Re: Doctors in favour? (edit3)
Well, I don't see any of Dr Fuhrman's patients looking like that at
http://www.drfuhrman.com
or Dr Alan Goldhamer's at the True North Health Centre.
I would say that's down to bad diet / health / illness, as opposed to a vegetarian diet.
In contrast you have the China Study (I know supporters of Weston Price fault it, and maybe there are some flaws, but that does not mean it's "wrong"). In addition you have John Robbins' research
http://healthyat100.com/display.asp?catid=2&pageid=26
John McDougall
http://www.vegsource.com/articles/McDougall_Arthritis.pdf
and loads of others including Dr Caldwell Esselstyn who all seem to agree that meat is bad for you, apart from perhaps in very small quantities.
I honestly have not come across one living doctor that can convince me there is a positive side to meat, let alone a broad consensus of opinion. All I can find positive for it is that it contains vitamin B12 and grass fed meat may be OK in small quantities. Yet plants can cure cancer, reverse diabetes and so on. I tried this search and nothing
http://www.google.com/search?q=health+benefits+of+meat+doctor
The only positives I can find are Weston Price (deceased) and his associates, and some
Conspiracy theory journalists.
This is from Wikipedia:
"The anti-vegetarian and anti-soy views of the foundation have also attracted counter-views by some in the vegetarian and vegan communities.[24][25] The vegetarian groups are scientifically supported by professionals including Dietitians of Canada and the American Dietetic Association (the world's largest group of dietitians, not to be confused with the uncertified status of nutritionists),[26] as well as the American Medical Association[27] and the American Heart Association[28] (and many other medical associations who take interest in the health of a specific human organ or system), as well as Dr. Benjamin Spock's best-selling paediatric book of all time, who all advocate that an appropriately planned vegetarian or vegan diet is healthy, for all stages of life."
(edit)
I did find one doctor in favour of meat. His name is Stephen Byrnes, he wrote a book on it
http://westonaprice.org/mythstruths/mtvegetarianism.html
He is the good looking young chap on the right
http://web.archive.org/web/20030402211911/www.powerhealth.net/nutrition.htm
- or rather was. Unfortunately he died at age 41, of a stroke. That was four years ago
http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=193463
To be fair to him though, it is said that he actually had AIDS and his stroke was a result of this. If the latter is true, it is ironic that he wrote a book believing that he knew how to cure AIDS
http://www.amazon.com/Overcoming-Natural-Medicine-Stephen-Byrnes/product-revi...
- but clearly he was wrong in that aspect of his research, so either way I can't really attach too much credence to his work.
(edit2)
I looked at the reviews that Stephen Byrnes gave to other Amazon books
http://www.amazon.com/gp/cdp/member-reviews/A1JGPMGA82RLXC/ref=cm_cr_pr_auth_...
and a clear pattern emerged. He gives glowing reports to pro meat books such as that written by Sally Fallon, head of Weston Price
http://www.amazon.com/gp/cdp/member-reviews/A1JGPMGA82RLXC?ie=UTF8&display=pu...
but terrible reviews on books written by people who I highly value, such as the one by John Robbins (who left Baskin Robbins Ice Cream on moral grounds), his book is lower down on that same page.
No decent researcher needs to trash other people's work, so this takes him down a few more points in my book. However it means he is now of some use to me. I will check out all the books for which his reviews got one star. I might find some good ones in there.
(edit3)
I checked out one of the references that Stephen Byrnes listed in his criticism of John Robbin's Book.
"The idea that eating meat or animal fats contributes or causes various cancers is a popular idea that is not supported by available evidence (The Lancet, 1999, 353:686-7)"
I found that article here
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(98)00377-8/ful...
A summary here
http://www.wddty.com/03363800369045128889/barbecued-meat-is-not-carcinogenic-...
says "In an accompanying comment, David Foreman from the University of Leeds points out that colorectal cancer seems to be linked to the consumption of red meat rather than chicken or fish, yet HCAs are just as likely to be formed in white meats that are grilled or fried."
In other words the author of the report is not saying there is no link, he is just saying that there is no evidence of any link in relation to HCAs that are produced when cooking meat. So for Stephen Byrnes to quote that reference as proving that "eating meat or animal fats contributes or causes various cancers is a popular idea that is not supported by available evidence" is very misleading. Later research can be found in this news item
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4662934.stm titled "Red meat cancer risk clue found" and the UKs own cancer research organisation (which the report author David Foreman probably does work for) suggests "Eating lots of red and processed meat can increase your risk of bowel cancer, and possibly stomach cancer. Red meat includes all fresh, minced and frozen beef, pork and lamb. Processed meat includes ham, bacon, salami and sausages. White meat, such as chicken, is unlikely to increase your risk of cancer." Source
http://info.cancerresearchuk.org/healthyliving/dietandhealthyeating/foodnutri...