[bwb]

Originally Posted by Jennihul

You must have all the same books as me.

I love Dr Mercola too but I feel that Dr Peter D'Adamo with the Eat Right 4 Your Type books, and his new book "GenoType," has a more customized concept of diets based on more solid research. Mercola's ideas are good, based on personal metabolism but so are D'Adamo's and his are much more specific to actual foods that are customized to your ancestry.

I encourage you to read John Robbins' "The Food Revolution", particularly pages 71-79 where he examines the "Eat Right 4 Your Type" diet (along with a number of other contemporary fad diets). Robbins cites a number of nutrition experts and widely-trusted sources, including the Tufts University Health and Nutrition Letter, which published:

"The author speaks of his `work' and his `research' throughout the book but doesn't reference a single study he has published in a scientific journal. In fact, D'Adamo's `work' appears to consist entirely of anecdotes he has gathered from his caring for his `patients' (he's not a physician) and articles he has published in a non-peer reviewed journal that he himself founded and publishes. Not recommended-Tufts' lowest rating.

Fredrick J. Stare, M.D., Founder and former Chairman of the Nutrition Department at the Harvard School of Public Health wrote:

"Eat Right For Your Type is not only one of the most preposterous books on the market, but also one of the most frightening. It contains just enough scientific sounding nonsense, carefully woven into a complex theory, to actually seem convincing to the uninitiated. Based on his and his father's `research' and observation of patients, D'Adamo has pieced together the outrageous hypothesis that blood type determines which foods an individual should or should not eat . . . Browsing through what at first glance appears to be a fairly impressive list of references, we found none that seem to support a connection between diet and blood type. . . . Selecting the blood type gene as the same one that governs food and digestive capabilities is a purely arbitrary and we think irresponsible decision. He could just as easily have chosen to link food with eye color --and he would have been no farther off target. . . . This outrageous theory is nothing short of sheer nonsense. Were there any truth to it, it's reasonable to hypothesize that the human race would have died out centuries ago.