(Lack of ) Quality of nutritional supplements

In my last post, I blogged about how we must not confuse marketing with truth. They are often two different things.

A patient I saw today was absolutely convinced that his fish oil was the best available in the world: purer, uncontaminated by mercury or pesticides--"not like that other crap on the shelves." I asked him how he knew this. "They say so," he proudly declared.

Do you recognize this? He fell for the marketing. While there may be some truth in the manufacturer's claims, you can't believe it from the mouth of the manufacturer. True judgements about quality and purity have to come from an independent source like Consumer Reports, Consumer Lab, or the FDA.

But the FDA doesn't regulate the quality and purity of nutritional supplements. On the positive side, this has allowed supplement manufacturers to keep costs down, not having to navigate arcane and complex regulatory restrictions.

On the negative side, a fair number of supplement manufacturers get away with 1) producing supplements that fail to contain the stated amounts of ingredients, occasionally containing none of the essential ingredient(s), 2) contain contaminants like lead, and 3) make extravagant and often unfounded claims like "superior", "more effective", and "purer". (DHEA, for instance, is a particular landmine of poor quality. I recently suggested that a patient take DHEA; despite consistently taking 50 mg of a specific brand for several months, the blood level of DHEA-S didn't budge one bit--there was likely little or none in the capsule.)

The Fanatic Cook at http://fanaticcook.blogspot.com has posted some very insightful discussions on this issue and the proposed FDA regulations of supplements. They're worth perusing.

I really wish regulation weren't necessary and that the industry could have policed itself. But it clearly has failed and perhaps federal oversight is not such a bad thing, as long as the FDA regulations restrict themselves to oversight over quality and purity and not to efficacy. It's the efficacy regulation that could hogtie innovation in supplement development.
Loading
Near-death experience with nattokinase

Near-death experience with nattokinase

This is a true story that I personally witnessed.

A 60-some year old man heard that nattokinase "thinned the blood." So he had been taking it for the past 6 months.

One week before he came to see me, he abruptly became quite breathless. He was unable to walk more than 20 feet or bend over to tie his shoes due to the breathlessness.

He came to see me in the office. I was alarmed by how breathless he was without signs of heart failure or other obvious explanation. I sent him for an immediate CT pulmonary angiogram. Within 30 minutes, we had the diagnosis: a large "saddle" pulmonary embolus, meaning a large blood clot that straddled the right and left main pulmonary arteries. One wrong move and . . . bang! He would have been dead within a couple of minutes, since a large clot can completely occlude the large arteries feeding the lung, essentially corking any blood circuiting through the lungs and back to the left side of the heart. (Causing, incidentally, electromechanical dissociation, in which the heart keeps beating for a few minutes but no blood is being pumped. CPR can keep you alive for a few minutes, then it's over.)

When I advised the patient of the diagnosis (after initiating the REAL anticoagulants), he said, "But I was taking nattokinase!"

Exactly. Blood clots are no laughing matter. They are potentially fatal events. Betting your life on some company's advertisement is nothing short of foolish.

Anyone who reads The Heart Scan Blog knows that I am an avid supporter of nutritional supplements. I even write articles and consult for the supplement industry. But I truly despise hearing unfounded marketing claims that some supplement companies will make in the pursuit of a fast buck.

There is no doubt that we need better, safer methods to deal with dangerous blood clots, whether in the lung, pelvis, or other areas. But, before anyone takes a leap based on the extravagant marketing claims made by a supplement manufacturer, you want to be damn sure there are real data--not marketing claims, REAL data--before you use something like nattokinase in place of a proven therapy.

Don't confuse the very interesting, though unpalatable, natto with nattokinase. Natto contains vitamin K2 and some other interesting compounds, including nattokinase.

Comments (22) -

  • Anonymous

    5/15/2010 10:41:58 PM |

    Interesting that your warning about nattokinese is FOLLOWED immediately by an advertisement for.... nattokinase extracts!

  • mongander

    5/16/2010 1:29:07 AM |

    Actually most nattokinase does not contain vitamin K2.  When nattokinase is extracted from natto, the K2 is separated and sold as another profitable byproduct.

  • Anonymous

    5/16/2010 1:29:07 AM |

    Wait a minute though! Was there any indication that he needed a real blood thinner before his clot? Maybe he was just taking it like a daily aspirin to "thin the blood" not for therapeutic blood anticoagulation. His clot was unfortunate but probably could have occurred with a cardiologist sactioned baby aspirin.

  • Dr. William Davis

    5/16/2010 1:07:24 PM |

    Anon--

    He was taking aspirin, as well.

    However, aspirin does NOT prevent deep vein thromboses that lead to pulmonary emboli, regardless of dose. Aspirin is a platelet-inhibitor, not a true "blood thinner" that works by way of clotting proteins.

  • sfr

    5/16/2010 2:18:50 PM |

    Was he using nattokinase as an excuse not to take his warfarin, or something like that? Otherwise it seems very unlikely that the nattokinase had anything to do with the clot. If anything, I'd worry about nattokinase causing bleeds, not clots.

  • Anonymous

    5/16/2010 5:58:24 PM |

    Curious if you ever recommend pycnogenol in cases where there is a risk of DVT? I believe there is at least one study showing a reduced risk of DVT in those who took pycnogenol.

    I'm not saying it's better than anti-coagulants, but it may be better than aspirin.

  • Myron

    5/16/2010 6:08:01 PM |

    Real anti-coagulants?  Like the red clover extract coumadin?  Patients on coumadin even with careful control often suffer excessive bleeding or more clots and strokes.    
    I guess the point is that clotting control is very difficult and that the number one drug is a natural medicine, herbal extract.

  • Anonymous

    5/16/2010 11:25:24 PM |

    One time, I was at a local vitamin shop when I saw that the supplement I was thinking about buying contained nattokinase.  Having read your blog and knowing what you think of nattokinase, I put the product back on the shelf.  The proprietor of the shop asked me why I did not want that supplement, because in his opinon it was a very good product.  I said that I did not want to take anything with nattokinase in it, and he said, "What do you have against nattokinase?"  I didn't bother to explain myself to him, figuring that I would just be wasting my breath.

  • Eric

    5/17/2010 1:37:14 AM |

    What is your opinion about doing higher dose mixed tocopherols, which do work on the clotting cascade. Or garlic and omegas which decrease platelet aggregation. What is your stand on normalizing your vitamin K content and then titrating your dosage of coumadin up to theraputic INR. As far as the nattokinase is concerned, do you like any of that style of enzyme? lumbokinase, serrapeptase. Although they don't have any effect on INR they should have an affect on FDPs

  • Paul

    5/17/2010 3:40:36 AM |

    That title is misleading.  People have been known to have near death cardiac events while taking fish oil, vitamin D3, and high dose niacin too.

    As well, on rare occasion, people have been known to have a recurrent DVT and/or PE while on warfarin therapy, even with an INR as high as 2.5.  Therefore, does that mean warfarin is an ineffective anticoagulant?  Of course not.

    This whole blog is about how we as individuals need to take control of our own health.  That just because we're taking a therapeutic medication or supplement, it does not therefore absolve ourselves from further investing in a life style that is proven to lower risk factors that may cause catastrophic health events.  

    I totally agree that some of the marketing claims made concerning nattokinase are inflated and frankly, unbelievable - particularly about its capabilities as a thrombolysis.  And I agree that if your doctor advices that you need heprin or warfarin therapy in order to prevent a catastrophic health event, you certainly need to heed that advice.

    But, count me down as someone who has extensively studied this subject and is still open to the possibility that nattokinase may contain some attributes in the prevention of venus thrombosis from a novel approach that needs further clinical investigation.

  • Dave

    5/17/2010 3:57:54 PM |

    Dr. Davis,

    I wouldn't be so quick to blast nattokinase because of this isolated incident or lack of research.

    Nattokinase is a "mild" blood thinner. Taking it once a day will not do more than relieve inflammation and slightly improve a person's circulation.

    A person would have to take it every 4 times a day (800 IU) on an empty stomach for if he desires a therapeutic effect. I would be curious if this patient of yours even took 200 IU per day (because a lot of products don't even contain that much).

    I have personally witnessed an improvement in circulation after taking nattokinase.

  • Dave

    5/17/2010 4:03:09 PM |

    I would like to add one more thing...

    I'm sure you have had experience with patients who took 400 IU of vitamin D in tablet form, and did not see any results after six months either. Was it because vitamin D is a worthless supplement, and should not be used?

  • Dave

    5/17/2010 4:42:33 PM |

    Sorry, I was misspoke about the dosage. Nattokinase is measured in fibrinolysis units (FU), not IU, and the effective dose ranges anywhere from 2,000-8000 FU per day.

    Also, here's actual scientific research (albeit small), not marketing hype, on nattokinase.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19358933

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18971533

  • StephenB

    5/17/2010 6:40:37 PM |

    I've like the taste of natto from the moment I tried it. I am, however, a bit weird. ;)

  • Aaron

    5/17/2010 8:19:54 PM |

    Dr. Davis -- my question here is, could the nattokinase cause the blood clot (doesn't seem the be the case)?  Are you saying that it didn't matter that he was taking nattokinese because it doesn't reach the bloodstream to clear clots (so he would of had the clot anyway)

    Secondly, if he was taking nattokinese that had vitamin K2 <--- is it possible that increases in K2 might cause abnormal blood cloting?

  • Dr. William Davis

    5/17/2010 9:44:34 PM |

    Vitamin K2 does not cause blood clotting any more than topping up your gas tank makes your car go faster.

    Whether nattokinase has other effects is not my point. My concern is that people frequently ask if they should treat their DVT or pulmonary embolus with nattokinase. This is a death sentence. It should NOT be used for a such a purpose unless there were a large treatment trial proving equivalence or superiority to existing therapies.

  • Paul

    5/18/2010 12:50:58 AM |

    Eric,

    High dose mixed tocopherols use the same mechanisms as Wafarin/Coumadin.  They block the reabsorption of vitamin-K in the liver.  Vitamin-K is necessary for the liver to synthesize and release clotting proteins in the blood.  Warfarin/Coumadin is much, much more consistent than tocopherols in maintaining vitamin-K malabsorption and a safely prescribed INR range.  

    Titrating a Warfarin/Coumadin dosage never made sense to me. It is not toxic other than causing vitamin-K deficiency. What difference does it make if the dosage is 20 mg or 20 mcg to maintain a therapeutic INR?  Your liver will need to be equally deficient in vitamin-K no matter how you caused the deficiency.

    Garlic, ginger, ginkgo, curcumin, n-3, aspirin, N-acetylcysteine, Plavix, and yes tocopherols too all are anti-platelet agents.   They are effective at preventing arterial thrombosis, where anticoagulants have little effect. Conversely, anticoagulants are effective at preventing venous thrombosis, where anti-platelet agents (unfortunately) have little effect.

  • Michaela

    5/18/2010 7:36:40 AM |

    I'm giving my son nattokinase, one tablet daily and he also takes Vitamin K2. He has not been prescribed blood thinners, only aspirin which I stopped many months ago.
    Are you warning of not replacing prescribed blood thinners with natural therapies?
    If blood thinners have not been prescribed, is it of benefit to supplement with nattokinase?

  • rob_scheuneman

    5/18/2010 11:31:00 PM |

    Hi Dr. Davis

    I was wondering if you could help me with something.

    I've been monitoring my blood glucose recently with a basic monitor, and my readings would suggest that I am on the verge of impaired glucose tolerance, but not quite there yet.

    I was reading about continuous glucose monitoring systems. I would love to have on if these to more thoroughly monitor my blood glucose, but every model out there requires a prescription to obtain one. I don't understand this, because they are not dangerous in any way.

    Do you know of any way a non diabetic can purchase one of these?

    Any information you can give me would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

    Rob

  • Anonymous

    9/25/2010 9:36:39 PM |

    Dr. Davis, i am a 45 year old female who recently started taking Lovasa for high triglycerides , i am also on garlic tabs and one baby asprin per day . Is is safe to replace the garlic and asprin with one tab of Natto- K per day and is it safe to take with Lovasa? I am about 20 lbs overweight do not drink or smoke and swim and or walk 3 days per week. i am genetically predisposed to high triglycerides but never had a problem until i gained the weight. Until i get the weight off i am trying a more natural approach. Help!

  • Kelly D

    8/10/2013 3:24:08 AM |

    Acta Haematol. 2010;124(4):218-24. doi: 10.1159/000321518. Epub 2010 Nov 13.

    In vivo evaluation method of the effect of nattokinase on carrageenan-induced tail thrombosis in a rat model.
    Kamiya S, Hagimori M, Ogasawara M, Arakawa M.
    Source
    Nagasaki International University, Sasebo, Japan. kamiya@niu.ac.jp

    Abstract
    Thrombosis is characterized by congenital and acquired procatarxis. Nattokinase inhibits thrombus formation in vitro. However, in vivo evaluation of the therapeutic efficacy of nattokinase against thrombosis remains to be conducted. Subcutaneous nattokinase injections of 1 or 2 mg/ml were administered to the tails of rats. Subsequently, κ-carrageenan was intravenously administered to the tails at 12 h after nattokinase injections. The mean length of the infarcted regions in the tails of rats was significantly shorter in rats administered 2 mg/ml of nattokinase than those in control rats. Nattokinase exhibited significant prophylactic antithrombotic effects. Previously, the in vitro efficacy of nattokinase against thrombosis had been reported; now our study has revealed the in vivo efficacy of nattokinase against thrombosis.

    PMID: 21071931

Loading
Test Of Scanner Saves A Doctor's Life

Test Of Scanner Saves A Doctor's Life


















Read the story online at http://www.courant.com/news/health/hc-luckydoc.artsep10,0,7572510.story?coll=hc_features_promo

I personally hate these stories, the ones that turn heart scans into drama by describing how someone had a heart scan, then turned out to have so much coronary plaque that they had to have bypass surgery.

But I point this one out because the story is related in an interesting way. It highlights the utter ignorance that operates in heart disease detection.

The story highlights how a 50-year-old, 5 ft 8, 150 lb slender, exercising neurologist underwent a CT coronary angiogram in a newly installed device in a Hartford, Connecticut hospital (not a heart scan) that detected entirely unsuspected severe and diffuse coronary disease. You know the rest: abnormal stress test, heart catheterization, bypass surgery of the hapless doctor-now-patient, followed by grateful patient saying things like "This machine saved my life."

It probably is true. You've seen these stories before. I've witnessed these sorts of headline-makers for the past decade. I remain surprised that it still happens.

The doctor is not some ignorant, uninformed man who can't even fill out his income tax forms. Yet how does a man like this walk around with life-threatening disease and not know it? Why does it still make headlines?

Anyway, despite all my jawing about heart scans and early heart disease detection, many physicians and the public remain in the stone age of heart disease. Even though this neurologist's story made headlines, the many other people who 1) identified their heart disease earlier with a simple heart scan, then 2) took action to put a stop to it, do not make headlines. But that's the way to go.

Why isn't the rest of the story being told? Why was this man's heart disease uncovered only in its late phases? Hartford, Connecticut is not some backwater. I've been there. It's a major city with large hospitals and a University Medical Center. But a professional with presumed knowledge of health and his doctor(s) allowed this to happen?

In other words, this is not a story of success, but of failure--failure to identify coronary disease years earlier when preventive action would have prevented bypass. But that's not such a compelling headline, is it?

As an aside, I'll bet you that this man has lipoprotein(a), a severe small LDL pattern, and severe deficiency of vitamin D. Correct these and it's unlikely he'll need bypass again. But that's kind of boring, isn't it?

Comments (5) -

  • Mike

    9/11/2007 2:57:00 PM |

    The article didn't mention the doctor's diet, but I'd be willing to bet that it was high-carb/low-fat.

  • Anonymous

    9/11/2007 3:04:00 PM |

    If DR. Wade had done a heart scan instead of the CT angio, what do you suppose his CAC would have been given how serious his condition was at the point of discovery?

    Also, given how the story lays out how quickly his stress test -- no echo described -- revealed EKG abnormalities with very little exertion, it boggles my mind that he would be completely asymptomatic.  Wouldn't he have some symptoms?  Chest discomfort?  I'm amazed he didn't.

  • Dr. Davis

    9/11/2007 8:16:00 PM |

    I agree. It's surprising that no symptoms were present.

    His heart scan score was almost certainly in the thousands.

  • Peter

    9/12/2007 5:29:00 AM |

    Dr Davis,
    I have been reading your Blog for months now and have found it enormously informative.  As I read this post, your use of the words "early detection' stood out.  I would encourage the use of this term because people have a favorable response to it already due to it's use when people are talking or writing about cancer.  CT scans need to get the same "social weight" as mamograms have now.  The battle of ideas is often about how language is used.  "early dectection" is a very powerful phrase.

  • Dr. Davis

    9/12/2007 11:58:00 AM |

    Excellent point. Thanks, Peter.

Loading
Are you more like a dog or a rabbit?

Are you more like a dog or a rabbit?

Dr. William Roberts, editor of the American Journal of Cardiology and cardiovascular pathologist, is a perennial source of clever ideas on heart disease.
In a recent editorial, Dr. Roberts comments:








"Because humans get atherosclerosis, and atherosclerosis is a disease only of herbivorers, humans also must be herbivores. Most humans, of course, eat flesh, but that act does not make us carnivores. Carnivores and herbivores have different characteristics. (1) The teeth of carnivores are sharp; those of herbivores, flat (humans have some sharp teeth but most are flat for grinding the fruits, vegetables, and grains we are built to eat). (2) The intestinal tract of carnivores is short (about 3 times body length); that of herbivores, long (about 12 times body length). (Since I am 6 feet tall my intestinal tract should be about 60 feet long. As a consequence, if I eat bovine muscle [steak], it could take 5 days to course through those 20 yards.) (3) Body cooling for carnivores is done by panting because they have no ability to seat; although herbivores also can pant, they cool their bodies mainly by sweating. (4) Drinking fluids is by lapping them for the carnivore; it is by sipping them for the herbivore. (5) Vitamin C is made by the carnivore's own body; herbivores obtain their ascorbic acid only from their diet. Thus, although most human beings think we are carnivores or at least conduct their lives as if we were, basically humans are herbivores. If we could decrease our flesh intake to as few as 5 to 7 meals a week our health would improve substantially."



You can always count on Dr. Bill Roberts to come up with some clever observations.

I think he's right. Some of the most unhealthy people I've known have been serious meat eaters. Most of the vegetarians have been among the healthiest. (I say most because if a vegetarian still indulges in plenty of junk foods like chips, crackers, breakfast cereals, breads, etc., then they can be every bit as unhealthy as a meat eater.)

Should you become a vegetarian to gain control over coronary plaque and other aspects of health? I don't believe you have to. However, modern livestock raising practices have substantially modified the composition of meats. A steak in 2006, for instance, is not the same thing as a steak in 1896. The saturated and monounsaturated fat content are different, the pattern of fat "marbling" is different, the lean protein content is different. Meat is less healthy today than 100 years ago.

Take a lesson from Dr. Roberts' tongue-in-cheek but nonetheless provocative thoughts. Pardon me while I chew on some carrots.

Comments (11) -

  • Jeff

    12/20/2006 4:48:00 AM |

    Fascinating and funny. Thanks for the post. I'm glad I found your blog

    Jeff Brailey
    http://wordworks2001.blogspot.com

    Check my blog and find out why I refused to have a quintuple coronary artery bypass in the spring of 2004 and am alive to tell about it almost three years later.

  • Regina Wilshire

    12/20/2006 8:52:00 PM |

    Dr. William Roberts, editor of the American Journal of Cardiology and cardiovascular pathologist, is a perennial source of clever ideas on heart disease.


    He's also on the advisory board of the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) - an organization with a very clear agenda.

  • Anonymous

    12/21/2006 11:06:00 PM |

    (2) The intestinal tract of carnivores is short (about 3 times body length); that of herbivores, long (about 12 times body length). (Since I am 6 feet tall my intestinal tract should be about 60 feet long. As a consequence, if I eat bovine muscle [steak], it could take 5 days to course through those 20 yards.)

    I can't believe a physician thinks the human intestine is "about 60 feet long". At most, it's about 25 feet long.

  • Terri

    12/22/2006 3:00:00 PM |

    Provocative thoughts, yes....

    By way of full disclosure, the leadership and advisory board of the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) includes:

    PCRM Board of Directors: Neal D. Barnard, M.D., President; Roger Galvin, Esq., Secretary; Andrew Nicholson, M.D., Director.

    PCRM’s advisory board includes 11 health care professionals from a broad range of specialties:

    T. Colin Campbell, Ph.D. Cornell University
    Caldwell B. Esselstyn, Jr., M.D. The Cleveland Clinic
    Suzanne Havala Hobbs, Dr.PH., M.S., R.D. The Vegetarian Resource Group
    Henry J. Heimlich, M.D., Sc.D. The Heimlich Institute
    Lawrence Kushi, Sc.D. Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente
    Virginia Messina, M.P.H., R.D. Nutrition Matters, Inc.
    John McDougall, M.D. McDougall Program, St. Helena Hospital
    Milton Mills, M.D. Gilead Medical Group
    Myriam Parham, R.D., L.D., C.D.E. East Pasco Medical Center
    William Roberts, M.D. Baylor Cardiovascular Institute
    Andrew Weil, M.D. University of Arizona

    Clearly, as a comment mentioned, they have a viewpoint or agenda, however that doesn't mean they are wrong, anymore than carnivore-type programs may be right for everyone.

    In my opinion, there's plenty of room for 'novel' thoughts in the field of preventive cardiology and I appreciate Dr. Davis bringing them forward.

    And most clearly of all, there's plenty wrong with the conventional "standard American diet" no matter which end of the dietary spectrum one embraces.

    Whatever WORKS to help with plaque reversal!

  • petite américaine

    12/31/2006 3:08:00 AM |

    "However, modern livestock raising practices have substantially modified the composition of meats."

    Is patient education difficult on such subject matter?  Curious; had to ask.

  • Sue

    1/5/2007 1:38:00 AM |

    And how about the flesh of grass fed beef and wild game?  Is that good, better, more acceptable but still bad?  How about the folks who believe anthropologically we were meant to to eat a hunters and gatherers diet?

  • d.rosart

    11/15/2007 5:42:00 PM |

    Polar bears have the longest intestine of all the bears. I'm like a polar bear.

  • Anonymous

    6/22/2008 8:38:00 PM |

    Hi Dr. Davis,
    Your favorite internet TYP promoter checking in. : )  Thought to mention a possible opportunity - a friend of mine mentioned that he printed out and passed on a copy of your latest blog posting, the Big Squeeze, to his friend, Congressman Jim Marshall.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Marshall_%28U.S._politician%29
    Don't know if much will come of it, but being an opportunity thought to bring to your attention.  
    You might want to delete my mentioning of this.

  • Anonymous

    4/4/2009 5:53:00 AM |

    Just found your blog and am enjoying it.

    On this topic, I read such a comparison by a veterinarian who had cared for sheep, dogs and cows for 30 years.  Unfortunately I can't find it at the moment

    His take was the opposite.  

    Some things I remember were that humans, like carnivores, can swallow very large chunks of food that would kill a herbivore.

    Humans don't have 4 stomachs and don't chew cud.

    Human stereo vision is much more like all types of predators (eagles, cats, dogs, hawks, predatory fish) than almost any herbivore (eyes almost on the sides of the head)

    If you look at human hands, they look a lot like the Bonobo monkey's hands and NOT at all like a gorilla's hands.  Bonobos eat a lot of meat - insects, rodents, birds, and gorillas eat a lot of fruit and vegetables.

    That's basically what I remember.

    I'll post a link later to the fill thing if I can find it.

    Sam in Toronto

  • Anonymous

    4/5/2009 5:04:00 AM |

    Another thing I remember - the intestine length argument goes both ways - some carnivores do have long intestines.

    Something that does not go both ways - human intestines have the enzyme systems needed to degest lots of chemicals that ONLY exist in MEAT.

    As far as I know, you cannot get these from plants, or from only 1 or 2 plants in the world  

    Heme iron (not a big deal these days, but this was huge in the past, where every human, even kings, had dozens of blood-extracting parasites on the skin, in the hair and intestines)

    creatine (vegetarians can be synthesize this out of plant methionine)

    EPA/DHA (from fish oil - in ancient times, in meat - none in vegetables - there's no plant source for EPA, and only seaweed for DHA)

    B12

    also, as an efficiency measure over and above the efficiency of digesting individual amino acids, human digestion can grab large chunks of protein, many of which occur only in meat ( very, very large peptices -  but I forget what these are called - globulins or antigens)  

    Sam in Toronto (that's me, the author, not a chemical that humans can digest and that does not occur in vegetables)

  • Tuck

    7/2/2010 1:39:24 AM |

    Robert's comment is interesting, it's also grossly in error.  

    We're not rabbits or dogs, we're humans, and we're omnivores.

    The anthropological record is quite clear at this point.  We evolved large brains to hunt prey, and the fat of that prey allowed our brain to get larger, making us better hunters.  We sweat because we could outrun our herbivorous prey, using our naked skin as a superior cooing mechanism.  We have smaller teeth because we've been cooking our food for 1.5 million years, or so.

    We do seem to need some vegetable matter in our diets.  Even the Eskimos eat some.  But we do fine on a primarily animal diet.  A cow would not.

    It'd be nice if a physician was a little more familiar with the species he's treating.  A veterinarian couldn't get away with this degree of ignorance.

Loading