Dallas
(TX): BenBella Books; 2005. ISBN 1-932100-38-5,
417 pages; paperback $24.95
|
|
Out
of a morass of conflicting nutritional studies and popular books
comes The China Study, a finely woven tapestry of
scientific inquiry and personal experiences of a highly respected
NIH-funded scientist. This impressive work by T Colin Campbell,
PhD, and his son Thomas provides chilling insights into how our
nation has arrived in the third millennium with some of the highest
rates of obesity, cancer, and heart disease in the world. Many
of the revelations in this book could serve as an indictment of
the medical profession but it becomes clear that there is plenty
of blame to go around.
The
authors note that cancer death rates from the 1970s to 1990s were
unchanged in spite of the "War on Cancer." Obesity rates
have more than doubled in 30 years and health care-related death
is now the third leading cause of death in America.1
But, as the story unfolds, these phenomena demonstrate not a failure
of medical treatment but that the very need for treatment
can be prevented.
Tracing
the parallel emergence of modern nutrition and modern chemistry
in the late 1800s, the authors show how the term "protein"
became synonymous with high-quality nutrition. This concept was
embraced by the emerging techno-agricultural industries and dovetailed
with the expanding affluence of middle America. In the mid 1960s,
Dr Campbell was asked to help solve the tragic and pervasive problem
of childhood malnutrition in the Philippines, a problem of inadequate
dietary protein easily solved by introducing peanuts into the
diet. However, recent evidence had shown that peanuts were often
contaminated with a fungus that produces the potent carcinogen,
aflatoxin. Indeed, Dr Campbell's investigation found high levels
of aflatoxin in the urine of Philippine children afflicted with
primary liver cancer. His sleuthing eventually revealed that the
peanut butter was laced with aflatoxin from mold-ridden peanuts.
This investigation might have ended as yet another triumph of
science over disease but for the intersection of two isolated
pieces of data. A prominent Manila physician told Dr Campbell
of his observation that childhood liver cancer afflicted only
the best-nourished Philippine children. About this time, Dr Campbell
read an obscure study indicating that rats subjected to aflatoxin
on a high-protein diet had a 100% incidence of liver cancer, while
rats subjected to aflatoxin fed a low-protein diet had a 0% incidence
of liver cancer! Dr Campbell eventually repeated and expanded
the aflatoxin-protein study in rats and demonstrated that while
aflatoxin initiates cancerous foci, the growth of foci into cancerous
tumors is fueled by consumption of animal protein.
The
opportunity to validate these findings in humans led Dr Campbell
to China where Premier Chou En Lai had mandated a study on cancer
and other causes of death involving 880 million Chinese citizens
living in 2400 counties. This outcome study of a genetically and
culturally homogeneous populace where cancer rates varied by up
to 100-fold from one county to another provided a potential gold
mine for studying lifestyle and nutritional factors. Dr Campbell's
team administered questionnaires and blood tests on 6500 Chinese
living in 65 counties, collecting data on lifestyle, diet, and
disease variables. By comparing disease groupings by region, subjects
separated neatly into two primary groups: the affluent with higher
animal protein and fat intake who suffered from cancer, heart
disease, and diabetes, and the poor who suffered primarily from
infectious diseases, diseases of pregnancy, and metabolic diseases
other than diabetes.
Animal
protein consumption becomes the linchpin of Dr Campbell's work,
which unavoidably positions him in diametric opposition to powerful
agro-pharma-economic interests. But the Campbell duo delivers
blow after scientific blow that could only leave the proponents
of high protein diets staggering in a pugilistic daze. As Abramson
illustrated in his book Overdo$ed America,2
so does The China Study expose the forces that protect
the status quo and their economic interests at the expense of
the consumer's health and wellbeing. Going beyond the perils of
high animal protein consumption, the authors provide useful insights
into the benefits of a whole plant-food diet without holding any
expectation of mass migration to their beliefs. Those who find
these conclusions too foreign should suspend their disbelief until
they have read The China Study.
References
-
Starfield B. Is US health really the best in the world? JAMA
2000 Jul 26;284(4):483-5.
-
Abramson J. Overdo$ed American: the broken promise of American
medicine. 1st ed. New York: HarperCollins; c2004.
|
