PDA

View Full Version : Eating for your blood type?



frankm007
04-09-2003, 02:09 PM
verwijder

raniali
04-09-2003, 02:12 PM
what is the 'serious scientific evidence'? i am somewhat familiar with the concept but have never seen studies reflecting its veracity.

Relentless
04-09-2003, 02:13 PM
I did this diet for a year (I'm also type B)

some people don't buy the research that supports it. Others do

my take: try it and see how you feel; the #1 thing it did for me was to make me more "food aware"

I also think that for the most part, wheat should be avoided by everyone and that was one of the big takeaways I brought with me even after I stopped following dadamo's diet

Tryska
04-09-2003, 02:15 PM
I'm type O. i can definitely say that followign the diet appropriate for my blood type has been helpful. definitely avoiding wheat, and most other grains, and dairy in my case. but i've always felt better on a paleolithic diet then anything else anyway. I definitely find the blood type and disease research quite fascinating.

ericg
04-09-2003, 02:43 PM
Didnt Ricky Williams (RB for the Dolphins) have his blood tested daily and the blood work resulted changes to his diet?

Think Gino brought this up at one point in time - was interesting.

Tiare
04-09-2003, 02:46 PM
The research I saw on this was not scientific and was not very convincing, but I'm sure I didn't see all the research.

Tryska
04-09-2003, 02:56 PM
Originally posted by ericg
Didnt Ricky Williams (RB for the Dolphins) have his blood tested daily and the blood work resulted changes to his diet?

Think Gino brought this up at one point in time - was interesting.

yeah - that was actually done by my friend's Mom!

ElPietro
04-09-2003, 03:00 PM
Eating for your blood type and eating based on blood tests is entirely different though. Blood tests could be used to determine defficiencies in vitamins and minerals, or cholesterol levels or any other such factor, that he could then adjust his diet to make up for. Which is much different than the broad claim that you are this blood type, so eat this and don't eat that.

It's not like they were testing him daily to make sure he was still B positive or something like that. :p

Workhorse
04-09-2003, 03:00 PM
I have never heard of this... interesting concept though... too bad I don't know my bloodtype...lol

Tryska
04-09-2003, 03:18 PM
Originally posted by ElPietro
Eating for your blood type and eating based on blood tests is entirely different though. Blood tests could be used to determine defficiencies in vitamins and minerals, or cholesterol levels or any other such factor, that he could then adjust his diet to make up for. Which is much different than the broad claim that you are this blood type, so eat this and don't eat that.

It's not like they were testing him daily to make sure he was still B positive or something like that. :p

bah - you don't like it because it says your suppsoed to be a vegetarian.

GonePostal
04-09-2003, 03:29 PM
I think it's just made up mombo jumbo, and so does this guy.
http://www.earthsave.org/news/bloodtyp.htm

Delphi
04-09-2003, 03:59 PM
It's all Bollox.

Alex.V
04-09-2003, 04:09 PM
Aye. Junk. The science is some of the WORST I have ever read, and it's amazing how many people back it up. (Note, these are not scientists or specialists that do.)

Berserker
04-09-2003, 04:09 PM
I can't imagine eating chicken being bad for anyone, except the chicken.

bradley
04-09-2003, 04:15 PM
Originally posted by Tryska


bah - you don't like it because it says your suppsoed to be a vegetarian.

:nod:, same here. Maybe if I was type O I would like it:D

raniali
04-09-2003, 05:04 PM
"Beyond his views on biology, I was disappointed in D'Adamo's psychological portrayal of people of vegetarian persuasion. In the book, he tells flesh-eating Type O's that they have a "genetic memory of strength, endurance, self-reliance, daring, intuition, and innate optimism...", "the epitome of focus, drive...", "hardy and strong, fueled by a high protein diet" (is he describing a Type O "master race"?)"

btw - i am O-neg ... the epitome of master blood!!!


however, i am still waiting for someone to provide the "serious scientific evidence".

Ironman8
04-09-2003, 05:50 PM
Yeah, this diet should be avoided. The body needs every type of food.

Berserker
04-09-2003, 06:11 PM
Ranaili-I have to agree with him there, meat eaters are superior. Just natural selection.:evillaugh

ericg
04-10-2003, 05:29 AM
Originally posted by ElPietro
Eating for your blood type and eating based on blood tests is entirely different though. Blood tests could be used to determine defficiencies in vitamins and minerals, or cholesterol levels or any other such factor, that he could then adjust his diet to make up for. Which is much different than the broad claim that you are this blood type, so eat this and don't eat that.

It's not like they were testing him daily to make sure he was still B positive or something like that. :p

True. Sorry I got off topic.

gino
04-10-2003, 09:01 AM
Originally posted by ericg
Didnt Ricky Williams (RB for the Dolphins) have his blood tested daily and the blood work resulted changes to his diet?

Think Gino brought this up at one point in time - was interesting.

Actually, it had no dirtect correlation with his blood type - only how his body reacted to foods and combinations of foods relating to blood glucose and hormones. Whether he was O, A, or B was irrelevant.

Zole
04-10-2003, 11:53 AM
No I dont believe that bs for 1 minute.

If those "facts" really meant something I strongly believe we would have read about it everywhere, in magazines and seen documentaries on TV and so on.

So I stick to what´s already been proven to be good for us. :D

bradley
04-10-2003, 04:14 PM
The foods that you mentioned would probably benefit the health of most people regardless of their blood type. For most people trading in a cheeseburger for a piece of turkey or fish would be a healthy alternative, along with making some of the other changes the book recomends.

PowerManDL
04-10-2003, 04:19 PM
The problem with it is that its attempting to reduce a lot of complicated, intricately-related variables to a single, and largely unrelated, variable.

That NEVER works in practice.

Tryska
04-10-2003, 04:20 PM
it's all about lectins, to be honest.

PowerManDL
04-10-2003, 04:39 PM
Originally posted by Tryska
it's all about lectins, to be honest.

Would you like a side of freshly-whooped ass to go with that?

Ironman8
04-10-2003, 05:42 PM
Actually, people are unhealthy because they don't watch their meal portion size and lack of excercise. 1 or 2 cheeseburgers a week would be fine, just make sure you get in some excercise after that.

bradley
04-11-2003, 02:19 AM
Originally posted by Ironman8
Actually, people are unhealthy because they don't watch their meal portion size and lack of excercise. 1 or 2 cheeseburgers a week would be fine, just make sure you get in some excercise after that.

I am just saying that replacing the more unhealthy foods with more nutritious foods would do most people good. I just used a cheeseburger as an example and I am not really trying to debate what constitutes a "bad" food.

Ironman8
04-11-2003, 07:21 AM
I wasn't referring to your post Bradley :). I'm just saying that a cheeseburger or something would be o.k once in a while, but people should choose nutritional meals most of the time.

Tryska
04-11-2003, 07:51 AM
Originally posted by frankm007
what do u think of it tryska? so u believe

well most people seem to be too hung up on the fact that he's organizing by blood type, but his reaosning behind that seems to be the immuno-charecteristics that come along with blood type. ie - type AB immune systems are much more open than Type O immune systems. I don't think anyone can argue with the fact that universal receivers are much more forgiving of forein bodys than universal donors.


anyways, his reasoning behind food choices has to do with the lectins in various foods and how they interact with each immune system. Lectins are a pet topic of mine, and i definitel can see how he is extrapolating what it is he's extrapolating.


i don't necessarily by into his ideas of different types ahving different personalities...that's a little too far-fetched for me, but the ideas of lectins interacting differently with different immune systems makes sense.

EdgeCrusher
04-11-2003, 08:30 AM
I'm skeptical, but I appreciate anything that gets people to be vegetarian or cut out dairy.

Relentless
04-11-2003, 09:11 AM
Originally posted by Tryska


well most people seem to be too hung up on the fact that he's organizing by blood type, but his reaosning behind that seems to be the immuno-charecteristics that come along with blood type. ie - type AB immune systems are much more open than Type O immune systems. I don't think anyone can argue with the fact that universal receivers are much more forgiving of forein bodys than universal donors.


anyways, his reasoning behind food choices has to do with the lectins in various foods and how they interact with each immune system. Lectins are a pet topic of mine, and i definitel can see how he is extrapolating what it is he's extrapolating.


i don't necessarily by into his ideas of different types ahving different personalities...that's a little too far-fetched for me, but the ideas of lectins interacting differently with different immune systems makes sense.

:withstupi

I have been through his research and books pretty extensively as well, and while I'm not as well versed in some of this stuff as Trysk or others, I found the lechtins the most compelling part. I've had some long discussions about this with some very learned naturopaths (Dadamo is also a naturopath, and son of a naturopath) and while I don't buy a lot of his "origins of the species" crap I think the interaction of food with your body is a solid concept.

Dismissing all of his work because you enjoy mocking the silly parts of it is a bit like throwing the proverbial baby out with the bathwater.

Ironman8
04-11-2003, 03:14 PM
Umm, what bloodtype allows you to eat a whole box of oreos? :D

Delphi
04-11-2003, 04:49 PM
Originally posted by Tryska


well most people seem to be too hung up on the fact that he's organizing by blood type, but his reaosning behind that seems to be the immuno-charecteristics that come along with blood type. ie - type AB immune systems are much more open than Type O immune systems. I don't think anyone can argue with the fact that universal receivers are much more forgiving of forein bodys than universal donors.



I can. ABO blood typing is based on the absence/presence of A and B antigens and antibodies. It doesn't make any sense to extrapolate tolerance of A and B antigens to a blanket statement that universal recipients are somehow immunosuppressed. They just tolerate the A and B antigens. If what you're saying were true, then we would find that AB-positive people are more likely to succumb to infectious diseases or would make better transplant recipients. There is absolutely no factual basis for this.


Originally posted by Tryska

i don't necessarily by into his ideas of different types ahving different personalities...that's a little too far-fetched for me, but the ideas of lectins interacting differently with different immune systems makes sense.

You mean you might believe it? This makes as much sense as saying that someone has a certain personality because they were born during a certain phase of the moon or on a certain date. As Reinier so elegantly put it one time:


Originally posted by Reinier
LMAO @ ZODIAC

the position of the heavenly bodies isn`t even annually periodic. the explanation makes no sense in the world.

the explanations they give are so open that anyone from hannibal to a chimp would fit in

LAM
04-12-2003, 10:59 AM
Originally posted by Tryska
I'm type O. i can definitely say that followign the diet appropriate for my blood type has been helpful. definitely avoiding wheat, and most other grains, and dairy in my case. but i've always felt better on a paleolithic diet then anything else anyway. I definitely find the blood type and disease research quite fascinating.

I have to agree with Tryska. I'm 0+ and have always basically consumed proteins and fats with little carbs in my diet. carbs just do not agree with my biology.

Delphi
04-12-2003, 11:18 AM
So what makes you think that's because of your ABO blood type?

Hint: It's not.

LAM
04-12-2003, 12:34 PM
there are certain traits that person of each blood type have. I bet if we took a pole the majority of people here (@ WBB) are type 0.

Delphi
04-12-2003, 01:58 PM
I'd guess this:

O 45%
A 40%
B 11%
AB 4%

Delphi
04-12-2003, 02:05 PM
Originally posted by frankm007
problem is..we can't say it is or it isn't...we haven't (or at least me personally) been involved or been a part of any of the research or theory of it...

If I tell you there's a spaceship hiding behind the next comet that comes our way, are you going to maintain that we can't say it isn't there because we haven't been involved in the research? Or are you going to use your common sense until it's PROVEN OTHERWISE?

You don't have to have proof to not believe con artists and quacks. The onus is on them to prove it true, not the other way around. This guy's just like the people selling copper bracelets for arthritis. He's making money off a ridiculous theory that doesn't have a chance in hell of being true. Unfortunately there's enough gullible people that will buy into his bullsh!t that he'll make out quite handsomely.

Delphi
04-12-2003, 07:20 PM
I'm saying NOT eating according to your blood type is the common sense approach. When this guy scientifically proves he's not full of poopoo that's when you start doing as he advises. In my analogy, he's the guy saying there's a spaceship behind the next comet.

Delphi
04-13-2003, 08:38 PM
Get back in here, Tina! My wife's been out of town all weekend and I need someone to argue with. :mad:

GonePostal
04-13-2003, 08:43 PM
I eat according to my shoe size... works much better then this mumbo jumbo....

restless
04-14-2003, 01:50 AM
Originally posted by GonePostal
I eat according to my shoe size... works much better then this mumbo jumbo....


:D :D :D

Ironman8
04-14-2003, 07:23 AM
LOL!

Tryska
04-14-2003, 08:28 AM
Originally posted by Delphi


I can. ABO blood typing is based on the absence/presence of A and B antigens and antibodies. It doesn't make any sense to extrapolate tolerance of A and B antigens to a blanket statement that universal recipients are somehow immunosuppressed. They just tolerate the A and B antigens. If what you're saying were true, then we would find that AB-positive people are more likely to succumb to infectious diseases or would make better transplant recipients. There is absolutely no factual basis for this.

~~~~so then let me ask you this? do type O people have an easier time battling most types of cancers? how about in comparison to type A, B. or type AB? What about as far as auto-immune conditions? (thyroid, rheumatoid arthiritis, MS, etc.) I'm asking int he context of your experience and medical histories.



You mean you might believe it? This makes as much sense as saying that someone has a certain personality because they were born during a certain phase of the moon or on a certain date. As Reinier so elegantly put it one time:

~~~~~what? i said i felt the personality stuff was farfetched.

i do believe in astrology tho. ;)

Delphi
04-14-2003, 08:25 PM
I did a Medline search on ABO blood type and cancer. Lots of articles on expression of abnormal A and B antigens and Rh factor in certain cancers, but nothing that said that your prognosis is better/worse because you have a certain blood type.

In contrast, there is a difference in prognosis depending on whether the CANCER CELLS THEMSELVES express the A,B, and Rh antigens- not the patient's blood type:

http://www.kfinder.com/member-search/getdoc.cgi?ord=19&searchid=2&have_local_holdings_file=0&local_journals_only=0

I found other articles that looked at ABO blood type and a family history of several cancers- gastric, esophageal, and ovarian. The family history was statistically significant and the ABO blood type weakly related, but the conclusions of the articles were that there is a genetic predisposition to these cancers. They did not say that somebody was more predisposed to these cancers solely because of their blood type.

There were also some articles discussing the expression of ABNORMAL A, B, and Rh antigens and the link with certain cancers.


Finally, I called the hematologist-oncologist in Cleburne today and asked her about the link between ABO blood type and cancer, possible changes in prognosis for cancer patients depending on ABO blood type, and possible changes in rejection rates for transplant patients. She said there is no clinical link between ABO blood type and cancer survival or transplant survival.

Specifically for cancers, the oncologists look at tumor cell differentiation, ploidy, estrogen-progesterone receptor status, and S-phase. ABO and Rh have no impact as far as she is concerned with prognosis or decision-making for chemotherapy and/or radiation therapy for cancer patients.

As Jim Carrey said in Liar Liar, "MAN, I'm tired of being right." :p

Tryska
04-15-2003, 08:42 AM
yeah, but you asked an allopath. you know how y'all are.


you didn't touch on any of the auto-immune stuff. were you able to find out anything about that?


actually to extrapolate on some of your findings....if the expression of abnormal A and B factors is seen, doesn't it make sense, that a type O would have an easier time fighting off the cancer, because it is a foreign antibody, as opposed to a A, B, or AB? I mean regardless of it's normal or abnormal, wouldn't an A/B/AB see that as self?

ElPietro
04-15-2003, 08:58 AM
I think I will agree with the doctor, not the astrologist. :)

Tryska
04-15-2003, 09:01 AM
you are entitled to your beliefs. :)

10 years ago people (including MDs) dogged me about free radicals and antioxidants too. never phased me, still doesn't.

gino
04-15-2003, 09:47 AM
Regardless, I like steak with A-1 sauce.

ElPietro
04-15-2003, 09:50 AM
I would get a 100% blood transfusion, before I became a carrot nibbling rabbit, as this lame diet advises. Down with these heathens! What we need is a good ole witch-dunkin! Anyone here from Salem?

Tryska
04-15-2003, 09:50 AM
i think gino is.

ectx
04-15-2003, 01:05 PM
Tryska, you have my total respect, and I appreciate that following this diet has been good for you...and I believe in doing what works for you...so long as it's not unhealthy in the long run (which I believe this isn't...not too familiar with all it's tenets though)....but WTF?

First off, how is this all about lectins? Lectins are carbohydrate/sugar binding proteins where the function of such a molecule is not enzymatic. There are a variety of lectin interactions in our bodies. Viral recognition, self recognition, receptor mediated interactions...they can all be lectin mediated. Lectins were traditionally considered plant proteins that bind sugars. A good example is concanavilin A or "Con A", yet the definition has been broadened by some to include non plant proteins.

Blood types are based on the presence of glycosphingolipids...that is a ceramide/fatty acid that has been glycosylated (had a sugar added to it). Yes, our antibodies will react against foreign blood groups, based on the presence or absence of these sugars. ...

With that said how is this all about lectins? You cannot say that anything outside a person's Lewis Antigen set would be bad for us because

a) this doesn't account for protein...hint, it's not glycosylated

b) this would severly limit your carbohydrate source.

I'm saying this without specific knowledge of this diet, but from what I read, and however way my brain extrapolates it...it makes no sound scientific sense.

I'm also thinking about HLA haplotypes, MHC molecules, tolerance, and the development of these phenomenon. Again, it makes no sense.

Okay...sorry to get on my soapbox. I have no problem with fringe science that is firmly rooted in hard science. This appears not to be. There was ample evidence for the use of antioxidants before this got filtered into common practice, but the information there was rooted in hard science, as was the formation of ulcers from H. pylori infections. I do not, however, think the information provided in these studies is rooted in hard science (I've only read a little of it). I'll read more on it...but from what I see now...pseudo scientific bollocks.



btw, my dissertation is on a lectin mediated event.

Tryska
04-15-2003, 01:28 PM
are you saying that lectins don't cause issues for human beings?

ie wheat agglutinin, kidney bean lectins, and ricin?

if these lectins do (and you know they do) is it truly difficult to believe that many other lectins may cause issues for human beings as well?

this is the at the heart of d'adamos theories. that not all lectins are good for all human beings to eat.

i for one definitely agree with that.

and yes, this does mean that carbohydrate sources are limited. absolutely.

Tryska
04-15-2003, 01:40 PM
here's a little light reading (with sources) for y'all. enjoy.

http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/318/7190/1023

ectx
04-15-2003, 01:42 PM
of course ricin is bad...the thing is that to say that all lectins are bad is bollocks. Our antibodies recognize sugars...that makes them proteins that bind sugars...are they bad? well no. To lump all sugar binding proteins as bad is wrong. A variety of processes that are NECESSARY within our bodies are governed by lectins. Of course you'll find some harmful lectins, like ricin. You can also find harmful proteins...preons, ...heck...there are a gazillion organic compounds that can be bad for you... everything can be bad...but to say that all lectins are bad is not a good assesment. By that same logic one could say that one shouldn't eat protein because preons are bad, and therefore all protein must be bad. Also...how does he link lectin selectivity to blood type? If he's saying that lectins recognize the glycosphingolipid group, there are a gazillion other sugar residues to worry about on RBC's...like n-sialo residues.

...I hope you're not taking this personally, btw. Delphi's wife is gone and I have no one to argue with. :D

Tryska
04-15-2003, 01:47 PM
and here's a brief description of what exactly d'adamo's theory is regarding blood type:

"The premise of Dr. D'Adamo's theory is simple: Your blood type - O, A, B or AB - is a powerful genetic fingerprint that provides the operations code for your body's digestive and immune systems. Your blood type is a key indicator of your body chemistry, how you absorb nutrients, your susceptibility to illness, and the way your body deals with stress.

Each of the four blood types contains specific and different chemical markers called antigens that signal the immune system what is friend and what is foe. When an antigen enters your body that is unlike your blood type antigen, your immune system creates an antibody to that antigen. The antibody then attaches to the foreigner, tagging it and making it chemically sticky, a process called agglutination. Agglutinated antigens on viruses, bacteria, parasites, cancerous cells, etc., attract one another, so they clump together, making it easy for your immune system to efficiently destroy them.

And - here's the connection between your blood type and your diet - proteins found in foods called lectins, if they are not compatible with your blood type antigens, agglutinate your red blood cells. Many food lectins look so much like the blood antigen of one blood type, that the antigens of the other blood types see these lectins as enemies, which starts the agglutination process.

In addition, incompatible lectins in foods resist digestion and themselves agglutinate cells in the stomach or intestinal tract, or they enter the bloodstream, travel elsewhere (e.g., kidneys, liver, brain), and agglutinate cells where they deposit. Incompatible lectins gum up body organs and systems, interfere with digestion, food metabolism, insulin production and hormonal balance. "

feel free to tear it up as you wish - for the record, as was stated before - i was following a paleo diet long before reading d'adamo's book. it was what naturally made me feel my best. reading his books, jsut re-inforced that iw as correct in listening to my body.

Tryska
04-15-2003, 01:50 PM
Originally posted by Tryska
this is the at the heart of d'adamos theories. that not all lectins are good for all human beings to eat.



i think i've responded to your statement that "to say that all lectins are bad is bollocks".

bear in mind he has different food suggestions for different blood types. one that springs to mind is for type O - wheat is off the menu, due to the insulin-mimicing effect it has on the blood. cabbage and radish as well due to their effects on thyroid output.


most blood types should stay away from potatoes, tomoatoes and other members of the nightshade family? why (joint pains and arthritis due to the lectins in it). type O's should stay away from dairy - i can go on and on abotu allt eh different ways dairy sucks for me...however apparently other blood types cope better and also thrive on it.

ectx
04-15-2003, 01:57 PM
Tryska baby...in order for your body to recognize these as non self they'd have to be directly in your blood system. They'd have to enter IV. By the time these antigens reach there, they've been digested and processed. Sure this antibody recognition happens for viruses, etc. but it only occurs once sepsis occurs. These proteins are not brought in whole into your blood stream. If anything, they are processed by the proteosome and presented via the major histocompatability complex (MHC...the major determinant of self and non-self) to T-Cells. I buy the argument made in the article you presented more than I do his.

geez, this is a good review of immunology for me. ;)

and for the record...I also said that whatever works for you is best. I just don't agree with the reasoning behind it.

Tryska
04-15-2003, 02:13 PM
not necessarily so, ec....jsut ran across an article from some source (valid med journal source) about how some lectins, tomato was one, don't break down at all. Kidney Bean was another, and i think navy bean as well...will ahve to go back and look for that link again.

then we come to leaky gut syndrome, and that's a pot i'm not ready to stir up again. (happens every time we have this discussion - i'm jsut waiting for web sources to cathc up with me).

btw did you know that blood-typing serums are made from purified lectins? soemthign new i learned today.

Tryska
04-15-2003, 02:18 PM
here's 1.....i'm looking for a different article tho.

i prolly shouldn't be copying this out, because she hasn't been published yet, but what the heck:

http://www.krispin.com/lectin.html

ah - here's the original article i was looking for....

http://www.ansci.cornell.edu/plants/toxicagents/lectins/lectins.html

ectx
04-15-2003, 02:34 PM
T-momma, I don't have the time to respond to this right now...but expect it tomorrow...and I'll pm you my critique of her paper, since it's not published yet.

btw, the reason provided by these articles is different than what's his face's for the diet. They claim direct interaction of lectins with certain glycoreceptors on cells and other glycosylated compounds like mucin.


....more to come. for now I'm going to go stuff my face with kidney beans. :p

Tryska
04-15-2003, 02:49 PM
well remember...the only actual explanation of what'shisface's diet comes from my drug-addled brain remembering something i read almost a year ago. if you really wanna pull him apart, it helps to read the book itself. ;)

my research has been on lectins themselves, not anything to do with bloodtypes. (altho, i do believe that certain lectins to exhibit like certain blood type antigens)

Delphi
04-15-2003, 05:25 PM
My main problems with D'Adamo:

1) He's not a real researcher. His main motivation has been to get a best-seller out to press, not doing valid randomized double-blind trials. Let's see some articles of his in Gut or Nature or Science or JAMA or any other journal recognized as a valid research journal. The editorial boards of those journals would chew his work up into little bits in about 5 minutes flat. His work is not scientifically reasonable. It's drivel for the lay press.

2) I haven't seen any documentation of the number of subjects in the O group for instance, that have a documented agglutination reaction due to wheat. What are the numbers of O subjects that can eat the "bad" stuff for them without any apparent ill effects?

3) I'd also like to see the numbers on subjects that have documented problems with certain foods that are supposedly bad for blood types other than theirs.

4) There's zillions of antigens and antibodies. He's oversimplifying the body's immune strategy in saying that it recognizes self/non-self based on ABO compatability. Obviously it does in the context of a blood or organ transfusion, but any antigen recognized as non-self is going to elicit an immune response.

5) His name is too close to mine.

6) Granted the diet proposed for your blood type agrees with you. I'm sure it works for lots of people outside your blood type, too. Beware of drawing general conclusions based on anectdotal evidence. I would be highly amused if an error had been made when you found out your blood type, and you were actually type B. Then again, I have a rather twisted sense of humor.



BTW I've been aware of surgical literature on research into free radicals as mediators of tissue damage since the late 80's when I was in med school, and I'm sure it was going on in burn research since at least as far back as the 70's. I'm not sure of the context of the ribbing you were getting from MDs 10 years ago. Are you sure you weren't saying free radicals are bad for you if you're blood type O? ;)

I also never understood why they always made the distinction of radicals being free in the first place. Who in the world would want to pay for them?

fuzz
04-16-2003, 12:04 AM
All this eating for blood type stuff sounds similiar to the anti-aspartame freaks. Taking science and twisting it way out of proportion.

Wheres my bourbon?

Tryska
04-16-2003, 08:38 AM
Originally posted by Delphi
My main problems with D'Adamo:

1) He's not a real researcher. His main motivation has been to get a best-seller out to press, not doing valid randomized double-blind trials. Let's see some articles of his in Gut or Nature or Science or JAMA or any other journal recognized as a valid research journal. The editorial boards of those journals would chew his work up into little bits in about 5 minutes flat. His work is not scientifically reasonable. It's drivel for the lay press.

2) I haven't seen any documentation of the number of subjects in the O group for instance, that have a documented agglutination reaction due to wheat. What are the numbers of O subjects that can eat the "bad" stuff for them without any apparent ill effects?

3) I'd also like to see the numbers on subjects that have documented problems with certain foods that are supposedly bad for blood types other than theirs.

4) There's zillions of antigens and antibodies. He's oversimplifying the body's immune strategy in saying that it recognizes self/non-self based on ABO compatability. Obviously it does in the context of a blood or organ transfusion, but any antigen recognized as non-self is going to elicit an immune response.

5) His name is too close to mine.

6) Granted the diet proposed for your blood type agrees with you. I'm sure it works for lots of people outside your blood type, too. Beware of drawing general conclusions based on anectdotal evidence. I would be highly amused if an error had been made when you found out your blood type, and you were actually type B. Then again, I have a rather twisted sense of humor.



BTW I've been aware of surgical literature on research into free radicals as mediators of tissue damage since the late 80's when I was in med school, and I'm sure it was going on in burn research since at least as far back as the 70's. I'm not sure of the context of the ribbing you were getting from MDs 10 years ago. Are you sure you weren't saying free radicals are bad for you if you're blood type O? ;)

I also never understood why they always made the distinction of radicals being free in the first place. Who in the world would want to pay for them?

so basically, you don't like d'adamos theory and his methodology right? and not necessarily disagreeing with lectin-based activity?

i could care less about his theory and methodolgy - i am however a big fan of lectins and lectin research, but my preferred book-writers were eades and eades.

y'all seem to think i'm a huge fan of his work and am totally tied to his concepts. whilst i find agglutination caused my certain lectins with Anti-A or Anti-B like properties quite intrigues, the diets themselves are fairly standard eat healthy, don't eat these foods, blah blah blah, stuff. I was basically trying to explain where he was coming form, whilst a bunch of you who haven't read his materials, or the premises immediately shot it down as crap. I don't think it is completely full of crap. he may not be 100% on the mark, but i certainly don't believe he's pullign everything out of his ass either. that's been my point all along.


as for free radicals, yes they might have been part of the literature when you were in school, but i was discussing with people, my father's age, who were in school pre-free radicals. they still laughed it off as voodoo science.

i dunno, my main issue with allopaths, and this is based on being an alternative med buff, growing up around allopaths, is that most allopaths tend not to think holistically when it comes to the human body, will dismiss anything not in fully quantified (yet) by science, and don't leave room for the "old ways" so to speak. I've only run across 2 allopaths who were different, and that would be a GP i once had, who turned me onto my endo, who i think by virtue of the field he is in is able to think more in wholistic terms then most. Oh and a Thai surgeon i saw once, but that was more culture based as well i think.

hate to make a blanket judgement, but i'm basing it on my own experiences.

for instance the docs who laugh off willow bark tea a a headache cure, saying that aspirin is better. that makes no sense to me.