On Tue, 6 Feb 2001, Phosphor wrote:

> > Would this include the 1928 study of Stefansson and Andersen,
> > which was paid for by the American Meat Packers Institute?
>
> That's interesting..where did you get that information from?

It was in one of the early published reports on the experiment --
Tolstoi's, I think.  It has also been mentioned in many
subsequent discussions.

Please understand that I do *not* believe in dismissing or
discounting research because of who funds it, but I know that
many on this list think otherwise.  While it is true that
corporations that have an investment in X will try to fund
research that shows X in a good light, it is also true that the
research stands or falls on its own merits.  Some research is
good; some is bad.  All research has to be read with discernment.

The Bellevue experiment with Stefansson and Andersen was
interesting, but not scientifically very good.  For one thing,
although it was described as an "all-meat" diet, it was not,
since they were allowed liberal amounts of black coffee.  As Ray
conjectures, this may have contributed to their (especially
Andersen's) increase in cholesterol, and possibly also to their
negative calcium balance.  We just don't know.  And any study
with just two subjects is limited in what can be concluded from
it.  Perhaps the most important conclusion is that a diet of that
sort doesn't cause immediate illness from nutrient deficiencies,
as many thought it would.

Incidentally, contrary to what I thought I had read previously,
John Harvey Kellogg did live longer than Stefansson.  Kellogg,
who was famous for his 15-hour work days, remained active until
his death at 91.  That's not an endorsement of his ideas about
health and nutrition, some of which seem pretty bizarre to me.
Just something to consider.

Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]