Fruit acid or alkaline. Tony Robbins advice.

[Vantage72]

I was wondering what everyone thinks of these claims:
Anthony Robbins' health program is based on research of Robert Young. He claims that many fruits have acidifying effect on the body. SnyderHealth.com - Foods You Can Eat Sparingly

This goes against everything else I've read that says that most fruits are alkalizing.

Tony robbins advices to only eat small amounts of fruit.

[Savage]

Tony then turns around and sells a boatload of expensive supplements via network marketing, as does Dr. Young.

Could it be that humans are the only species on the planet that need expensive supplements to survive and thrive?

[Zombie]

Apparently he also sells a magical necklace that protects you from radio waves I wouldn't be surprised if the Q-Ray bracelet shows up at his conferences, too.

[Vantage72]

Well I agree it's questionable that they are plugging their own green drinks and other stuff.

But for recommending limited amounts of fruit, they have no financial gain.

All others say fruits are alkaline, so I keep trusting that.

[Savage]

If they shun animal products, fruit, and complex carbs, then they're promoting a high fat diet by default. They advocate lots of green veggies, but you won't get enough calories from those alone. I notice their suggested recipes are high in fats like avocados and oils as well as some nuts and seeds. I'd say they get at least 50% of calories from fat.

I read Dr. Young's book Sick and Tired when it first came out. I like his detailed analysis and ideas, but I'm not sure I agree with his solution. It seems a rather forced and unnatural way of eating to me. Why would you need to consume empty calories like refined oil instead of eating whole foods in their natural state?

[MasterD]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

I read Dr. Young's book Sick and Tired when it first came out. I like his detailed analysis and ideas, but I'm not sure I agree with his solution. It seems a rather forced and unnatural way of eating to me. Why would you need to consume empty calories like refined oil instead of eating whole foods in their natural state?

I second that. His scientific analysis is brilliant. His solution is just one of many.

By the way; Dr. Young does not sell any supplements anymore. He sold his company Innerlight when Tony Robbins companies decided to release their own line of products and he lost a lot of customers. After that he wanted to start another business with basically the same supplements as he gained more fame through his book 'the pH miracle'. He lost a trial and is not allowed to sell any supplements anymore.

[Savage]

Originally Posted by MasterD

By the way; Dr. Young does not sell any supplements anymore. He sold his company Innerlight when Tony Robbins companies decided to release their own line of products and he lost a lot of customers. After that he wanted to start another business with basically the same supplements as he gained more fame through his book 'the pH miracle'. He lost a trial and is not allowed to sell any supplements anymore.

Interesting... probably as a result of a no-compete clause, eh?

[Fullcrum]

Forget Tony's diet advice.

Follow his goal setting, persistence, and achievement advice. That's where he excels.

And observe his stage presence. Something to learn from

[impaul99]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

Tony then turns around and sells a boatload of expensive supplements via network marketing, as does Dr. Young.

Could it be that humans are the only species on the planet that need expensive supplements to survive and thrive?

(1) Who says they're expensive. Compared to what?

(2) What's wrong with network marketing?

(3) All the supplements sold on the programs are there to help you find alkaline alternatives.

For example, Innerlight offers a multi-vitamin product that is Alkaline. Why? Because there's nothing more frustrating than being offered an incomplete solution. For example, saying "A lot of vitamins are actually synthetic, unhealthy and acidic." and then leaving you with a "Well where the heck do I get good vitamins!?"

The Green powder they sell is really good, and so are a lot of the other supplements they sell. Nothing on the diet forces you to take supplements unless you want to. If you're eating a lot of veggies and getting all your nutrients already, and you don't want supplements, then don't eat them, don't buy them.

Throwing away the whole concept of the diet because it is promoted by a person who also sells supplements is silly in my opinion. It's kind of like saying that I won't read any advice on this blog because you make money from advertising.

(4) Humans are not the only animals on this planet that require supplements. It all just depends on our food source. If the foods we eat are missing key nutrients, then we need to get them from alternative sources.

For example, the food that my dog eats is the best quality I can find, but for his specific breed, I have been feeding him some extra fish oils for the Omega 3 & 6 fats to help him with his dry skin and coat.

Your arguement doesn't really make sense. It's like me going to the optometrist and saying that no other animal in the world needs glasses so I don't need them either. It's like saying no other animal in the world gets a cast put on a broken arm in nature, so neither should we.

Anyway... I don't think you should discredit a whole concept just because a person who thought of it sells supplements.

[impaul99]

Originally Posted by Vantage72

I was wondering what everyone thinks of these claims:
Anthony Robbins' health program is based on research of Robert Young. He claims that many fruits have acidifying effect on the body. SnyderHealth.com - Foods You Can Eat Sparingly

This goes against everything else I've read that says that most fruits are alkalizing.

Tony robbins advices to only eat small amounts of fruit.

I believe in Tony's advice. When a guy who makes $500 Million a year by studying the best personal development strategies does his research, he doesn't make the kinds of mistakes some people on here think he does. He spent a schwackload of time learning about health and continues to do so to this day.

Don't be put off by anyone criticising him just because he makes money selling the advice. He also puts out a time management system called RPM which I find really helpful, and he makes money selling a daytimer for it. So what! Just because he sells a daytimer I should ignore his advice?

Anyway... if you're interested, check out my blog: HealthyFitGuy.com | No More Mr. Fat Guy. I am pretty much following the Tony Robbins / Dr. Young diet on there, with a few tweaks of my own from my Nutritionist Courses.

I'm one exam away form getting certified as a nutritionist, and I really like Dr. Young's stuff. It makes sense to me and I've found it effective.

In the last 17 days I've been mostly eating alkaline, drinking alkaline water with lemon, exercising for 30mins daily and I've lost 8lbs so far. You can see what I eat each day on my blog. I've done that without really taking the supplements (green powder etc) but I have been drinking alkaline water.

Starting today I'm going to start taking my green supplements to see what that does. I keep track of my daily weight on the site etc.

So, short answer: I like Dr. Young's stuff and Tony's stuff. I have all of Dr. Young's books, plus the Robbins "Living Health" seminar, as well as many other books not written by Dr. Young related to Alkaline diet.

[Addict]

Could it be that humans are the only species on the planet that need expensive supplements to survive and thrive?

Brilliant! I feel like you're reading my mind. As a corollary, could it be that humans are the only species on the planet that need to calculate the pH level of everything they eat to survive and thrive?

[impaul99]

Originally Posted by Addict

Brilliant! I feel like you're reading my mind. As a corollary, could it be that humans are the only species on the planet that need to calculate the pH level of everything they eat to survive and thrive?

Could it be that humans are the only species on the planet that need:
- the internet
- blogging
- cars
- hospitals
- books
- charity
- social structure
- languages
- to explore space
- etc.

I don't really understand the logic behind that statement.

You either believe that the foods we eat are missing certain vitamins and minerals due to soil erosion, food processing, etc. or you don't. If you do, you either believe that those minerals and vitamins are important to your health or you don't. If you believe that they are missing and if you believe that they are required, who cares if no other species takes vitamins? Maybe if they were as smart as us, they would.

[Addict]

Could it be that humans are the only species on the planet that need:
- the internet
- blogging
- cars
- hospitals
- books
- charity
- social structure
- languages
- to explore space
- etc.

Need? We don't.

If you believe that they are missing and if you believe that they are required, who cares if no other species takes vitamins? Maybe if they were as smart as us, they would.

Maybe if they were as smart as us? I guess life hasn't been surviving/thriving for 3.5 billion years.

My underlying point is that it's quite naive to assume that humans (or any other species for that matter) can't exist without human technology. Because, after all, how did our species get this far without having it in the first place? By saying that that our bodies need certain vitamins and minerals, you are also implying that our bodies are adapted to run on them. And it's quite illogical to then say that these vitamins and minerals can't be found naturally. How the hell else would our bodies have evolved to require them if they didn't exist in nature?

To illustrate my point, let me ask you this:

Did we have to invent air? Water? Gravity? Bacteria?

No, but our bodies are adapted to work with and in fact rely on all of these.

[wolfgang]

Originally Posted by Addict

Because, after all, how did our species get this far without having it in the first place? By saying that that our bodies need certain vitamins and minerals, you are also implying that our bodies are adapted to run on them. And it's quite illogical to then say that these vitamins and minerals can't be found naturally. How the hell else would our bodies have evolved to require them if they didn't exist in nature?

To illustrate my point, let me ask you this:

Did we have to invent air? Water? Gravity? Bacteria?

No, but our bodies are adapted to work with and in fact rely on all of these.

isn't it smart to know what our bodies want and try to provide?

We humans evolved in a much different environment than what we get as "food" now a days. How long were humans eating as hunter/gathers before this modern age that is just a tip of the ice berg in terms of time of exposure to humans? The so called "food" we are exposed to, even the veggies, are not as natural as they used to be. Especially all the processed and dead stuff in the middle isles of a typical super market. Tons of preservatives and salt - much more that we evolved with. Of coarse vit/mins are natually occuring substances - but try to find them in the typical SAD.

[wolfgang]

Originally Posted by Addict

My underlying point is that it's quite naive to assume that humans (or any other species for that matter) can't exist without human technology.

It's more like we survied without technology but now technology is making it hard to continue on the path we started as humans. Now we have to think and use our technology to figure out about what we did to ourselves and try to match what our bodies want based on where our bodies came from. Which means eating better and probably finding whole foods that contain vit/mins. Maybe those whole foods don't exists anymore so then what? And not eating as much preservatives and salt.

[sweetsmile]

To answer the question first posted...most ripe fruits are alkalizing to our body, while unriped ones are acid forming. If the source of your fruits is supermarket, then yes, it can have acidifying effect on the body...

[impaul99]

Originally Posted by Addict

Maybe if they were as smart as us? I guess life hasn't been surviving/thriving for 3.5 billion years.

My underlying point is that it's quite naive to assume that humans (or any other species for that matter) can't exist without human technology. Because, after all, how did our species get this far without having it in the first place? By saying that that our bodies need certain vitamins and minerals, you are also implying that our bodies are adapted to run on them. And it's quite illogical to then say that these vitamins and minerals can't be found naturally. How the hell else would our bodies have evolved to require them if they didn't exist in nature?

To illustrate my point, let me ask you this:

Did we have to invent air? Water? Gravity? Bacteria?

No, but our bodies are adapted to work with and in fact rely on all of these.

I find it interesting that both you and Steve follow the exact same line of thinking here in terms of the "ideal" diet resembling something along the lines of a "natural" diet that caveman Bob would have eaten which obviously didn't include supplements.

However, even though you use the same logic to determine the principles of your ideal diet, you're a strong proponent of eating meat, going as far as to imply that eating a vegan diet will make you sick and leave you malnutritioned and missing the B12 vitamin. At the same time, Steve shares the same logic as you, but he is a vegan.

Why do you think there is a difference in belief here?

Your entire blog is dedicated to defending eating meat, which is acidic, so I can see why you wouldn't be interested or supportive of any of Dr. Young's ideas (He's also vegan).

By the way, do you cook your meat at all? Is cooking meat on a fire allowed in your way of thinking or does that also belong under the "are humans the only species on earth that require their food to be cooked before eating?"

Also, when you select your foods for consumption, like for example your beef, do you eat "natural" beef, like the wild cows in Africa which have a 3-4% body fat percentage, or do you eat supermarket beef which is fed supplements and injected with hormones to bring the body fat % to levels well above the 30-40% level to enhance flavor (fat tastes good) of meat and it's weight/selling price?

[MasterD]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

Interesting... probably as a result of a no-compete clause, eh?

I think so. Tony Robbins included Robert Young in his seminars and so Robert Young got a lot of customers through Tony Robbins. Eventually Tony Robbins wanted to buy the company from him. This did not work out (I don't know why exactly) so Tony Robbins decided to cut off the relationship with Innerlight Inc. and release his own product line. Innerlight lost a lot of customers/new potential clients and they got in financial trouble. Robert Young had to sell his company (to some 3rd party). After that he wanted to start another company with the same principles but he was forced to stop doing that. There is some pdf file of the verdict out on the internet.

[Addict]

Why do you think there is a difference in belief here?

It's quite simple. The evolutionary reasoning makes it easy to figure out some foods that probably shouldn't be eaten at all: dairy, grains, sugar, and artificial products. We just haven't had time to adapt. However, to my understanding, it doesn't necessarily answer questions like "should we eat meat" or "what sort of vegetables should we eat." (beans, potatoes?) Those foods certainly were in our grasp during the evolution, but did we really eat them and if so, how much? These are things I have an idea about, but I don't know and I hope to explore further.

I'm being quite frank here in saying that I haven't found the ideal diet and for all I know it could be raw vegan. My guess so far is that it likely involves meat, but I'm not sure. Regardless, I wasn't trying to bring in that kind of argument into this thread. To answer your questions: I do cook my food, but I'm certainly interested in the possibilities of raw food (maybe even raw meat). Should I be eating cooked food? That's something I honestly don't know at this point. With the evolutionary reasoning, it all depends on how long we've had access to fire and to my knowledge that's at least 20 times as long as we've had access to dairy and grains. The same goes for supplements. Does that invalidate my original point? I don't think so. Have other species controlled fire for 200,000 years?

We as humans have invented a lot of neat technology that makes our lives a lot easier. But the point I think you're missing is that we don't need any of this technology. Steve and I compared humans to other species because, although we have a whole bunch of great technology, that technology doesn't do a thing to change our basic biological needs, at least without the proper amount of adaptation. Those things have pretty much been predetermined for us. And there was time, a long long span of time, before any of our technology was invented that we lived. We survived. We thrived. Assuming that we can't make it without this any of stuff is pretty arrogant and pretty insulting to each one of your millions of ancestors that did a pretty damn good job of getting you here.

[impaul99]

Originally Posted by Addict

And there was time, a long long span of time, before any of our technology was invented that we lived. We survived. We thrived. Assuming that we can't make it without this any of stuff is pretty arrogant and pretty insulting to each one of your millions of ancestors that did a pretty damn good job of getting you here.

Here's where this all boils down to. Dr. Young's supplements. More specifically his green powder or green capsules. No, you don't need to buy those to be healthy. All they do is make it more convenient. Instead of growing wheat grass in my back yard, cutting it up, blending it and drinking it for the benefits it offers, I just take a capsule that offers most of the same benefits.

It's kind of like sun-dried cranberries. I buy them in a package, I sprinkle them on my salad. Or pumpkin seeds. I don't really see any difference between those, and a "supplement" such as wheat grass or green powder drinks etc.

I don't know...this seems to be a pointless argument.

[Keith]

As I understand it, fruits are acidic (ie. have a ph below 7) but are generally alkalising when processed by the body.

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

Tony then turns around and sells a boatload of expensive supplements via network marketing, as does Dr. Young.
Could it be that humans are the only species on the planet that need expensive supplements to survive and thrive?

This is pretty spurious reasoning. There's a difference between getting enough nutrition to meet our basic needs and optimal nutrition. Do we really believe that human nutrition was optimised back before we even knew what nutrition was or had access to a wide variety of foods?

And others have pointed out, your first sentence is analogous to saying that your work is suspect because you get commissions on related products (which I don't believe either, incidentally).

[impaul99]

Originally Posted by Keith

As I understand it, fruits are acidic (ie. have a ph below 7) but are generally alkalising when processed by the body.


This is pretty spurious reasoning. There's a difference between getting enough nutrition to meet our basic needs and optimal nutrition. Do we really believe that human nutrition was optimised back before we even knew what nutrition was or had access to a wide variety of foods?

And others have pointed out, your first sentence is analogous to saying that your work is suspect because you get commissions on related products (which I don't believe either, incidentally).

Thank you for verbalising exactly what I've been trying to say all along here.

It's kind of like if I went to the workshop Steve's doing in Vegas this summer, and I listened to all this good stuff he taught, and then at the end of the talk he mentioned that the talk is just an introduction to his teachings, and that the real meat and potatoes is in the new book "Personal Development for Smart People" he's selling after the session, and me going "Oh this is crap advice, he's just trying to sell me his book... what a sham."

[shiggityjoe]

Steve, as much as I love your work, it really seems like you have ZERO appreciation for the cutting edge food science technology provided by some (not all) nutritonal supplement companies.

Do you not believe that scientifically engineered food can be useful?
Have you ever thought that maybe scientifically prepared food can be made better than is possible by nature? Surely at some point, if we haven't reached it yet, this will be true.

Bariatric protein for example is a very refined form of protein prescribed by doctors for those under going bariatric surgery. This is an unnatural food. Modified in a lab. Yet it is absolutely healthy to eat, and is highly recommended (if not mandatory) for post-op recovery of stomach staplings and whatnot.

I think you could benefit from doing a test period with creatine or protein shakes, one of the less extreme and more socially accepted nutritional supplements that is known to have few side effects yet be highly effective for what it was designed for.

[Joeschmoe]

Does anybody here think that we are anywhere close to understanding what vitamins and minerals the body needs and in what proportions? We have identified a few of them and we've identified the balances between a few of them. There are tons we don't know.

For example we can take the fructose and glucose out of fruits and make a powder and we can take out the fiber. There is speculation that this combination makes sugar a good steady energy provider. But you need the water. Also you need the micro nutrients, and the protein, and the essential fatty acids in the right proportions. And you might be able to get say even 50 percent of these things and in the correct proportions and hope that's enough for optimum health.

Or ...

You could just eat the fruit and get the whole thing, with all the right things in the correct balance already provided for you.

Nutrition is great in understanding how the foods we eat effect us, but some look far too hard at those few tree's that we can see and lose the forest. Supplementing an inadequate diet, leaves you with an inadequate diet. I believe that is what Steve was getting at.

Just as an example Dr. Atkins suggested heavy supplement use for his high fat/ low carb diet, because the diet itself is far from adequate for human health needs, but supplementing it doesn't magically make it adequate.

[impaul99]

Originally Posted by Joeschmoe

Does anybody here think that we are anywhere close to understanding what vitamins and minerals the body needs and in what proportions? We have identified a few of them and we've identified the balances between a few of them. There are tons we don't know.

For example we can take the fructose and glucose out of fruits and make a powder and we can take out the fiber. There is speculation that this combination makes sugar a good steady energy provider. But you need the water. Also you need the micro nutrients, and the protein, and the essential fatty acids in the right proportions. And you might be able to get say even 50 percent of these things and in the correct proportions and hope that's enough for optimum health.

Or ...

You could just eat the fruit and get the whole thing, with all the right things in the correct balance already provided for you.

Nutrition is great in understanding how the foods we eat effect us, but some look far too hard at those few tree's that we can see and lose the forest. Supplementing an inadequate diet, leaves you with an inadequate diet. I believe that is what Steve was getting at.

Just as an example Dr. Atkins suggested heavy supplement use for his high fat/ low carb diet, because the diet itself is far from adequate for human health needs, but supplementing it doesn't magically make it adequate.

ALthough I half agree with you, I also have to disagree.

I too also believe that you can't just eat Big Macs, and then pop a mulitvitamin and then you'll be healthy. That's just stupidity.

Where I do believe in vitamins and supplements is for example something like Vitamin C. By normally eating a healthy diet, you can get enough of this vitamin. But now, lets say that you feel a cold coming on. Instead of now eating 50 oranges / day, you can supplement your already healthy diet with a few vitamin C capsules, to just give you that extra boost for 3 or 4 days.

Here's another example. I know someone who has a little kid who just got a really bad case of bronchitis and something else that they HAD to treat with antibiotics. Once the treatment is done, his body will be left with not enough good bacteria for proper digestion because antibiotics kill all bacteria indescriminately. Yes, he can be fed craploads of yoghurt afterwords to replenish the bacteria, but he can also take a priobiotic supplement to replenish the good bacteria.

These are cases where you're not supplementing INSTEAD of a healthy diet, but ON TOP OF. My point is that supplements SOMETIMES are important. Like I said...not as an excuse to eat crap.

My belief is that you shouldn't just say "Caveman didn't eat supplements, so they are all bad."

Caveman could have died of malnutrition.

[seeker5]

Originally Posted by impaul99

I believe in Tony's advice. When a guy who makes $500 Million a year by studying the best personal development strategies does his research, he doesn't make the kinds of mistakes some people on here think he does. He spent a schwackload of time learning about health and continues to do so to this day.

On the other hand, remember that simply because Tony has proven great and helpful in some areas of your life, does not mean his advice for the other areas of your life is automatically perfect and will work. Tony makes mistakes just like everyone else. Case in point: His divorce after years of how to teach people how to be married forever. Furthermore, Tony also admitted to being wrong on some of the health advice he used to give (he used to advocate eating fruits all morning long and now he says he was wrong to advocate that). So even in Health he's not infallible in his own words.

Don't be put off by anyone criticising him just because he makes money selling the advice. He also puts out a time management system called RPM

The difference is that Steve (according to one of his blog post), and myself have both seeing Tony engage in what we consider unethical practices. Thus, what Tony does is more suspect then say someone else we've never seen engage in unethical practices.

I'm not saying everything Tony says or does is suspect, but I'm also saying that I can no longer assume everything he does is for the good of humanity either. He's human like other people and sometimes he may be misguided.

[impaul99]

Originally Posted by seeker5

On the other hand, remember that simply because Tony has proven great and helpful in some areas of your life, does not mean his advice for the other areas of your life is automatically perfect and will work. Tony makes mistakes just like everyone else. Case in point: His divorce after years of how to teach people how to be married forever. Furthermore, Tony also admitted to being wrong on some of the health advice he used to give (he used to advocate eating fruits all morning long and now he says he was wrong to advocate that). So even in Health he's not infallible in his own words.

It's so funny how different people see the same thing from a different perspective. I too read Tony's advice about eating fruit in his Unlimited Power book. I wasn't into health back then so I wasn't really doing it or following the advice. However, when he came out with his Living Health seminar and he admitted that he was wrong in his first book, I didn't see that as a bad thing, I saw it as a good thing. To me it showed that he was willing to admit any mistakes he made, even though it makes him look bad.

To me, this showed great character and built more trust. I trust people who admit mistakes much more than those that stubbornly stick to something they no longer believe. As such, I trust his advice even more now.

As far as his divorce, if you actually see Tony's teachings on relationships you'll see that he doesn't advocate being married forever. He teaches people how to have healthy relationships. Sometimes that means not being together as a couple. If you watch the DVD's on his relationship program, he does a workshop with a couple and they re-connect as best friends, and later on realize that they want to remain friends but not be a married couple anymore so they both find someone else who they love romantically, but they stay friends.

Once again I don't see Tony being incongruent with his advice at all here.

The difference is that Steve (according to one of his blog post), and myself have both seeing Tony engage in what we consider unethical practices. Thus, what Tony does is more suspect then say someone else we've never seen engage in unethical practices.

I haven't seen any unethical practices from Tony.

I'm not saying everything Tony says or does is suspect, but I'm also saying that I can no longer assume everything he does is for the good of humanity either. He's human like other people and sometimes he may be misguided.

Cool.

[Keith]

Originally Posted by Joeschmoe

Does anybody here think that we are anywhere close to understanding what vitamins and minerals the body needs and in what proportions? [...]

Or ...

You could just eat the fruit and get the whole thing, with all the right things in the correct balance already provided for you.

Nutrition is great in understanding how the foods we eat effect us, but some look far too hard at those few tree's that we can see and lose the forest. Supplementing an inadequate diet, leaves you with an inadequate diet. I believe that is what Steve was getting at.

That's why you should take nutritional supplements in addition to eating properly rather than in lieu.

All the nutrients we need are available in the foods we eat and our body is designed to maximise health based on the nutrition available in the foods that are available at any given time. But that doesn't mean that a body won't run better if it can't get more of a desired nutrient. In practice our bodies run well, but not optimally on the supply of nutrients available in food - they've generally been designed to run as well as they can on as much as they can get. (There are exceptions - some vitamins can be toxic in large amounts).

As impaul99 said, if your have a cold and your body would benefit from a lot of vitamin C (say 1000mg), you can eat 2kg of oranges (for half your daily calories and a ton of sugar) or you can supplement the Vitamin C.

Aside: Oranges are actually overrated as a source of vitamin C. You get 50mg Vitamin C from 100g of orange. You get more benefit from 100g of strawberries (60mg), Broccoli (90mg), Parsley (130mg) or Blackcurrant (200mg). In this case, you'd be better off eating 750g of parsley, but I think the principle is clear. For some vitamins, the optimal level exceeds that which you can practically obtain from food.

[hawkal]

Don't any of you think this is all a bit OTT? I mean these days we seem to get bombarded with things telling us what isn't good for you that it just sounds to me like that Tony and Dr. Young are just trying to capitalise on the fanatical new age followers and that any old bull will do. How does that saying go again? Quality over Quantity.

[gettingskinny]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

If they shun animal products, fruit, and complex carbs, then they're promoting a high fat diet by default. They advocate lots of green veggies, but you won't get enough calories from those alone. I notice their suggested recipes are high in fats like avocados and oils as well as some nuts and seeds. I'd say they get at least 50% of calories from fat.

I read Dr. Young's book Sick and Tired when it first came out. I like his detailed analysis and ideas, but I'm not sure I agree with his solution. It seems a rather forced and unnatural way of eating to me. Why would you need to consume empty calories like refined oil instead of eating whole foods in their natural state?

Well said, ITA!