|
213 of 220 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
The critics are wrong, for the most part, July 29, 2001
I just read John's newest book, The Food Revolution. In many ways, it makes Diet for a New America obsolete. The Food Revolution is basically a rewrite of Diet for a New America with new information.I looked at some of the reviews here for Diet for a New America. Almost all of the reviews are either 5 stars or 1 star. John certainly does generate rather extreme responses. So, I thought I'd take a look at the negative reviews and see what they have to say. I read some of the reviews of other books made by those who gave Diet for a New America negative reviews to see where they are coming from. One of the negative reviewers gave a 5 star rating to a Protein Power book. So much for that reviewer's knowledge of nutrition. Doctors of both mainstream and alternative medicine virtually unanamously condemn Atkins and his clones. Some of the reviews complain that John's presentation is too emotional. Nature isn't always so kind. Not all animals are cute little puppies to play with. Fair enough - I'm not going to go pet an aligator any time soon. But does that then mean we have the right to engage in systematic torture of animals? I'd say that is a rather extreme leap. So is the fact that John tries to tug at our hearts so bad? I guess some readers believe that we humans are merely more "protein conversion machines" that the meat industry thinks of the aninimals it tortures. Some critics would say that John isn't qualified to talk like an expert in nutrition, the environment, animal husbandry, etc. Okay, except for one thing. People who ARE experts in these fields, such as former cattle rancher Howard Lyman (of Oprah Winfry "McLibel" fame,) nutrition experts Dr. T. Colin Campbell of Cornell University, Dr. Dean Ornish, Dr. John McDougall, Dr. Neal Barnard, etc. all readily endorse John Robbins work. Possibly the most controversial subject matter would be John's environmental statistics. Even many vegetarians feel that John is too one-sided on this and try to distance themselves from John for this reason. I'm not an environmental expert, so I guess I can't legitimaly argue with authority who is right. However, even taking more conservative numbers, such as the 450 gallons of water per pound of beef, (instead of John's 2,500 to 12,000 gallons per pound,) even the conservative number is many times less efficient than vegetables. And the vegetables are much more healthy too. So, even conservative numbers are damning enough. In John's latest book, he give more information as to why he feels the conservative numbers are faulty. And I feel that John makes a credible case for his position. But in the end, it doesn't matter, the conservative numbers are bad enough! Even so, I'd still say that some of the material in Diet for a New America is dated. If you haven't read it yet, skip it and go for The Food Revolution. Also get Reclaiming Our Health. Oh, and as far as the video of Diet for a New America, well, I know that nobody could do justice to Diet for a New America in one hour. So perhaps I was expecting too much. But I just found the video version just way too skimpy. I wish I knew of a better video on the environmental issues, but I don't. Sadly, I really can't recommend the video.
|