I heard that Polar Bears eat lots of fish. How many is "lots"?

The word "extreme" is a relative term.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relative_term

The above link states, "The colloquial meaning for a relative term is that it is different for different people or situations. An example: someone who is 5 feet tall might think someone who is 5 feet six inches tall is tall, but someone who is 6 feet would think that that person is short."

VPL, you are an intelligent man.
In previous threads, many of us have said that we eat in moderation. I know that you dislike that word.
You've said in a previous post: "Some have given the advice to eat everything in moderation but they never explain what it really means. It's evasive."

I have clearly explained what moderation means to most of us -- which is simply avoiding extremes. We make informed choices. Most retirees in The Villages have had successful careers and are well read.

We are capable of making healthy choices, and having a healthy and happy social life with lots of friends and activities.
Why do you doubt otherwise? :confused:

:agree:There are far to many all or nothings in this world. And moving to a "plant based diet" as defined by the article would benefit and improve the health of a huge majority. But I suppose "huge majority" is an evasive term as well.

And I just love my plant based stuff in liquid form. :eclipsee_gold_cup:

By this I assume that those of us that have read several books and many studies and, along with many cardiologists and other doctors have come to a different conclusion are not SINCERELY interested in nutrition.

A routine understanding of the English language should tell us that "plant based" and "plant only" are not the same.

It would seem to me that any diet in which over 50% of the calories are derived from plants would be categorized as a plant based diet. Are not vegetarians who eat dairy products eating a "plant based diet"?

As far as I can tell, a vegan diet is another name for a plant only diet.

Enough to help them manage their survival.

I doubt otherwise because of various statistics that indicate high rates of degenerative diseases and overweight issues in the U.S. population.

The author of The China Study, who studied nutrition nearly all of his life, referred to veganism as "a plant based diet". I never heard the phrase "plant only" diet before this thread.

I doubt that very many people will take the time to calculate whether or not they are getting 50% of their calories from plants. Non-starchy plants are very low in calories. MyPlate, which is used as an acceptable example, has 3/4 of the plate devoted to vegetables and grains(1/2 vegetables plus 1/4 grains). 1/4 of the plate is reserved for "lean protein" but the calories are allowed to go as high as 49%? That doesn't seem to make sense. Where did you get the information "50% of calories from vegetables"?


What's wrong with calling it what it is, a "omnivore diet"?


Notice that nothing was said about preventing cancer and cancer is the second leading cause of death. The vegan diet, as presented by Dr. Colin Campbell, includes a cancer prevention strategy as well as a prevention strategy for all the other degenerative diseases.

Barefoot never said everybody makes those healthy choices we are all capable of making.

There is no such thing as a diet that will prevent "all the other degenerative diseases." This is a snake oil sale.

Well...you know what they say about assumptions...

Most of these "nutrition" threads end up in tit-for-tat sniping and the thread being closed. Little nutrition information is SINCERELY discussed or exchanged. I apologize I didn't make that clear, but that's what I was referring to.

I do understand from previous posts that you've done a good amount of your own research and have arrived at a different and significantly opposing conclusion about what constitutes a healthy diet. I wish you only health and happiness and suggest we simply agree to disagree on this subject.

Good point.