Lots of dodgy pseudo-science but we do need more fruit & veg
581617
I very, very nearly asked for a refund but then thought it has encouraged me to stick fruit & veggies in the blender and that's gotta be good.

It's a very quick read - it only took me 2hrs to read it all. It consists of roughly one third text, two thirds recipes:

THE TEXT is a peculiar mix of scientific fact and appalling pseudo-science comments (without references) by the author (and the occasional plug for Vita-Mix blenders). Here are some examples:

"Young people today have jaws that are so narrow and short there is simply not enough space for all of their teeth" (Bizarre, could be true but no reference given)

"If we share 99.4% the same genes [as chimps] our diets should be 99.4% similar"
(Using that logic, we share 70% of our DNA with sea sponges so we should live underwater)

"I don't think it is possible to estimate the amount of green mass on the earth"
(Erm, yes it is. You can estimate anything.)

"Our bodies can assimilate several times more vital nutrients from blended greens than from chewed greens"
(No reference. But our bodies have evolved to process chewed food not liquidised food.)

"My observation is that in the West we are seeing smaller ear lobes with each generation"
(Bizarre, could be true but no reference given)

THE RECIPES were a bit of a disappointment for me, containing lots of ingredients I don't have (eg aloe vera, guava, puslane, goji berries, tangelo juice). But at the same time, the recipes do give some good ideas as to what kind of things to stick in your blender.

That said, I've made 3 smoothies in the past 24hrs, since reading the book. None of them followed a recipe but all were healthy and yummy. Which has got to be good.
3926069
So of course information like this has been discredited and hidden from the public arena. Didn't occur to me how much our diet has changed in the last 100-200 years let alone the last 10,000. For example, fruits were never readily available to europeans because they grew in warmer climates. And the fruit of today is not what it was when we discovered it, we have cultivated the sweetest varieties and under the precept that they are 'natural' advocated our unadjusted bodies would benefit from them. Of course fruit has many nutritional benefits, but consider the sugar load that our bodies have let to evolve to manage. I know only eat small amounts of low fructose fruits such as blueberries, raspberries, kiwifruit. You may think these expensive but its far cheaper compared with the amount of chocolate, sweets and cakes my body was addicted to eating! Join the sugar free revolution - actually will change your life! and remember do your own research, even trusted nutritional agencies have agendas - consumerism is a big money maker.
953701
This book looked like a normal diet book that would interest me, as I have long been on the low carb diet and believe that starch and sugar cause obesity and health problems such as diabetes and arthritis. I was intrigued by the idea that starch such as rice and potatoes could help with weight loss, and wondered how that would work. Man, was I surprised to hear this works if and only if you give up meat, fish, eggs, cheese, and milk (the staples of all low carb diets). So it's not the blueberries but the cream that causes weight gain; not the pancakes but the butter on them. The low carb diet says it is the excess of carbs that causes weight gain; this book says it is the fat and protein that cause weight gain.

I was pretty stunned when I came across such ideas as:
- all fish is toxic, including omega 3 fish oils in capsules; no one should ever eat fish again.
- man does not need any meat or dairy; and these both contribute to health problems.
- sugar does not make you gain weight and humans need some.

My son is a vegan and he is obese. The author gets into that danger in chapter 10, The Fat Vegan. He largely blames the fake meat soy products and vegetable oils, but it's pretty hard to get enough non animal protein without resorting to some tofu and soy. The author admits that there is no vitamin B12 in non animal food, and that is the one supplement he recommends. Would this be the case in nature if we were not meant to eat any animal protein?

This may indeed be a diet that is healthy, but to change over to these recommendations would be to eat the opposite of what I've been living on. I may just try it one day. It seems so drastic and I wonder if eliminating all animal products helps you lose weight simply because of the number of calories and the amount of fat. To me it does not make sense scientifically - I've experienced weight loss from a low carb diet and weight gain from adding carbs. But I've never tried a totally vegan diet.

He praises Dr. Swank's low fat diet, whereas my husband tried this when he was diagnosed with MS in 1975, and it did not help him and he was unable to continue very long on it. In the past few years I have been seeing more about the need for fat (now called "good fats") in the human diet; the low fat craze of the 60s and 70s is no longer in favour. The need for Omega 3 because we get too much Omega 6 was only discovered in the 1980s and now I thought it was universally accepted.

Anyway, to wrap this up, this is a startling book. It's worth reading, but it may be very difficult to actually follow the advice. I do want to try it though, to see if I could really lose weight eating mashed potatoes, beans and corn, as long as I don't eat meat, eggs or dairy. I just don't think I could stay on it for long, and I'd be worried about giving up all animal protein.
4121950
Bob Park has done a great service in this book about current superstitions in mentioning the "superstitious nonsense" known as vitalism, the foundation of many 'alternative medicines,' including naturopathy [which ludicrously claims such survives scientific scrutiny!].  Here's a sample, and I quote:

"at the beginning of the twentieth century, the existence of a 'vital life force' or 'divine spark' still seemed necessary to some scientists [...] this is the ancient concept of vitalism, which long ago lost any meaning in science. The chemistry and physics that animates matter has ceased to be a mystery.  Certainly since Watson and Crick resolved the mystery of DNA, there is no longer a need for a 'divine spark' [p. 081...and] Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection in particular gave rise to naturalism [...which] left no room for vitalism or other spiritual explanations. The germ theory of disease, emerging from the work of Pasteur and Koch after the death of Darwin, would prove to be the death of such superstitious nonsense as vitalism [p. 151]."

I recommend all of Dr. Park's books -- including this excellent one -- and his "What's New" weekly online UM column.

-r.c.
2247685
As a vegan, I've become painfully aware of the food system. Everything from it's production to it's marketing. My partner thinks I should become a nutritionist with all that I have come to learn about food. It doesn't matter how much you tell me the food system is backwards and that I am seduced by marketing. I already know. I felt too much time was wasted on what more and more people have learned about the food system since eating locally and being aware of food sources has become such a hot topic. For those that want to stop eating poorly, this is a good source of info, hence 3 stars. For those of us who already stopped eating processed junk and buying into fad diet foods this isn't a big help. People are astonished when they see what I eat "You eat such healthy food! I could never do it..." I love veggies and fruit and real food in it's real state... too much. Overeating usually isn't about good food versus "evil" food. Binge eaters aren't just binging because food tastes good or because the restaurants they go to serves huge portions of it. The problems are deeper and require more looking within, not just examining the external forces.
3033568
I caught Michael Gregor on a  talk show on the internet and was appalled by the misinformation he was spreading, aided by an ignorant host. But what both of them have in common is that they are  vegans.

And it is basically vegans who sing the praise of this totally misleading book. That is the same crowd that is equally uncritical of the China Study which is shown on the same page on this website. (Look for a truly informative critique on the discussion forum for this book further down in the listing)

Michael Greger claims that most of the research on Atkins is faulty and that most of Atkin's claims are unsubstantiated. That is an outright lie. On July 7, 2002 the New York Times published a major piece on the Atkins Diet in its Sunday Magazine, flatly stating that, grudgingly and reluctantly, a lot of reputable people in the field have come around to Atkin's point of view.

If you are interested, go to nytimes.com, seach for Atkins, then click on 'Magazine' and you will find 'What if It's all Been a Big Fat Lie?' written by Gary Taubs.

Another old trick of the anti low-crab crowd is that they continue to accuse any proponent of low carb diets of trashing fruits and vegetables in favor of cheeseburgers, steaks and animal fats.

Their M.O. is to attack  the Atkin's diet from 30 years ago and to ignore everything that all of us, including Atkins, have learned in the meantime.

Go to any bookstore and take a look at chapter 3 of ATKINS FOR LIFE. It is titled 'Yes, You can eat carbs', and it lists tons of fruits and vegeables that are recommended on his diet.

Also, we now have a much better understanding of a phenomenon called Syndrom X or Metabolic Syndrom,  a cluster of symptoms that is primarily associated with a diet high in refined carbohydrates  and hydroginated fats, which leads to  insulin resitence.

So now here is Greger bemoaning carbophobia at a time when diabetis assumes almost epidemic proportions in this country and obesity has been recognized as a major health threat. That is the result of a diet heavy in refined carbohydrates, not in protein.
3069924
This book is loaded with erroneous information despite the author's impressive resume and the many registered dieticians who the author claims were involved in the writing of this book, so if you are looking for a smoothies Bible you can trust, this isn't it.  I barely graduated high school, but was easily able to spot error after error that these highly educated contributors apparently missed.  Did I mention the editor ultimately responsible for this mess should be fired?  If I didn't, I should have.  I will give just a few examples of what I found.  Page 96, Strawberry Pistachio Cream Smoothie.  The author claims this particular smoothie contains only 9 grams of fat, but that is clearly impossible because the recipe calls for 1/4 cup pistachios (14 grams fat) and 1/2 avocado (10 grams fat) for a whopping total of 24 grams of fat and that doesn't even include the fat contained in the other ingredients.  Page 141, Romaine Around.  The author claims there are 210 grams of protein in this particular smoothie (is there such a thing as protein overload?) when in fact there are only 25 grams of protein.  Page 110, Detox Watermelon.  Oh boy, this looks interesting!  I wonder how many calories, fat grams and carbs are in this?  Well, keep wondering because the nutritional facts are nowhere to be found.  I could go on and on with example after example of the mistakes made in this book, but you get my drift.  For those of us who want to drop a few pounds or simply want to improve our health by being more aware of what we put in our bodies, there are plenty of smoothie books out there with information we can trust.  This isn't one of them.
79255
Better to trust a actual scientist or nutritionist when it comes to healthy and safe diet. GMO food is safe. Enough said.
1844222
The best thing about this book is that one comes away with an understanding of how funding or studies by organizations and corporations causes results to be skewed.  According to this book, and rightly so, agribusiness is distorting our view of what a healthy diet really is.  According to the author, we should all be eating whole foods, plant-based diets.
360184
This is an enormously important study. The conclusion that we must be eating a plant-based diet is irrefutable. For our own health, we need to eat more plants and a lot less protein.
495350
Although I certainly understand the enthusiasm that many reviewers have for the central thesis of this film, and I certainly believe that there is little good in a diet heavily focused on meat (particularly red meat), I want to caution people to think twice before buying into the notion that all you have to do is eat a whole foods vegan diet and your chance of getting cancer and other diseases will disappear. I  know someone who has eaten such a diet all of his adult life and still got prostate cancer.  He told me that the disease has run rampant through generations of men in his family and it was just a matter of time before it hit him.  That scenario is also true of me.  My father died of prostate cancer and so did his father.  It turns out mine was caught in time, but it seems those nasty cancer cells are trying to make a return engagement while all other aspects of my heath, including my weight, blood pressure, cholesterol level, etc. are in excellent shape!

I have another example of an alternative scenario.  I work for an organization that has pretty powerful board members.  One of those directors takes annual trips to Sweden with her husband.  Both are vegans and have been most of their adult lives (and they are both now in their early 70's).  While on one of their trips to Sweden, they got into a terrible car accident.  Their survival was very questionable.  But they both emerged from comas and were eventually in good enough condition to eat solid food.  When the Swedish doctors learned they were vegan, the couple was given a choice: eat the vegan diet and increase your chances of not surviving, or start eating meat and live because of the various animal derived protein benefits of building the body back up to good health.  I regret that I cannot be more specific about what those benefits were because the accident happened roughly 12 years ago and I simply can't remember.  In any event, the couple started eating meat and continued to do so for a number of years.  Some three or so years ago they returned to the vegan diet and appear to be doing well.

What am I trying to say through all of this?  Well, the first thing is I don't believe in miracles.  If all it takes to eliminate cancer in the world is a vegan diet then you can bet a huge percentage of the world's population would have embraced it.  But such a claim hasn't been proven and I think it's cruel to give hope to someone suffering from cancer, or likely to get it because of genetic family history, by saying all they need to do is eat plant-based whole food.  This may, in fact, be true of some people, but it certainly won't be true for all.  NOTHING is a magic bullet.

One last story: I know of a very tragic case of a German woman who had three daughters.  She watched two of her daughters die of breast cancer, both under forty-years-old and both in otherwise good heath, neither was the least overweight, both ate great diets, were extremely successful, and were married with families.  The third daughter pre-emptively had her breasts removed in order to avoid getting the disease.  I think she's still okay.  But in the meantime, her mother died of breast cancer as did her mother's sister.  It virtually decimated the women in her family.  I really whether all of them would have lived had they eaten a whole foods vegan diet.  If I recall correctly, at least one of the deceased was a vegetarian, but I don't know if she was vegan.

Please embrace this diet if you feel so inclined. It will more than likely do wonders for those suffering from obesity (as long as the focus on carbs is controlled), those with diabetes and a host of other conditions.  Hell, I may embrace it myself!  But be realistic as well.  There aren't too many miracles out there even though early morning Saturday infomercials want you to believe otherwise.
207780
He uses Kirlian images to demonstrate that raw foods have more energy, but there's no science to back up the validity of them, and some before-after pictures demonstrate that somtimes, in reality often, after following a raw food regimen people became terribly underweight, emaciated and this is not healthy and some of the herbs suggested in here can be more harmful than helpful.
600310
We've all been told to eat our veggies.  Now, author Victoria Boutenko points out that it may not be enough to simply eat from the broad range of items we term "vegetables"; rather, we should be eating more greens, specifically.  As she points out, the category we term vegetables includes fruits (ex: tomatoes, cucumbers), roots (carrots, beets and the like), flowers (ex: broccoli, cauliflower, artichokes) and greens (spinach, kale, parsley, etc.).

With several comprehensive tables offering nutritional comparisons of roots and greens, Boutenko illustrates the nutritional mother-lode offered by greens over the roots of the very same plant.  Additional tables in later chapters address the mineral and vitamin content and the essential amino acid content of greens; again, greens deliver the goods, nutritionally speaking.

Subsequent chapters continue to discuss the other benefits of a diet rich in greens as indicated by these chapter titles:
Fiber: The Magic Sponge
Greens for Homeostasis
The Significance of Stomach Acid
Greens Make the Body More Alkaline
The Healing Powers of Chlorophyll

In the chapter titled "The Roseburg Study", Boutenko summarizes the results of a study conducted in Roseburg, Oregon, in which they got 27 volunteers to drink a quart a day of freshly made green smoothies for the period of a month.  Roseburg doctor Paul Fieber, who participated in conducting the study, writes a several page summary of the study protocol and the results within that chapter.  Boutenko writes in that same chapter "as Dr. Fieber mentions, we were expecting some positive changes, but we didn't know they would be so significant in such a short period of time..."

Boutenko includes a chapter of testimonials, which gives an idea of the far-reaching improvements in health that this green smoothie regime can have (rosacea disappears, reduced or eliminated allergies, improvements in blood sugar control, reduced arthritis symptoms, more energy and healing eczema, as examples), as well as a chapter which includes the questionnaire responses from the Roseburg participants. The later I would have preferred to see simply summarized; the question by question responses were repetitive and didn't add as much to the book as a summarized overview would have.

The final chapter includes 45 recipes for green smoothies, starting with the sweeter, more palatable fruit-added blends, and progressing to more savory blends.  Those recipes I've tried so far have been wonderful...my husband will even drink them!

For anyone looking to improve their health via nutritional means, this book will be a great addition to their arsenal.
651888
I'm disappointed. At least I bought the book on sale for $1.99. To me it's not worth any more than that and here's why. For a book titled The Healthiest Diet on the Planet, it's irresponsible to recommend such a high percentage of foods that are both genetically modified and/or post harvest sprayed with round-up and not mention anything about purchasing organic. If the average person went out and switched to this diet it could wreck havoc on them with all the glyphosate they would be exposed to by eating such high quantities of these foods.

Additionally the author made reference to the Blue Zones all being starched base diets, while this is true they are also all vegetarian and not vegan. Some vegans do exist within these regions but that is not the norm. Also, olive oil is used liberally in Italy, eggs are eaten daily in Costa Rica, and all of them enjoy approximately 2 oz of nuts daily according to Dan Buettner. In Loma Linda, the vegans actually live a shorter life than the vegetarians from what I recall in earlier studies.

There's also no mention of proper preparation of these foods either. Beans and grains are high in phytic acid and nuts contain a fair amount as well. This is why traditional preparation for these foods are mandatory to prevent these foods from leaching minerals from your body to digest them rather than nourishing your body. All corn should undergo nixtamalization before consumption. That's how the Healthiest people on the planet (i.e. The Blue Zone residents) stay healthy to over 100. It's not by eating canned beans, frozen corn, and processed white flour.

There's no mention of loading up on non-starchy vegetables either which happen to have more phytonutrients and are powerhouse foods. In the slides he mentions to "eat some". No, eat tons of these! These non-starchy vegetables like broccoli, brussel sprouts, carrots, spinach, kale, cauliflower, artichoke, etc are perhaps the biggest part of the Healthiest Diet on the Planet. Just research any natural cancer fighting diet, it's LOADED with these non-starchy vegetables.

Because of the reasons listed above, the Healthiest Diet on the Planet misses the mark almost completely. I gave it 2 stars because at least it's promoting a plant based diet and that's something I do believe in. However, having a few high quality locally raised eggs each month will probably only benefit you, not harm you. If you're looking for a good book, save your money and don't buy this one.
920725
Ms. Reno offers some good advice in this little book. I like that she warns us to beware "the suits", ie. the ones who bring us chemical laden, highly processed "food" whose ingredients read like a science experiment. She points out that we probably wouldn't be allowed in the processed food factories with their barrels of chemicals. However, she encourages her readers to eat meat and, I'd like to point out, it's very unlikely we'd be allowed in slaughterhouses either.

In a previous book, Eat Clean Recharged, Ms. Reno is supportive of vegetarianism and veganism and offer a vegan version of her plan. But there is no evidence of this support in Just the Rules, where, flying the face of thousands of scientific studies, she encourages meat eating and even suggests we go to fish farms (so natural!) and bison ranches. I've yet to understand what is "clean" about eating decaying animal flesh, laden with saturated fat and cholesterol, no matter how it was raised or what it was fed.

On page 98, she promotes the long-ago disproved notion that we must eat whole grains together with something containing more protein, like beans, to obtain complete protein. It's been known for some time that the body easily takes what it needs from the blood stream to form the proteins we need, regardless of whether we eat grains and proteins together or not. Soy protein is a complete protein on its own, yet Reno says to limit it, but gives no reason. Again, an opinion based on outdated, disproved studies.

I do love that she promotes eating whole, unprocessed foods, weight lifting for women and awareness of how foods affect blood sugar. But, beware, because she encourages her readers to eat substantial amounts of animal products, she also encourages heart disease, cancer, diabetes and various auto-immune disorders. For a more enlightened and scientific perspective on diet, see the works of John McDougall,M.D., Joel Fuhrman, M.D. and Neal Barnard, M.D., all available here on Amazon. You might also want to see the DVD Forks Over Knives.
4378669
I absolutely love listening to Dr. Fred Feit, the NYU Cardiologist on Sirius XM's Doctor Radio.  He's a brilliant doctor, and he's also insightful, interesting, modest, and kind.  I recently caught the end of Dr. Feit's interview with Dr. Guarneri and thought her book sounded interesting.  While there are a few interesting nuggets in her book, most of it is overly simplistic and too much of her book is outright wrong, which is more than a little troubling given all of Dr. Guarneri's accolades.

Dr. Guarneri rails against a number of nutritional boogeymen and claims linkages between food and mental health that are largely unproven.  For example, Dr. Guarneri warns against consuming any GMOs, but she doesn't cite a single study that claims that GMOs are unhealthy.  Obviously, the reason Dr. Guarneri doesn't cite any studies in support of her claims against GMOs is because there aren't any such studies.  People have been eating GMOs for over 30+ years, and there's not a single peer reviewed study that have found them to be unhealthy.  In fact, just last year, the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine issued a report that reviewed hundreds of studies produced over the last few decades  and found no evidence that GMOs were less safe than non-GMO foods.  Scaring people about the non-existent health risks of GMOs is not something a doctor or scientist should be doing, but Dr. Guarneri apparently wants to lead the charge.

As one of her other pearls of wisdom, Dr. Guarneri also encourages her readers to buy "organic" foods.  Yet again, there's no scientific research that supports her claim that organic foods are healthier.  On the other hand, there are, in fact, studies that indicate just the opposite because organic foods contains higher levels of fecal contamination.  Organic farming has consistently proven to be much less efficient and require much more farm land, and scientific studies show that organically produced food may be more dangerous to consumers than conventional farming.  In 2016, researchers using the CDCs Foodborne Disease Outbreak Surveillance System identified 18 specific outbreaks that were caused by organic foods. These outbreaks were linked to 779 illnesses, 258 hospitalizations and 3 deaths.  That's not a great track record, and it's certainly no basis for Dr. Guarneri to recommend "organics" to her patients on the basis that organic foods are healthier.

In her book, Dr. Guarneri also warns about the dangers of lactose.  Again, she doesn't cite to any science to back up her fashionable claims.  As a matter of scientific fact, about 35% of the world's population can tolerate lactose into adulthood without a problem (mostly people with European and East African ancestors).  Certainly, if someone is lactose intolerant, then they should avoid milk.  However, if a person doesn't have that issue, then milk's really very nutritious.  Milk is filled with protein, carbohydrates, calcium, and it's a primary source of vitamin D for many people in the United States.  However, if you listen to Dr. Guarneri, milk is baaaaad!  That's terrible medical advice for a doctor to give most Americans.

I could go on, but the point is Dr. Guarneri is not careful when it comes to the advice she's dispensing.  While Dr. Guarneri provides other pearls of wisdom to "Awaken Your Healing Potential" that are based on actual scientific or medical research, the numerous examples that she refers to that are based on disputed fads or unproven opinions that happened to be in fashion were so distracting that I quite seriously thought this book deserved a retraction or at least some sort of editor's note that these are simply the opinions of Dr. Guarneri.  This isn't science or medicine, and, to be candid, I was disappointed that Dr. Feit was promoting it.
4260932
I haven't read the whole book yet, and I can see it contains a lot of valuable and useful information about soil management and improvement, but her comments about so-called "global warming" are nothing but new-age false religion nonsense! The planets in our solar system have also heated up slightly, and they have no factories nor internal combustion engines that I know of. The truth is the sun's heat output waxes and wanes, and this natural fluctuation directly affects the temperature of the planets which revolve around it, including the earth. See "Climate Change the Facts." Get real, people!