Peter Constantinidis wrote:

>It is a big problem in his material that he makes claims that the blood
>agglutinizes and whatever. Except from what I have read, there is no
>microscope slides, no evidence, nothing to show this agglutinization and
>other stuff happening.

The fact that lectins cause agglutination is well known, but I agree
that there has been no independent confirmation of his claims that
specific lectins cause agglutination only in particular blood types.
At least, I was never able to find any confirmation.  Of course, this
doesn't "debunk" his theory in the sense of showing it to be false; it
only shows it to be inadequately supported.

I haven't looked at his stuff in years, so I don't know what new
research may have been done.

>And really, it's not all that far removed from a form of dumb racism.

I don't think it's quite that bad.  For one thing, the tendency of
certain diseases to favor certain blood types has been known for
decades, but as far as I know there is no other theory as to why this
is so.  Type A people really are at greater risk for heart disease and
certain cancers.

When I was trying to dig up material on the D'Adamo theories, I was
also able to confirm that type A people have much lower levels of
intestinal alkaline phosphatase than type O people have.  They also
produce less stomach acid.  These traits must be linked to the same
gene that carries the blood type.  What I was never able to confirm,
however, was D'Adamo's claim that these facts make type A people less
capable of digesting meats.  I think it's possible that the lower
levels of stomach acid make type As less able to handle carrion, or
other "contaminated" food, but that's a different matter.  One of my
biggest problems with D'Adamo is that he often fails to say whether a
food is an "avoid" because of lectins or for some other naturopathic
reason.