Episode 113 Summary
Belinda Fettke’s incredible article responding to the American College of Lifestyle Medicine’s published (Type 2) Diabetes Bill of Rights inspired much of this week’s conversation.
Read it here: https://isupportgary.com/articles/aclms-type-2-diabetes-bill-of-rights-fails-to-deliver
Belinda shares with us how the authors and facilitators of the “The Diabetes Bill of Rights” have deep personal bias and/or devout religious beliefs on diet and nutrition - These biases have not been transparently disclosed. The document has a strong bias towards eating plants and demonising animal fats and proteins and yet it has been adopted and accepted into endocrinology societies in America, affecting the care and management of patients with type 2 diabetes.
Many medical professionals would not think to question or check the references in a document endorsed by their regulatory body - Therefore the majority will simply accept it on face value. The diet that this document endorses is completely plant based and vegan.
The American College of Lifestyle Medicine was founded at the Seventh Day Adventist Church’s Loma Linda University in America - The history of the Seventh Day Adventist’s Church includes a woman named Ellen G White who was their prophetess who had a vision from God in 1863. Ellen G White’s vision told her that meat was a “harmful stimulant”, even more harmful than alcohol or tobacco, and that it made people animalistic and that meat caused crime. It became an essential doctrine of their church. The church’s health reform message based on these visions is to follow the Garden of Eden diet, based on fruit, nuts and seeds. The church has a strong focus on medical evangelism and this plant based model which is based on their church doctrine is becoming embedded in the medical training of many doctors in America.
At Real Life Medicine we advocate for a low carb real food way of eating, with a focus on the importance of prioritizing bioavailable protein from real foods - Dr Lucy and Dr Mary are proud omnivores. We don’t believe it is helpful for an institution to try to set one diet for the entire world, without taking into account the individual lineage and ancestral diets of varied populations. We need to support fresh, seasonal local foods based on these appropriate ancestral diets. Fortified processed plant foods for everyone is not the answer.
In 1916, before the invention of insulin, Russell M. Wilder discovered that type 2 diabetes was a form of carbohydrate intolerance - He released a primer in 1922 on therapeutic carbohydrate restriction for diabetics, along with intermittent fasting. This is not new science. The Society of Metabolic Health Practitioners have recently developed guidelines around therapeutic carbohydrate restriction in an inclusive manner, supporting people no matter what their food choices. These are the type of guidelines that medical professionals should be educated with.
The Health Star rating algorithms were designed by a technical expert at Sanitarium - They are biased towards plants and processed foods, but the truth is that processed foods bypass your natural satiety mechanisms and are engineered to be addictive. This is why we advocate strongly for REAL foods.
Belinda Fettke describes herself as a change-agent challenging the health benefit claims of low-fat high-carb dietary and health guidelines promoted as the ‘Gospel Truth’.
She has spent the last 8 years delving into the history of vegetarianism and ‘nutrition science’ only to discover the unexpected influence of religious ideology, and its intersection with commercial vested interests, intent on demonising animal protein and fats. Their symbiotic relationship has shaped our ‘plant-biased’ dietary and health guidelines for over 100 years.
Belinda’s concerns have included a lack of transparency in research and nutrition policy that may negatively impact health outcomes for people with Type 2 diabetes, in particular, and the attempts to ‘silence’ healthcare professionals from discussing the health benefits of ancestral diets and evolutionary science.
She is not anti-vegan, nor anti-religion. She is pro-choice, especially when it comes to health!
www.belindafettke.com (coming soon)
Episode 113 - A Diabetes Bill of Rights?
Dr Lucy Burns: Hello Lovely listeners! This week I continue my chat with Belinda Fettke. The reason I reached out to Belinda was because of an article she wrote on the Diabetes Bill of Rights published by the American College of Lifestyle Medicine. She discovered why they advocate a plant-based diet, devoid of animal protein or dairy.
Belinda Fettke (00:00): A Diabetes Bill of Rights is a much needed document. But this particular one has come out from a group that has a strong bias towards eating plants and demonizing animal proteins and fats. So it's come out and been adopted and accepted into endocrinology societies in America, and certainly being considered here as a very important research document. And my challenge is that it's exclusive, not inclusive. It doesn't include cultural, environmental, it doesn't include things like including animal proteins and fats, essential proteins, essential fatty acids, essential vitamins and minerals in the diet. Because if you eat an exclusively vegan diet, you need to supplement and you need to eat fortified foods. I mean, a lot of people can't afford the amount of supplementation they need. Okay? They might be able to afford the fortified breads, but that's not really helping people's health. It's going to contribute to their type two diabetes as we've been discussing.
(01:06): So where does this paper sit? And I think I told you I'd been off social media for probably nearly a year. We've had lots of family things and we had our grandchildren move home with Covid, so come back from Melbourne and they all lived under our roof for about 11 and a half months. So we've had a very hectic life. And I just went, I've gotta prioritize family for a little while. And it was this Diabetes Bill of Rights that made me go, “You know what? I can't stay quiet. I've just gotta get back and make a bit of a, uh, song and dance about it”. Because to me it states that, you know, that people need to have all of the truth. They need to have all these things, but there's no transparency in the beliefs and the ideology of the authors and co-authors of this document and their accompanying educational 20 lectures that become an educational model.
(02:01): And also the, um, the facilitators of these modules, you don't understand unless you do the research. And, we talked about before, who's going to spend the time looking at the actual references and checking them for themselves? If you are given a document, an authoritative document, whether it's from your, so go back to the Dietician's Association of Australia. When they put out their vegetarian position papers, we spoke to dieticians and said, did you actually check the references and what they were and who they were written by? And they said, well, it's put out by our educational body, our accreditating body, and our regulatory body. Why are we going to question this document? And so I would say the same with this Diabetes Bill of Rights. A lot of people would accept it on the face of coming from the American College of Lifestyle Medicine, which has a seemingly endless benevolent agenda to improve lifestyle. And the lifestyle things that they talk about are fantastic and they're really, really important. But their dietary recommendations and if you look at the actual plates on their website, the dietary recommendations are completely vegan. There are no animal proteins or fats in it. And I think it was a bit of a shock for a lot of people.
Dr Lucy Burns (03:21): Yes. And I am a member of the Australian Lifestyle Medicine Society, and initially I joined it thinking, good, yes, I love lifestyle. I'm really wanting to learn a lot about lifestyle and how lifestyle can not just prevent but treat disease. You know, this is, I mean, this is exactly what we're talking about. You can treat disease with a low carbohydrate lifestyle. And I'd signed up and I sat all the exams and as I'm reading all the exams, I'm thinking, “Oh, this is all not what I'm wanting to learn about.” Because it was completely plant-based and vegan and, and showed lots of documents relating to, you know, various small colonies, I suppose you would call them in, in America, where people had particular, you know, particularly long, perhaps healthy lives. And then they would attribute that solely to this plant-based living. But interestingly, and I think this is probably the work of various people in the low carbohydrate space, the Australian Lifestyle Society has certainly changed its tune. They spoke with David Unwin, they've spoken with people from New Zealand who have been using low carbohydrate lifestyle and they're actually open to the concept which the American Lifestyle Association would never be.
Belinda Fettke (04:35): Exactly. And Sam Manger, in fact, he's the President of the Australian Society of Lifestyle Medicine and he's very pro low carbohydrate. So the conversation is entering that space. But my concern is still, they come under the umbrella of the American College of Lifestyle Medicine. And if people join that society and do the exams, they're being educated by the American College of Lifestyle Medicine, which was founded at the Seventh Day Adventist Church's Loma Linda University in America. And also their association, somehow the American College of Lifestyle Medicine blended, it's got a symbiotic relationship with Coca-Cola, which makes no sense because the Seventh Day Adventist Church was founded in 1863. I love the history by the way. So if anyone wants to know more about history, <laugh> take me anytime. I can go on forever. But the history of it is Ellen G White was their prophetess and she had a vision from God in 1863 and she talked about the harms of sugar.
(05:37): She encouraged intermittent fasting, only eating two real meals a day and not really snacking. So, and she talked about the importance of sunshine and exercise, as in walking exercise, not going out and doing a marathon necessarily. But you know, just movement, I guess. And you have to remember it was, she was in a space that she could move a lot. They were farming, they were doing all sorts of things, but concerningly, she had a vision that she was told that meat was a harmful stimulant. It was as harmful, if not more so than alcohol, tobacco, you know, this was a really interesting phenomena. And unlike other health reformers, temperance, health reformers at the time of, in America, because they were certainly going around saying that, you know, meat caused crime. You know, some of these people were saying it made people animalistic. If you ate an animal, you became an animal.
(06:34): This was a little bit of the concept around the thinking at the time, but she brought it into the actual doctrines of the church and she stated that people waiting for translations, so waiting to go to heaven would give up flesh meat. And that was the most important thing she felt in going forward. And their church, which she believed was God's chosen remnant church, the last church for our times. And they believe that the end of the world is coming very, very soon. They're an apocalyptic church. So they're praying for the end of the world. And she taught that medical evangelism is the right arm of the church. And their health reform message, which she says is the Garden of Eden diet fruit, nuts and seeds is the God-given diet for man. And interestingly, the early Adventist health studies were all done to prove, not disprove divine inspiration.
(07:35): So you talked before about small colonies in America having this supposed longevity. Well they're specifically talking about Loma Linda, which was founded in, I think Ellen G. White went there in 1910 and said, we need to build a university and a hospital here. So you know, you look at longevity, places that Michel Poulain and Gianni Pes studied as demographers around the world and Okinawa, Ikaria in Greece, Sardinia in Italy. And these places were geographically isolated. They were generally poor people and they'd lived there for all their lives. So they’re generational, multi-generational, they were self-sufficient. They had livestock, they raised crops. So Michel Poulain and Gianni Pes, when they described the original Blue Zone in Sardina and the reason it was described was because they were using a blue highlighter pen and it was so close and so small, it just became an entire blue zone. They went, oh, that's what we'll call it. <laugh>.
(08:36): These places were very, very different. It was Dan Buettner in 2005, an American journalist who decided you couldn't prescribe a pill for the blue zones that these people were discovering. And they didn't actually look really closely at the diet. It was more about the culture and the lifestyle that these people had that they thought contributed to the health and longevity because all of them included animal proteins and fats in their diet and ate plants. So, you know, so it wasn't about that. But Dan Butner, when he did his National Geographic tour in 2005, he thought, “We really gotta have an American one because we're not gonna be able to sell the concept if it's only poor geographically isolated places”. So he came up with Loma Linda and if you consider Loma Linda, this is where the Seventh Day Advent Church have their flagship university, their flagship hospital.
(09:30): If you look at pictures of Loma Linda University Hospital, it is massive. It is so big. So potentially the people that live in Loma Linda are people that work at the university who are devout Seventh Day Adventists, people who work at the hospital as a devout Adventist. Not all of them of course, but the majority. And I follow a group of people who are ex Seventh Day Adventists and they suggest that the reason that there's such incredible longevity in health in Loma Linda specifically is that affluent retirees go there to retire. So it's like an incredible retirement village. And unlike our community where as you know and must have this discussion with people all the time, that people try to derail their choices, too. I'm not gonna have dessert tonight. No, I don't wanna have dessert. And like, oh, it makes them feel bad. So you often get peer pressure to have a dessert or have this or have that because you know, everyone else is doing it. At Loma Linda, this religion believes in the abstinence of these things. And so nobody is challenging you to cheat.
Dr Lucy Burns (10:40):Yes. Right! Yes.
Belinda Fettke (10:42): Yeah. So they're not smoking, they're not drinking, they're not eating junk food and they're really, really serious about their health. They're in a close spiritual community and there's no doubt some of those people are very, very healthy and living long lives. But my grandfather lived till 98 and he was still swimming every day at 95 and he was eating meat. So the bias there, and I know this is going off track from what we've been discussing, but this Blue Zones project, cause it's another article I'm doing at the moment, the Blue Zones Project became a brand in, I'm not sure what year it became a brand, but it's Gianni Pes, Michel Poulain and Dan Buettner who own the rights to it. And to become Blue Zone accredited in the US I found a document in 2018 saying it was going to cost that community six and a half million dollars U.S. to become accredited as a blue zone.
(11:39): If you look at the graphic of their Blue Zone graphic, it's a plant slant, 95 to 100% plant based eating. And to get accredited, you have to have restaurants on board, you have to have the mayor on board, you have to have senior business people on board and the schools on board. So they're taking that plant based diet into schools and educating children about the harms or the demonizing animal proteins and fats. Scarily Adventist Health bought the Blue Zones project in 2020 and they are planning to run it to their 75 communities on the west coast of America and into Hawaii. And that's over 10 million people. Then last year at the 89th US Congress of Mayors 1,400 Mayors around the US signed up for the Blue Zones because they wanted to make changes to make their communities more healthy. Do they understand that this demonization of animal proteins in fat comes from a belief, an ideology taught by a church that is desperate to get back to the Garden of Eden and eat fruit, nuts and seeds.
(12:57): I said the um, Adventist health reform message is literally sweeping across America and embedding itself in the very fabric of their society. It is coming here. What happens there comes here. And the medical education that the American College of Lifestyle Medicine and unfortunately under the umbrella of the Australasian Society of Lifestyle Medicine is a plant based diet and that's what they're trying to get into medical education here. And while the Australasian Society of Lifestyle Medicine can have a different set of beliefs within their own society, they are influenced by the Seventh Day Adventist Church. Up until two years ago, Stephen Penman, the CO, he was still talking about the only place you could do advanced studies in lifestyle medicine was at the Seventh Day Adventist Church owned Avondale College in New South Wales. So they were offering it. And if you look at the documents, because they're under that umbrella of the American College of Lifestyle Medicine, it will be a plant biased education model.
(14:01): It has to be, even though they can talk about it differently. And in fact they had a big talk about type two diabetes remission last year. Gary was invited but couldn't attend, but James Muecke and as you say, David Unwin and a few other low carb advocates attended. But Gary Egger sent out an email following that, a confusing email. He was the founder of the Australian Lifestyle Medicine Association and he's still very integral in it. And he said, conclusion, what we can all agree on is plant-based diet. And I, I don't think that was the conclusion. If you listen to all the things, so again, it's that marketing, it's the conclusion you read at the end, doesn't matter what's discussed, it's that conclusion. We can all agree a plant-based diet is best for health. And Colin T. Campbell, I dunno if you're aware of him, he wrote the China study,
Dr Lucy Burns (14:53): Right? No.
Belinda Fettke (14:55): Which is this big study that sort of talked about veganism and it's incredible and I can go to all sorts of research with that. But Colin T. Campbell said he euphemized plant based to cover veganism because a vegan diet was considered a bit of a diet that animal activists, you know, it had more of a factor…
Dr Lucy Burns (15:17): A stigma.
Belinda Fettke (15:18): A stigma. Perfect, thank you. A stigma that they didn't really wanna attach, but it was a vegan diet. So you can either call it a total vegetarian diet or you can call it a plant-based diet. And I've got the document where he says, I'm going to create this as a euphemism. So unfortunately a plant-based diet, cause Gary and I will say we have a plant-based diet, we have plants on our plate and sometimes the plants look bigger than the piece of steak, cauliflower and broccoli and different things. But we include animal proteins and fats. And this concept of a plant-based diet through the American College of Lifestyle Medicine does not include any of those.
Dr Lucy Burns (15:54): No, it definitely doesn't. If you've got an extreme view, it's very easy to defend that because you just keep repeating your same lines. So, you know, my, in my mind, vegan, a whole plant-based diet, it's one extreme, you know, and at the other end, and I know there are plenty of people who have improved their health on a carnivore diet, but it is also an extreme at one end and it's really unsexy to sit in the middle and go, yeah, I'm a very loud omnivore I'm an omnivore! Yeah, no one wants to know you. Yeah, yeah. You're not very, yeah, it's boring. Yeah, let's go to the two ends. But I think this is the problem with an institution trying to find one diet for the whole world. It's not possible because we all come from different lineage. So you know, if your lineage is Inuit, your ancestors, they didn't have fruit nuts and seeds. They got seals and whale blubber or whatever people up there eat. If your lineage is Maasai, they might have had a few berries out there in the, but there's not many. Same with indigenous Australians. There's not, you know, they had some plants, but there wasn't a lot available that was edible. So, you know, then recommending this entire thing, everyone should eat the same food. I think that's where we've come unstuck.
Belinda Fettke (17:18): I think so too. And I read a terrible report this week to say that they think type two diabetes is going to wipe out our indigenous aboriginals, our indigenous Australians. And this is shocking. And again, that is the white flour, the white sugar. I mean there's alcohol, all sorts of things have come. But my concern is the American College of Lifestyle Medicine and the South Pacific Society of Lifestyle Medicine with support of the Australasian Society of Lifestyle Medicine, in a lot of cases they are moving into the South Pacific. And again, like you talk about these indigenous communities, so potentially you've got some groups from generations ago that were eating a very, very high sugar diet in the South Pacific. And yes, they might have been large, you know, fatter people, larger people in size, but they weren't having the poly unsaturated oils and they weren't having all the other things that then cause disease, the disease part of it.
(18:21): So all different latitudes create different environmental food security. And I think this is the thing to take now this message of a plant based diet and get rid of all animal proteins and fats, including fish that these South Pacific islands would've relied upon. You just think, I don't understand. And I think that is overstepping the mark. And what we should be doing is supporting ancestral diets and foods that are fresh, seasonal, local, which is what Gary talks about, what you talk about, and Mary, because we can't give everyone fortified processed food and supplements. And this is really, really concerning going forward. And this same thing with this Diabetes Bill of Rights. There's so much in it everywhere from, you know, medical ethics right through to what the actual research was about and their conflict and conclusions I don't believe were right, but we've got people like a guy called Russell M. Wilder, he worked out in 1916 that diabetes was a result of carbohydrate intolerance. So it's nothing new, we're talking about it now, but 1916 before the invention of insulin, and this was at the Mayo Clinic and he wrote a book, a primer for diabetics in 1922. And it talked about a therapeutic carbohydrate reduction of less than 60 grams of carbohydrates per day with some intermittent fasting. He didn't keep people on that forever, but that was to stabilize their blood glucose and then see how people went. You know, they moved up and down from that. Insulin was an amazing drug by an orthopedic surgeon.
(20:11): Not the only orthopedic surgeon involved in diabetes.
Dr Lucy Burns (20:13): Who knew these orthopedic surgeons were clever!
Belinda Fettke (20:15): So, you know, it was an amazing invention. And he and the other co-inventors, they sold the patent for $1 because they wanted it to be accessible to everybody. It's not a dollar anymore, it's out of reach of most Americans. The cost in Australia for at least for type two diabetes, it is subsidized, uh, sorry for type one diabetes, it's subsidized. Is it subsidized for type two diabetes?
Dr Lucy Burns (20:42): Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Belinda Fettke (20:44) The medications?
Dr Lucy Burns (20:45): Yeah.
Belinda Fettke (20:46) So in Australia we've got subsidies, so people can afford it. In America, I spoke to, I was doing a talk over there and I went, had my hair done and I spoke to the hairdresser and we got chatting and she said her boyfriend as someone with type one diabetes would restrict the amount of insulin he was taking because he could not afford to have enough. And that they knew of other people who, young people who had died because they couldn't afford the medication.
(21:13): And to me this is all wrong. So Russell Wilder knew about it back then. I think what's incredible now is the, um, society of metabolic health practitioners in America, but they're growing as a larger and larger group and they have developed guidelines around the therapeutic carbohydrate restriction model. And it is an inclusive document. It supports people no matter what their food choices. And, and that's important. I'm not anti-religion, I'm not anti vegan, I'm not anti vegetarianism. I'm pro-choice and I'm pro-choice about health. And I look at Gary and his health and if he ate a whole food plant based diet, I would not have him here anymore. That diet has too much glucose sugar in it for him to control the cancer that he has and he would be dead. So, you know, we have to provide an inclusive document as a Diabetes Bill of Rights.
(22:14): We have to include, as you mentioned before, people of all different cultures, people of all different nationalities. We have to do something. And I guess that's why I jump up and down, you know, going through the history is amazing. And what's been influencing guidelines, did you know there's a guy called Harvey Wiley. He was a chemist in um, America, and he was put in charge of trying to pass the Pure Food and Drug Act in 1906. And he came up against vested interest back then, but he said the biggest deterrent of passing anything about additives was Coca-Cola. They still had cocaine in their drink. And so every level that he tried to get this pure Food and Drug Act passed, Coca-Cola was paying off Congress at all different levels. And it finally passed, but with restrictions and Coca-Cola never abided by in anyway, but he threw his hands up and in 1910, I think it was 1910, he decided he'd go and work for a woman's magazine because he decided he was going to give up on politicians changing guidelines. And he would go to the people. And at that time, the women were the people who bought the foods, bought the drinks, and supported and nourished their families. And he got together 20,000 women to march on Congress to finally get Coca-Cola to pull cocaine out of their drink. So it's the people power. Yeah. He wrote for a woman's magazine because he went, I'm just gonna go straight to people, which is what you guys are doing, yeah, you and Mary.
Dr Lucy Burns (23:53): Uh, and do you know, I mean, nothing's actually changed in a hundred years because, you know, we, we know that, you know, for Australian politics and, and I'm sure it's for politics all around the globe. You have lobby groups and you know, the lobby groups will donate money to the political parties and they're very clever. They donate the, you know, mainly to the larger political parties and they donate to both because, and then the fear is from one, if you don't keep these lobby groups appeased, they'll withdraw the funding and therefore your opposition will have a leg up. So it's very clever, but it's insanely evil.
Belinda Fettke (24:35): Insidious <laugh>.
Dr Lucy Burns (24:36): Yeah. You know, the food and beverage lobby group, you know, they're massive and their advertising power is huge. Their, you know, their backing is massive. So they are the Goliath and will take down as they did for Gary, any Davids that are trying to kind of challenge them or unseat them. They will take you down.
Belinda Fettke (24:56): Mmm. Yes. So I think we can choose what we provide for our families and the industry will respond. I mean there's definitely, Coca-Cola's got low sugar Coca-Cola drinks now, not that I recommend any of them, but you know, they've responded to the fact that people are looking for low sugar. You know, you've got low carbohydrate beers now because people are looking for less carbohydrates in their drinks and their foods. Unfortunately, what we really, really want is just to support the farmers. We need to improve our soil health, to improve people and planetary health really. So, you know, if we can support our farmers to produce local, fresh, seasonal foods, that's going to be the best way forward for our health and also everything else. But it does cut out food and pharma and they are going to fight it as much as they possibly can. And, and I guess we've all seen that alternative meats are the newest thing, but the ingredients in those alternative meats, it's just a chemical experiment.
Dr Lucy Burns (26:00): Shitstorm, shitstorm we call it. Yeah, yeah. It is just, it is. And I think that you're right. I mean, this is the thing. We've got people power, people are now recognizing the benefits of living a lower, low carbohydrate or even a lower carbohydrate lifestyle. But now again, you've got food companies, they don't care about your health. Sanitarium is called a health food company. It is not a health food company. They don't give a toss about your health. What they want to do is convert, you know, you to buying their vegan products. But there's other companies out there and they're slapping on their front of their product, you know, low carb or keto or something like that. But there's no, there's no regulation on that. You could be selling anything. And if, if people don't, you know, have the time or the education or the inclination to read the nutritional panels on the back, then they'll be taken for a ride.
(26:53): And it's, you know, I'm often saying to people, you know, you can use the power of your mind in a way that reframes our relationship with processed food. Because so many people go, “It's so hard. That food's so good. I love it. It tastes so nice.” And I go, “You know what? They do it on purpose. It's manufactured, it's scientifically engineered to make you want more. So it will override every single one of your body's natural satiety and regulatory systems and basically processed food acts like a drug. And I'm not giving those drug dealers my money.”
Belinda Fettke (27:33): <laugh>
Dr Lucy Burns (27:33): <laugh>. It's basically I just go, you know what? That's how you reframe it. They're not getting my hard earned money. Even if my brain says, “Oh, but I quite like Tim Tams.” They're not, and you know, and I won't use, I've got a bit of a potty mouth, which I won't necessarily use on this, but in my head I'm using it <laugh> going, “Those F bombs are not getting my money!!” Because I work hard, as everybody does. We work hard and we want to feel better. And these people are providing rubbish that offers the promise of health. And it's as far away from health as you can honestly believe.
Belinda Fettke (28:07): Well, it's labeling, that's another thing which is really scary because the health star ratings, the algorithms were designed by the technical expert at Sanitarium. So is it any wonder that up and go gets five stars? They gain points, you get extra points for plants, you lose points for animal proteins and fats. And so the algorithms are so biased toward processed food. It's just not funny. It is honestly ridiculous. And this is the same thing with all of the Adventist health studies. When I was reading a lot of the research into the Adventist health studies. So in their food frequency questionnaires, which are highly questionable, they give more points if you eat vegetables and you lose points if you eat animal proteins and fats. So it doesn't even correlate to what it should. But the actual definition of someone who is vegan in the Adventist health studies means you eat meat less than once a month.
(29:12): So to me, this is why a lot of the seventh Day Adventists who claim to be vegan or they don't say, they say total vegetarian or plant-based diet, potentially have an opportunity for health because they're not smoking their drinking alcohol, they're probably minimizing sugar and they are still getting enough animal protein and fat, maybe just enough from a buildup already to maintain health at once a month. If you're a vegetarian, under their definitions it's meat, eggs, dairy, and whatever else. But it's meat less than once a week. So that doesn't translate to the general public. So the general public in Australia who hear that a vegan diet you're going to do, you know you're gonna live seven years longer if you eat a vegan diet. They would truly eat a vegan diet. They would not include animal proteins or fats in their diet. And that's just unfair.
Dr Lucy Burns (30:10): Oh, absolutely. And I, I can't believe that. I didn't, I didn't realize that that in their definition, the vegan is not a vegan!
Belinda Fettke (30:18): Vegan is not a vegan, it's more of once a month.
Dr Lucy Burns (30:20): Yes. And you know, this happens also when studies are out there lambasting, low carbohydrate diets. Often you look at what their definition of a low carbohydrate diet is and it's not that low. It's not low carb.
Belinda Fettke (30:33): No. Sarah Hallberg pointed out 41% I think.
Dr Lucy Burns (30:38): Yeah. They're not low carb at all. So it's just that they're not ridiculous carb, like the current guidelines are of, you know, 300 grams a day or whatever they might be 200 or 150. But in my mind, that's not, 150 is often not enough to have a therapeutic benefit.
Belinda Fettke (30:52): No, I've heard many people say that. And um, yeah, this is the confusion I think around all of it, Lucy, and I'm just so thankful you let me on board just to have my little vent <laugh> and, um, and talk about these things.
Dr Lucy Burns: That was the second of the 3 part series with Belinda Fettke. Next episode we wrap-up our discussion on how religious ideology can influence society and what we eat. So my lovely listeners that ends this episode of Real Health and Weight Loss. I'm Dr. Lucy Burns.
Dr Mary Barson: And I'm Dr. Mary Barson. We are from Real Life Medicine. To contact us, please visit https://www.rlmedicine.com
Dr Lucy Burns: And until next time, thanks for listening. The information shared on the Real Health and Weight Loss Podcast, including show notes and links provides general information only. It is not a substitute, nor is it intended to provide individualised medical advice, diagnosis or treatment, nor can it be construed as such. Please consult your doctor for any medical concerns.