to the gospel.
So where the balance becomes difficult is when, in order to maximize my efforts to encourage my brothers and sisters in their walks with the Lord and to share the gospel with unbelievers, the best way to do this that I can think of is to sacrifice sleep and healthy eating. True, I need to be a good steward of my body, and I need to accept God's gift of sleep (and Psalms says He gives to His people in their sleep), but I also am to strive for the Kingdom.
So I need to constantly remind myself that, as you said, it's an issue of moderation and wisdom. Can I prepare a meal beforehand that I keep at the fridge at work in case I suddenly need to jet out to meet with a brother? Absolutely, so good stewardship means thinking and planning ahead of time. But also, I believe I shouldn't pass up opportunities to further the Kingdom by spending excessive amounts of time exercising and making uber-healthy food. Time is scarce as it is. Where does the balance lie? It lies in constantly seeking out what God would have me do with each hour of the few meager years He has given me on this earth to do His will, trusting that ultimately, He will use my feeble actions to glorify Himself, and seeking to be wise in making choices.
Really, you should blame yourself. You TOLD me to ramble away! On your old blog, no less. =D
Post a Comment