I can't bring myself to trust Sally Fallon anymore. - Page 3

[mrs_mandolini]

On chilling stock: It's not that the temperature "rises," it's that the stock is so hot (it has a lot of thermal mass) that if you don't cool it with ice, or in a sink with ice water, or let it cool on the counter or whatever first, but just throw a 200 F pot of stock in the fridge, it *cools too slowly*. If it takes more than 2 - 3 hours to get down to 40 F, there is, according to food safety folks, too much time before it gets cold, so dangerous bacteria has a window of opportunity to start growing. That's why you're supposed to cool the soup off before sticking it in the fridge. This is what I learned in my food safety class, anyway.

Back in the icebox days, a hot pot of soup or a huge roast could actually warm up your fridge to the extent that OTHER food would become unsafely warm, as well. Folks I know in their 80s still let all food cool completely, because their first refrigerators were true "iceboxes."

[raksmama]

yikes! I have been putitng still warm, not hot stock in the fridge. Nothing has happend but I did not know this.

Regaring NT, I am still glad I got it. I just don't regard it as a bible.

Also many of the recipes I tried were real disasters!

Edited by raksmama - 4/20/11 at 12:13pm

[7thDaughter]

Originally Posted by kmamma 

I know many don't agree with me but I think Fallon's breastfeeding advice is solid, as far as nutrition goes. I wish more people were courageous enough to say what needs to be said. Quality of breastmilk will be affected by what a mother eats and there's no way around that. Most people within TF will agree that the meat and milk from animals eating a 'proper' diet has an entirely different nutrient composition than the products from factory farmed animals. Yes, it can be a downer to know that the milk you're giving your child may not be of the best quality, but in my life as a parent there have been so many moments like that, tearing me apart, I've eventually had to come to accept that being responsible for a child's health is really friggin hard. I still crave the truth though, regardless of how heavy it can make me feel when I'm not able to live up to those standards.

The point is to not buy-in completely with any organization's agenda.  Not to put down a well-known breastfeeding organization, but I was informed again and again that my breastmilk was perfect and it was all my baby needed, in person and in books by their world-class BFing experts, so I did not look further until many years later I read Weston Price.  Now it is very clear that my child was not getting the fats she needed and was desperately trying to tell me.  She cried and cried and cried and nursed and nursed and nursed and didn't sleep and didn't grow.  I met with 4 different LC's, 2 of them authors of BF books, and over the years I spoke with many more.  We had her checked out by doctors who couldn't find anything wrong, and even a nutritionist when she was 6, who told me not to feed her soda (I didn't) and gave me a pix of the food pyramid!  (The one that says keep fats and sweets to a minimum.)  Now she is a teen and I see Weston Price's pictures and I see my daughter was malnourished.  My eyes might have been opened had a single lactation consultant had me keep a food diary or even told me it was possible my milk was missing fatty nutrients.  (At the time I was doing pretty low-fat.)  Nobody looked at my diet and/or suggested it was not sufficient.  It was always "a mom's breastmilk is always best."  My daughter is paying the price for that.  In the remaining couple of years she is at home, I am teaching her nutrition so she can continue to keep her bones strong and have healthy babies one day.  And yes, it tears me up. 
 

[kmamma]

I hear you. I also had a very difficult time with my two babies. They both were extremly fussy nursers. I seriously did not want to have my second baby because of that first experience. My breasts were always engorged and my babies had diarrhea most of the time, refusing to nurse and crying a lot. I had breast infections about twice a month with my first son. No one talked to me about overproduction and how basically the root cause of it is the same as for low supply. Most women in my family suffer from an oversupply and most of them also have fairly serious digestive problems. As a result, of course the baby suffers too. All the support I got from LLL leaders etc was very one sided, basically that they'd never heard of such a thing as oversupply or if they had, they definitely didn't even consider that there might be a reason for it! Both kids have underdeveloped jaws, especially the second one as he was conceived under a period of significant digestive distress. They also both have digestive issues, but luckily, besides that, they're in fairly good health.

However, I'm still happy to have nursed them both, for as long as they desired. The youngest one is still nursing at 3.5.

I'm not sure whether Sally Fallon is going to influence a significant number of mothers to give their babies formula instead of breastmilk. I tend to assume that adults are mature enough to make their own informed decisions and considering the vast amount of misinformation out there, from government authorities to health gurus, I don't get too riled up about people like Ms Fallon. If anything, the absence of perfect role models will force us to start thinking for ourselves.

[kallyn]

Originally Posted by mrs_mandolini 

On chilling stock: It's not that the temperature "rises," it's that the stock is so hot (it has a lot of thermal mass) that if you don't cool it with ice, or in a sink with ice water, or let it cool on the counter or whatever first, but just throw a 200 F pot of stock in the fridge, it *cools too slowly*.

Ok, I swear I'm not trying to be dense, but if the main problem is how long the stock takes to cool, how would cooling it on the counter be any quicker (and thus safer) than cooling it in the fridge? I've seen this advice a lot and it doesn't make sense to me, but maybe I'm overlooking something.

[dds07]

I've had this experience with info on the WAPF as well. While I like a lot of what Weston A Price has to say, do be careful with the WAPF. They aren't necessarily a reputable resource.

I'm a dental professor and read this article about dentistry: http://www.westonaprice.org/dentistry/1957-root-canal-dangers.html The article states that "Dentists are generally taught to remove a tooth and leave the periodontal ligament in the socket, a procedure which would be like delivering a baby and leaving the placenta in the uterus." Except that this isn't true. I've been a professor at 2 dental schools and a student at 1 and this statement would be considered completely crazy. I teach students how to extract teeth and I'd be sued if I was teaching them to leave the ligament. No one today advocates leaving the periodontal ligament in the socket and it is certainly not what "dentists are generally taught". It isn't even something that is controversial. This statement is just wrong. It isn't even a matter of philosophy or opinion or point of view or perspective or anything. Regardless of how you feel about modern dentistry, how it is practiced, what it should be etc, it is just a wrong fact. This isn't what dentists are taught. I know. I'm teaching it to them!

I read this on inaccurate info as well: http://www.kitchenstewardship.com/2010/06/23/the-real-story-of-homogenized-milk-powdered-milk-skim-milk-and-oxidized-cholesterol/

It is a bit sad to see they are taking a bit of advantage of people's trust under the guise of "natural" by not presenting accurate info...

[SandraMort]

SO glad to see you saying this, because I was scratching my head and thinking the same thing.
 

Originally Posted by kallyn 

Ok, I swear I'm not trying to be dense, but if the main problem is how long the stock takes to cool, how would cooling it on the counter be any quicker (and thus safer) than cooling it in the fridge? I've seen this advice a lot and it doesn't make sense to me, but maybe I'm overlooking something.

[kmamma]

Originally Posted by dds07 

I've had this experience with info on the WAPF as well. While I like a lot of what Weston A Price has to say, do be careful with the WAPF. They aren't necessarily a reputable resource.

I'm a dental professor and read this article about dentistry: http://www.westonaprice.org/dentistry/1957-root-canal-dangers.html The article states that "Dentists are generally taught to remove a tooth and leave the periodontal ligament in the socket, a procedure which would be like delivering a baby and leaving the placenta in the uterus." Except that this isn't true. I've been a professor at 2 dental schools and a student at 1 and this statement would be considered completely crazy. I teach students how to extract teeth and I'd be sued if I was teaching them to leave the ligament. No one today advocates leaving the periodontal ligament in the socket and it is certainly not what "dentists are generally taught". It isn't even something that is controversial. This statement is just wrong. It isn't even a matter of philosophy or opinion or point of view or perspective or anything. Regardless of how you feel about modern dentistry, how it is practiced, what it should be etc, it is just a wrong fact. This isn't what dentists are taught. I know. I'm teaching it to them!

I read this on inaccurate info as well: http://www.kitchenstewardship.com/2010/06/23/the-real-story-of-homogenized-milk-powdered-milk-skim-milk-and-oxidized-cholesterol/

It is a bit sad to see they are taking a bit of advantage of people's trust under the guise of "natural" by not presenting accurate info...

Possibly, considering tha age of the author of this article, he's not up to date on changing procedures. Interesting article, is there anything else that you would consider a false statement?

Edited by kmamma - 4/21/11 at 2:47pm

[7thDaughter]

Kmamma, thx for listening. It feels at times like I'm crying out in the wilderness and nobody hears. It's absolutely clear to me that we are suffering an epidemic of obesity and malnourishment simultaneously, due to the corporate control of our food supply.  Most folks including DH & most of my family don't want to hear this message.  They wonder why on earth I'm willing to spend 2-3 hours daily in the kitchen, and put me in the middlin' crazy category. 

Our daughter has been seen by 4 orthodontists over the past 6 years, every one said they couldn't fix her bite.  The problem is her underdeveloped jaw.  She is having corrective jaw surgery this summer.  Her bone structure is light and thin, with underdeveloped shoulders, chest and ribcage, just like some of the WP pictures.  My bones and her father's are long, strong and sturdy.  I wondered for years how we got such a fairy child. 

It seems to me the honest message is "BFing is best, AND women need excellent nourishment to grow healthy babies."  It's really common sense, but the agendas get in the way, whether it's Sally Fallon's organization or BF advocates or whatever.  Truth is we are all paying for malnourishment -- in taxes for special needs children, expensive health care for our increasingly frail older population, mental illness, and increasing rates of cancer and chronic diseases.  All of it is related to diet.
 

[gardenmommy]

Originally Posted by 7thDaughter 

It seems to me the honest message is "BFing is best, AND women need excellent nourishment to grow healthy babies."  It's really common sense, but the agendas get in the way, whether it's Sally Fallon's organization or BF advocates or whatever.  Truth is we are all paying for malnourishment -- in taxes for special needs children, expensive health care for our increasingly frail older population, mental illness, and increasing rates of cancer and chronic diseases.  All of it is related to diet.
 

Hear hear!!  Very well said.
 

[Milkymommi]

Indeed!

I'm enjoying this thread... we are about 6 months into a TF lifestyle after many years of lacto ovo vegetarianism which eventually went vegan, then raw and back to vegan. My body and health and the health decline in my family turned us onto TF. There is still so much to learn. I value the wisdom here. I've been weeding my way through all of what's out there ever so slowly.

[cristeen]

Originally Posted by SandraMort 

SO glad to see you saying this, because I was scratching my head and thinking the same thing.
 

Because its not just about the stock. You stick a pot of boiling hot stock in the fridge and it raises the temp of the fridge and everything in it. It takes the fridge hours to cool everything back down and not Only does the stock sit in the risky range, so does your milk and your meat and whatever else is in your fridge.

What i do w my stock is to strain it then pour it into quart jars. When those are cool enough for me to transfer w my bare hand they go in the fridge. They cool much quicker than the big pot does.

[Sourire]

Wow its interested that people have found so many different errors in Sally Fallon's book.

I have a copy of Nourishing Traditions. My dad started reading the intro and he got super angry about some of the statements she made at the very beginning about recent trends in mortality and morbidity rates because he is an actuary whose job is to study exactly those things and he said that what Sally Fallon was saying was definitely not true. It annoyed him so much that he actually wrote a letter to Sally Fallon to complain about the mistake, but he never heard back.

He kept telling me that I shouldn't trust anything in the book since if one thing was wrong, how many other things would be? But I always assumed it was an honest mistake on Sally Fallon's part and was probably just a one-time thing. Your comments have shown me otherwise!

I guess the lesson I am taking from this is that I will keep trying to make as much food from scratch as possible and eat food that is organic, local, etc and continue avoiding refined flour & sugar as well as processed food... but maybe I shouldn't go too crazy eating tons of fat and meat and all that.

[gabbyraja]

Originally Posted by openpollination 

Sure! Some books I've really liked are:

-Lights Out: Sleep, Sugar and Survival by T.S. Wiley , (the writing style is a little chaotic - as in describing fats as a condom for carbs, haha - but there are some super interesting conclusions found in here if you dig deep and skim through some of the more out-there parts)

Lights Out was freaking BRILLIANT! I couldn't BELIEVE it when I read it. It took me a while to get into it, since the writing style was odd at first, and it seemed repetitive, and they are so freaking smart they get into things like quantum physics... But it was BRILLIANT!

[mamakah]

subbing

[marinak1977]

I too have been put off by authoritative "chip on the shoulder" manner of NT. I think there are good points in the book but a lot of it is SF's opinion or factual misrepresentation. I found it ironic that in railing against "dietary dictocrats" SF was one of them.
She lost me when she stated her belief that the reason certain cultural traditions prohibited pork was not due to parasites but to increased risk of cancer. (although lard is safe to eat according to her). Sure, when average life expectancy is under 30 years, cancer is of utmost concern.

[kmamma]

I don't think we have to go as far as discrediting everything Sally Fallon says. She repeats a whole lot of what others have said before her, like Weston Price. To judge the veracity of their statements, you gotta go to the source.

Whether or not to eat a ton of fat, or protein, that has nothing to do with Sally. She actually doesn't promote a high protein diet. As for saturated fats, traditional diets were indeed high in animal fats, regardless of what Fallon says about it. There are tons of other resources to go to for that.

However, having said what appears to be in defense of her writing, I have recently discovered something in NT that deserves, in my opinion way more attention than her misleading advice on breastfeeding or misquote of mortality rates, and that's her advice on whole grains. I have absoultely no idea why she claims that traditional people consumed their grains whole. I'm currently reading Ramiel Nagel's book Cure Tooth Decay, whose sources claim the opposite. Not only that, but aren't they the same sources which Sally had access to while writing NT?! Come to think of it, there's even a passage in her book describing a traditional millet souring process in which the grain is completely refined. If it weren't for the fact that consuming unprocessed grains is totally detrimental to a person's health, I'd have let it slide. Even while there are some old recipes using whole grains, there are a lot of truly traditional techniques in which bran and germ is removed. In the Swiss Alpes, the rye sourdough consumed was made with sifted flour, not the whole grain. Considering they had good dental and otherwise health, the refining of grains has nothing to do with bad nutrition.

Seems Fallon's suggested methods of preparation were not carefully thought through. Soaking whole grain flour for 24 hours doesn't seem to have any basis for removing phytc acid or lectins. It's just odd. Since both my kids have multiple cavities, I'm really struggling with this one. I've fed them whole grains a la NT for many years without being aware of the danger.   

[Storm Bride]

Originally Posted by 7thDaughter 

Kmamma, thx for listening. It feels at times like I'm crying out in the wilderness and nobody hears. It's absolutely clear to me that we are suffering an epidemic of obesity and malnourishment simultaneously, due to the corporate control of our food supply.  Most folks including DH & most of my family don't want to hear this message.  They wonder why on earth I'm willing to spend 2-3 hours daily in the kitchen, and put me in the middlin' crazy category. 

I clued in a few years ago that the malnourishment is actually contributing to the obesity in some cases. A teen that I know, who probably isn't quite obese, medically (largely because he walks a lot, imo), but is definitely overweight gave me some insight. I've watched this young man eat at home, and he just does not stop putting food in his mouth. But, when he was with us a for a few days, I found that he really wasn't eating much more than anyone else would, and the "extra "would be easily explained by the fact that he was a late preteen male, who needed it to fuel growth. After watching this for a few days, I clued in that what he was constantly eating at home was almost all carbs...breakfast cereal, white bread, etc. - with a smattering of fat in the milk and some butter. He ate as much meat as he could get at dinner, but his diet was almost all highly processed carbs, with a very, very small amount of fruit (apples, bananas, and an occasional orange) and veggies (mostly carrots). The sheer number of calories he was ingesting was pushing him hard into the overweight/obese category, but he was eating so much, because there was little nutritional content, and his body was hungry for nutrients. With us, he was eating lots of veggies and fruit (this kid would inhale salads of leafy greens, for instance), seeds and nuts, etc. He did eat bread and cereal with us (my diet's far from perfect, even if I knew what perfect was!), but it was oatmeal and whole grains and whole wheat bread, and peanut butter without sugar and things like that. He has siblings and they're all at least slightly overweight, and I think it's mostly because the food they have available to eat is totally lacking in nutrient density.

So...I still have no idea how I feel or what I believe about certain things (grains!!), but we at least try to make sure our kids have fruit and veggies to go for, and that most of our food is loaded with nutrients other than just simple carbs. It's hard to eat a healthy diet when you're not sure what exactly constitutes a healthy diet, though! I'm trying to focus on whole foods, and as little processed food as I can manage...

[ltlmrs]

Originally Posted by kmamma 

However, having said what appears to be in defense of her writing, I have recently discovered something in NT that deserves, in my opinion way more attention than her misleading advice on breastfeeding or misquote of mortality rates, and that's her advice on whole grains. I have absoultely no idea why she claims that traditional people consumed their grains whole. I'm currently reading Ramiel Nagel's book Cure Tooth Decay, whose sources claim the opposite. Not only that, but aren't they the same sources which Sally had access to while writing NT?! Come to think of it, there's even a passage in her book describing a traditional millet souring process in which the grain is completely refined. If it weren't for the fact that consuming unprocessed grains is totally detrimental to a person's health, I'd have let it slide. Even while there are some old recipes using whole grains, there are a lot of truly traditional techniques in which bran and germ is removed. In the Swiss Alpes, the rye sourdough consumed was made with sifted flour, not the whole grain. Considering they had good dental and otherwise health, the refining of grains has nothing to do with bad nutrition.

I've not read Nagel's tooth decay book, but I have his children's health book which I did enjoy though the style was somewhat difficult for me to sift through.  That said, I've argued with various WAPF folks in my area about the deal with whole grains to no end.  We have evidence that the Ancient Egyptians sifted grains, that the Romans did too, etc.  And in Russia there are several traditional porridges that are made from sifted grains (semolina, for example).  And when I think about quick breads and various noodles/dumplings, I really cannot imagine that the ancients soaked them before cooking even if they did use whole grains.

I think it comes down to a balance that needs to be maintained and the WAPF folks aren't about balance but rather as a reaction to the hostile climate towards whole foods and various fad diets that are being advocated they are rather ideological and dictatorial about the sort of food they promote.  I appreciate what they are trying to do and I do enjoy NT and its recipes, but in the end I just try to cook like my own Polish & Siberian ancestors and DH's Scotch Irish Appalachian ancestors rather than follow any specific diet/cookbook.  Thankfully, there are still enough people alive on both sides of the family that I can pick people's brains about how things used to be done, even if they think I'm a little weird for wanting to revive old traditions (for example, my mother in law didn't want to tell me about how her mother used to make hominy because after all why did I need to know when I could just buy it in a can?!?!).

[kmamma]

Originally Posted by ltlmrs 

I've not read Nagel's tooth decay book, but I have his children's health book which I did enjoy though the style was somewhat difficult for me to sift through.  That said, I've argued with various WAPF folks in my area about the deal with whole grains to no end.  We have evidence that the Ancient Egyptians sifted grains, that the Romans did too, etc.  And in Russia there are several traditional porridges that are made from sifted grains (semolina, for example).  And when I think about quick breads and various noodles/dumplings, I really cannot imagine that the ancients soaked them before cooking even if they did use whole grains.

I think it comes down to a balance that needs to be maintained and the WAPF folks aren't about balance but rather as a reaction to the hostile climate towards whole foods and various fad diets that are being advocated they are rather ideological and dictatorial about the sort of food they promote.  I appreciate what they are trying to do and I do enjoy NT and its recipes, but in the end I just try to cook like my own Polish & Siberian ancestors and DH's Scotch Irish Appalachian ancestors rather than follow any specific diet/cookbook.  Thankfully, there are still enough people alive on both sides of the family that I can pick people's brains about how things used to be done, even if they think I'm a little weird for wanting to revive old traditions (for example, my mother in law didn't want to tell me about how her mother used to make hominy because after all why did I need to know when I could just buy it in a can?!?!).

Also consider southern hemisphere traditional people whose staple included high carb tubers, which I think, don't contain a whole lot of micronutrients. When I first read this is Nagel's book I was confused, not understanding why people would consider a simple starch so important. I guess that comes from TF/NT 'brainwashing' (if I may call it that;)), that ALL worthwhile foods must be high in micronutrients. My conclusion is that that's not true. Other animals go after high carb foods, and why shouldn't we? It's energy. As long as this is balanced by the addition of plenty nutrient dense foods, no damage will result from a diet high in simple carbs.

Do you write a blog about your food discoveries? I'd love to know what you have learned about your ancestors' diets! I share your approach to traditional foods, I tend to prefer to get straight to the sources for food selection and preparation methods. Much of Fallon's methods I don't feel comfortable with being that they're not substantiated with evidence from traditional societies.

The interesting thing is that while grains were processed to remove much of the phytates and lectins by sifting most of the bran and germ out, the resulting white flour STILL underwent further extensive processing by fermenting. I'm assuming that some phytates are still found in the white portion, so while white flour is better than whole grain, it should still be fermented for best results.

Interesting that no one in your local WAPF community would take you seriously on the whole vs refined grain topic. Just looking at one of Price's own examples it's pretty clear that the sourdough bread of the Loetschental valley inhabitants was not made with whole grain, or else the phosphorus levels would have been much higher than simply 0.1 grams more than regular commercial white flour.

Yes, I've gotten a bad vibe about the WAPF community too, although I've only had minimal contact with them. Strange indeed.