Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Medical Students - DO' started by GeauxDO, Apr 20, 2004.
Somebody asked me about this today. Does anybody know anything about it? Sounds like a crock.
I read up a bit on this and basically it sounds like a crock!! I am Type O, so I am supposed to eat a lot of red meat, exercise strenuously and avoid dairy products!! So I guess grains interfere with my hemoglobin make up or some sort or receptors not allowing the unloading of oxygen if I drink a class of milk with a side of cheese (I made that up, so dont think I am quoting a source )
Anyway, there will be a continuum of fad diets. I am actually on the Atkins diet; im not overweight but wanted to lose some lbs. Been on it fairly religiously for a month and have dropped 15 pounds. I have been doing more cardio and kept my weightlifting routine up. So it does work but I imagine if you would exercise and eat right, anything could be a miracle diet!!!!
I heard Asian food is good for type A.
I'm on a "see"-food diet. Since I'm type A, thank God for Super-Buffets!
Where did you read about a blood type diet?
I'm type B, what should I be eating? (probably not the cheeseburger and fries I had for lunch )
Those diets are very popular in Health Food Book Stores. It's just another way to try to stick to an eating regime that individuals don't have the self control to do on their own. It's good for novelty and for the occasional person that will actually eat better because of it.
I am sure someone out there may have a diff. exp., but it is rare. I have known several folks to try it out desperation, hoping to avoid cravings that accompany the typical diet. No statistics on that one.
The most balanced thing I ever read re. it was in the BODY ECOLOGY DIET book. I still don't agree, but she has other, really sound food advice that goes with it.
I acutally went to a naturopath who reccommended this diet but I must be honest I had a hard time sticking to it. Basically certain food actt as a poison in the body certain foods act as medicines and certain foods act as foods. I am type A so basically I was supposed to eat a vegetarian diet essentially. Also very little breads and fatty foods. Anyhow I tried it and I don't think I lost much weight ( I was doing it to control medical issues more that weight loss anyhow) but I did feel a bit better, though it would seem on a healthy diet you would feel better! Kind of an interesting concept if nothing else and it does make sense that certain foods interact with different blood types differently due to different proteins on the RBC's. IO still had a hard time understanding some of the reasons some foods were good and some were bad. for example grapefruit is good for my blood type but oranges are bad. anyhow thats my two cents
Blood cells are not directly responsible in the transportation or distribution of nutrients derived from food. This coupled with the fact that all foods more or less get broken down to the same basic units lead me to believe that there would be no difference in the interaction with RBC's for someone who started eating two different diets as long as the diets were both well rounded. Proteins on blood cells are used as a way for the body to recognize them as its own. If your going to postulate that this might effect the way you respond to a certain diet, then what about more important locations where proteins on your GIT, liver, blood vessels, can vary from person to person. Though these diets may be healthy, I believe, they provide no additional benefit/ when used by someone of any blood type.
I have heard of this diet before. One thing that I saw with it that was kind of interesting. It said that Type A people are more prone to being lactose intolerant because the sugar chains on Type B cells are so similar to the lactose sugar. It does make some sense when you think about it those type of correlations.
Not to burst your bubble, but that makes no sound biological sense. Lactose intolerance is determined by an absent or mutated enzyme found in the gut, not by glycoproteins found on RBCs. The only reason people are intolerant is because they can't absorb the lactose in the first place which leads to an osmotic pull in the gut and diarrhea. Once the lactose crosses the gut it wouldn't make one bit of difference what's on the RBCs one way or the other.
It makes me sick that people publish books with bogus info. How in the world is the general public supposed to tell the difference? Then they think their doctors are a__holes when they dismiss these things as rubish and they spend $10,000 on shark cartilage and coffee enemas to try and cure their stage IV cancer when they would have been money ahead and had a much higher chance of survival on standard chemotherapy. Of course the rest of them will do the chemo anyway and credit the shark cartilage for curing their tumor and insist that their oncologist is a money-grubbing charlatan who was out for their money and the quack naturopath that got their education out of a GNC pamphlet is really caring and not in it for the money at all.
Wow I think I went off the deep end.
Much better now.
OK. My mother in law was recommended this by a naturopath. And honestly, it was a healthier diet for her. It recommended a lot of salmon, fresh vegetables, some sorts of beans, etc. And while the base of the diet is ridiculous, if a person on it is eating a well balanced, nutritious diet, then it's probably benign.
I saw the thread about this diet so I thought I'd check it out.
Here is the website for the diet:
His first book was called Eat Right for Your Type and I believe it was a best seller. He has also published cookbooks and stuff like that now. I did this diet for awhile and it was helpful, but then again I found out I have a wheat allergy so the Type O, no grain thing worked well for me.
I never said that this was the sole reason for lactose intolerance. However it does make sense for it to be possible. If there is an immune response to the lactose sugar similar to those sugars found on the end of the glycoproteins on RBC's then you would end up with decreased or very little absorption of the substance and most likely damage to the gut itself followed by many of the symptoms you mention. As a matter of fact this is very similar to the pathophysiology of celiac disease (or at least the most believed theory). I do not personally believe this is a major cause as obviously what we know shows THE cause to be lack of the proper enzyme (or not enough of it ) in the gut. It is unlikely that this process is a major factor in lactose intolerance because although the sugars are similar they are far from identical, however, I was just saying that it does make one wonder about some of these ideas or theories. Although I do have to agree with you about people writing some of the ridiculous books they do and all the junk science the public gets on a daily basis. Actually there was a nice article about this in this months issue of popular science if you're interested.