This strikes me as hardly an argument in favor of a low fat diet.  Is 
Pritikin any less dead just because his arteries were clean when he killed  himself? 
My Paleo oriented doctor has maintained all along that Pritikin's  Leukemia 
resurfaced because of severe essential fatty acid deficiency. He may  have also 
suffered psychiatric aberrations, also due to deficiency of Omega 3  fatty 
acids. Perhaps this contributed to his decision to commit suicide.
 
To me, this is evidence which elucidates the dangers of a low fat  diet. 
(Make that low beneficial fats. Obviously nobody would espouse the  consumption of 
trans fats, and most people of Paleo orientation also believe  that excessive 
vegetable oil consumption is deleterious as well.)
 
Maddy 
 
In a message dated 3/18/2007 4:00:23 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, Marilyn  
Harris [log in to unmask] (mailto:[log in to unmask])   writes:

Hi  Phil/Leonie;

Not a counter argument - but  -  the best  argument for a low-fat diet are 
the clean arteries of Nathan Pritikin on  his death vs the silence from the 
Atkin's  camp.

Marilyn

>I think Anthony Colpo probably has some good  counterarguments for most anit 
>sat fat studies in his book "The Great  Cholesterol Con" which I don't have 
>to hand. >  Leonie







************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone. 
 Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.