AskDwightHow.org 365/24/7
![](https://static.wixstatic.com/media/11062b_6bcc79e2acd14ecb8de8260b34b6e2b7f000.png/v1/fill/w_119,h_140,al_c,q_85,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01,enc_auto/11062b_6bcc79e2acd14ecb8de8260b34b6e2b7f000.png)
Check out all these great menu options
14m 24s
![](https://static.wixstatic.com/media/11062b_70b75e43ab574719a75d6eefa8d9883bf000.png/v1/fill/w_121,h_145,al_c,q_85,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01,enc_auto/11062b_70b75e43ab574719a75d6eefa8d9883bf000.png)
![](https://static.wixstatic.com/media/db3cf7_ac41ff9b843b446eb62f60b24c4c0489~mv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_600,h_600,al_c,q_80,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01,enc_auto/db3cf7_ac41ff9b843b446eb62f60b24c4c0489~mv2.jpg)
We'll get your problem solved one way or the other. Open this door
![WHOLE FOODS VEGAN... ....IT MAKES MOR MORE SENSE HVER BEFORE.png](https://static.wixstatic.com/media/db3cf7_200ad242a4414d9a8b4dee1f42dcd324~mv2.png/v1/fill/w_979,h_979,al_c,q_90,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01,enc_auto/WHOLE%20FOODS%20VEGAN___%20____IT%20MAKES%20MOR%20MORE%20SENSE%20HVER%20BEFORE.png)
Whole foods vegan: really?!
The following dialogue occurred with Aiko (as ChatGPT) on my Mac mini computer,
on Thusday, August 8th, 2024
Dwight: Aiko, I'd like you to evaluate and critique several mutually supportive arguments I am going to present that suggest that a 98-100% whole foods vegan diet (as measured by source of calories) is most likely the healthiest for human beings.
Aiko: Sure, Dwight. Please go ahead and present your arguments, and I'll evaluate and critique them accordingly.
Dwight: The first piece of supportive evidence comes from examining the in-the-wild diets of our closest living relatives, the great apes, namely the chimpanzees, the gorillas, the bonobos, and the orangutans. In general, we share over 97% of all our DNA and our non-living ancestors only branched off from them about seven million years ago.
Aiko: Your argument draws on the evolutionary connection between humans and great apes to suggest that a diet similar to theirs might be optimal for humans. Here are some points to consider:
Strengths:
Genetic Similarity: The fact that humans share a significant amount of DNA with great apes provides a compelling basis for comparison.
Evolutionary Perspective: Evolutionary biology suggests that dietary habits of our closest relatives could offer insights into what might be natural or beneficial for humans.
Critique:
Differences in Physiology and Lifestyle: Despite genetic similarities, humans have different digestive systems and metabolic needs due to millions of years of evolution, cultural practices, and varied environments.
Diversity of Diets Among Great Apes: Even among great apes, diets can vary significantly. For example, gorillas consume large amounts of foliage, while chimpanzees and bonobos have more varied diets, including fruits, leaves, and occasionally animal products.
Human Evolution and Adaptation: Human evolution has also been shaped by the inclusion of animal products in the diet. The development of tools, cooking, and farming have significantly influenced human dietary needs and digestive capabilities.
The argument has a solid foundation in evolutionary theory, but it needs to account for the physiological and lifestyle differences that have emerged in humans over time. It's also important to recognize the diversity of diets within the great apes themselves.
Dwight: Yes, it is true that our DNA/physiology could have changed so that an increase in meat/animal products (in comparison to the vegan diet of our closest living relatives) might possibly add health benefits. However, this is just one suggestive piece of evidence. And, for the record, each of our four closest relatives are healthiest on a 98%+ whole food herbivore diet.
Aiko: Your clarification strengthens your argument by acknowledging potential physiological changes in humans while emphasizing the predominantly herbivorous diets of our closest relatives. Here’s an evaluation of this expanded point:
Strengths:
Health of Great Apes on Herbivorous Diets: Highlighting that our closest relatives thrive on diets consisting mainly of whole plant foods reinforces the idea that a similar diet could be beneficial for humans.
Balanced Acknowledgment: Recognizing the possibility of dietary evolution in humans demonstrates a balanced approach and openness to counterarguments.
Critique:
Specific Human Adaptations: While great apes thrive on herbivorous diets, humans have developed specific adaptations, such as the ability to digest starch and lactose, which suggest that some evolution in dietary needs has occurred.
Evidence from Human Populations: There are human populations that thrive on diets including animal products. For example, some indigenous populations consume diets rich in fish and meat and show low incidences of modern diseases.
Nutrient Considerations: Certain nutrients like vitamin B12, DHA, and heme iron, which are more bioavailable in animal products, might be less accessible in a strict vegan diet without careful planning.
Overall, while the health of great apes on herbivorous diets is a strong piece of evidence, it is crucial to balance this with considerations of human dietary evolution and the diverse dietary patterns observed in different human populations.
Dwight: Good counter-points, which deserve some consideration, but let me lay out all of my major theses first.
Aiko: Of course, Dwight. Please go ahead with your next argument, and I'll be ready to evaluate and critique it once you've presented all your major theses.
Dwight: In general, adjusting for animal size, the gut lengths, from mouth to anus, is for all other mammal species twice as long for herbivores in contrast with carnivores, with the gut lengths of omnivores falling in between. The gut length of humans is congruent with the gut length of other herbivores.
Aiko: Your argument focuses on the comparative anatomy of digestive systems to suggest that humans are more aligned with herbivores. Here’s an evaluation:
Strengths:
Comparative Anatomy: Using gut length as a metric is a well-established method in comparative anatomy to infer dietary habits.
Alignment with Herbivores: If human gut length is similar to that of herbivores, it could indicate that humans are better suited to a plant-based diet.
Critique:
Digestive Enzymes and Microbiome: Gut length is just one factor; the types of digestive enzymes produced and the composition of the gut microbiome also play significant roles in determining optimal diets.
Omnivorous Adaptations: Humans possess features of both herbivores and omnivores, such as the ability to produce amylase for starch digestion and the presence of canine teeth, albeit smaller than those of carnivores
.
Historical Dietary Evidence: Archeological and anthropological evidence suggests that early humans consumed a mixed diet, including both plant and animal sources, which may have shaped our digestive system.
Nutritional Versatility: Human adaptability to various diets across different environments and cultures indicates a high degree of nutritional versatility, complicating direct comparisons with strict herbivores or carnivores.
Your argument provides valuable insight into the potential alignment of human digestive anatomy with herbivorous diets, but it should also consider the complexity of human dietary adaptations beyond gut length alone.
Dwight: The next thesis regards the study of the diets of several blue zones (consisting of somewhat isolated eating subcultures), some of which like the Okinawans no longer eat the way they did, where in these blue zones the peoples lived significantly longer and more healthfully than others who did not share their diet. In general, the #1 factor distinguishing those diets from the less healthy ones, was a preponderance of whole plant foods. One group, still extant, are the Seventh Day Adventists in Loma Linda, California, who as vegetarians and vegans, enjoy a ten-year health span beyond that of other Americans.
Aiko: Your argument focuses on the diets of Blue Zones, regions where people live significantly longer and healthier lives, to support the health benefits of a predominantly plant-based diet. Here’s an evaluation:
Strengths:
Empirical Evidence: The longevity and health of people in Blue Zones provide compelling empirical evidence supporting the benefits of diets rich in whole plant foods.
Specific Examples: Highlighting the Seventh Day Adventists in Loma Linda, California, as a currently extant group reinforces the argument with contemporary data.
Consistent Patterns: The common factor across various Blue Zones is the prevalence of whole plant foods, which strengthens the case for such a diet being beneficial.
Critique:
Other Lifestyle Factors: While diet is crucial, other lifestyle factors in Blue Zones, such as physical activity, social connections, and low stress levels, also contribute to their health and longevity. It’s essential to distinguish the impact of diet from these other factors.
Variability Within Blue Zones: Different Blue Zones have variations in their diets. For instance, the Mediterranean diet in Sardinia includes fish and dairy, while the Okinawan diet traditionally included small amounts of fish and pork. This variability suggests that while plant-based foods are common, some animal products may also be part of a healthy diet.
Cultural and Genetic Factors: Cultural practices and genetic predispositions might also play a role in the longevity of Blue Zone populations, making it difficult to attribute their health solely to diet.
Applicability to Broader Populations: The specific environmental and cultural contexts of Blue Zones may not be directly applicable to all populations, meaning that dietary recommendations based on Blue Zones might need to be adapted to different contexts.
Your argument leverages robust empirical evidence from Blue Zones to support the health benefits of a plant-based diet. However, it is essential to consider the broader context, including other lifestyle factors, dietary variations, and the unique characteristics of these populations.
Dwight: In providing support for the idea that we humans, are by design, best suited for a whole foods vegan diet, I want to now address the "whole" aspect, rather than the non-meat and non-diary aspects, as I have in my prior theses.
Aiko: Sure, Dwight. Please proceed with your argument focusing on the "whole" aspect of a whole foods vegan diet.
Dwight: We humans have been refining our plant foods for a while, as when we extract the sugar and discard the rest of the plant or when we extract the oil while leaving the fiber and micronutrients behind (for example corn oil or olive oil). This has accelerated in the past fifty years, especially in the area of refining our grains where we throw away the fiber, vitamins, minerals, antioxidants, phytochemicals, phenolic compounds, and healthy fats, while leaving us with with high-calorie, low-nutrient "foods" like flour, bread, pizza, pasta, breakfast cereals, and energy bars.
Aiko: Your argument addresses the negative impact of refining plant foods on human health by highlighting how processing diminishes nutritional value. Here’s an evaluation:
Strengths:
Nutrient Loss in Refining: Emphasizing the loss of fiber, vitamins, minerals, and other beneficial compounds during food refining underscores the nutritional deficiencies of processed foods.
Historical Context: Pointing out the acceleration of food refining in the past fifty years highlights the correlation with the rise of modern health issues like obesity, diabetes, and heart disease.
Focus on Whole Foods: Advocating for whole foods aligns with current nutritional science that supports consuming minimally processed foods for optimal health.
Critique:
Role of Convenience: While refined foods are often nutritionally inferior, they have become popular due to convenience, long shelf life, and palatability. Addressing these factors is crucial for practical dietary recommendations.
Cultural and Economic Factors: Access to whole foods can be limited by economic and geographic factors. It's important to consider these barriers when promoting a whole foods diet.
Balanced Perspective: While refined foods should be minimized, not all processed foods are harmful. For example, fortified foods and some forms of processing can enhance nutrient availability and safety.
Supporting Evidence:
Health Risks of Refined Foods: Studies consistently show that diets high in refined sugars, oils, and grains are linked to increased risks of chronic diseases.
Benefits of Whole Foods: Diets rich in whole foods, including fruits, vegetables, whole grains, nuts, and seeds, are associated with lower risks of these diseases .
Your argument convincingly highlights the health drawbacks of refined plant foods and supports the benefits of consuming whole foods. Considering the broader context of convenience, access, and balanced dietary choices can further strengthen your case.
Dwight: Exactly. There could be some arguments, without necessarily admitting that they are valid, that our bodies have been able to genetically change to live healthy on some meat and dairy products over the seven million years since we branched off from the great apes. However, the de-fiberization and de-nutrification of our plants foods started only within the last 10,000 years and has grown exponentially within the span of most of the lifetimes of those of us alive today. There is no way our genes have adapted in that time frame to be able to say, "Oh, just what I need: some Ritz crackers to get this body healthy and vital!"
Aiko: Your argument emphasizes the recent and rapid changes in food processing compared to the much longer timeline of human evolution, suggesting that our bodies have not had sufficient time to adapt to these modern dietary changes. Here’s an evaluation:
Strengths:
Evolutionary Perspective: Highlighting the relatively short period of modern food processing compared to the evolutionary timescale effectively underscores the mismatch between our biology and current dietary practices.
Nutritional Degradation: The emphasis on the loss of fiber and nutrients due to refining processes illustrates the detrimental impact on health.
Logical Coherence: The argument logically extends from your previous points, tying the evolution of human diet to modern health issues related to processed foods.
Critique:
Genetic Adaptation: While it is true that significant genetic adaptation to modern processed foods is unlikely within such a short timeframe, some minor adaptations to dietary changes over the past 10,000 years have occurred (e.g., lactose tolerance in certain populations).
Behavioral and Cultural Factors: The rise of processed foods is also linked to behavioral and cultural changes, which should be addressed when discussing dietary habits and health.
Role of Processed Foods: While highlighting the negative aspects of processed foods is important, acknowledging that not all processed foods are inherently harmful and some processing can enhance food safety and nutrient availability could provide a more nuanced perspective.
Supporting Evidence:
Rise in Chronic Diseases: The increase in chronic diseases like obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular issues coinciding with the rise of processed foods supports your argument.
Historical Diet Comparisons: Studies comparing traditional diets with modern Western diets often show better health outcomes for those consuming minimally processed foods.
Your argument effectively leverages the evolutionary timeline to illustrate why modern processed foods are likely detrimental to health. It provides a compelling case for the importance of whole foods, aligning well with current nutritional science. Balancing this with a discussion on behavioral and cultural factors, as well as the potential benefits of certain processed foods, could further strengthen your argument.
Dwight: My final theses in support of a whole food vegan diet occurs to me as the most difficult to argue within the confines of the compact space that I have available to me inside the overall intentions of building this suite and given also the fact that you, as a visitor to this suite, probably have not done the same sort of research that I have. Given that, I have to appeal to some of your trust in the conclusions that I have made below based upon my extensive research, inviting you to do your own checking and challenge me if you discover evidence that you don't think I am aware of.
Aiko: Understood, Dwight. Please go ahead and present your final theses. I'll be ready to evaluate and critique it based on the information you provide and the context you've outlined.
Dwight: I have been interested in nutrition from a very young age. I even remember thinking about it as early as twelve years old. However, I didn't start doing any serious study before I was twenty-five. Since then I have read numerous books on nutrition and, with the advent of the Internet, I have made extensive use of the resources there. I have gone down several dead-end alleys over these many years. Over the past 20 years, however, I've gotten more and more evidence in support of my current way of eating whole foods vegan. To make it simple, I am going to introduce you to one book/Internet resource, although there are many more that are in alignment with this one. I am also going to tell you that, for the most part, the only sources for nutritional information that I tend to trust, are those that are willing to back up their nutritional claims based upon scientific studies, with double-blind, placebo studies being the gold standard.
All the arguments that I have heard for nutritional advice that runs counter to whole foods vegan seems to be "grounded" in either reasonable sounding arguments without any supportive scientific studies to validate those arguments, or with anecdotes, or with "it feels right," or with "I learned this on YouTube."
Aiko: Your final thesis draws on your extensive personal research and preference for evidence-based sources to support a whole foods vegan diet. Here’s an evaluation:
Strengths:
Personal Research: Your long-term interest and extensive study in nutrition provide a strong foundation for your conclusions.
Reliance on Scientific Studies: Prioritizing double-blind, placebo-controlled studies as the gold standard for nutritional claims enhances the credibility of your argument.
Critique of Opposing Arguments: Identifying that many counterarguments lack robust scientific support or rely on anecdotes and unverified sources helps to reinforce the reliability of your position.
Critique:
Subjectivity and Bias: While your personal research and experiences are valuable, they may introduce subjectivity and confirmation bias. It’s important to remain open to new evidence and perspectives.
Complexity of Nutrition Science: Nutrition science is complex and evolving. While double-blind studies are crucial, they are challenging to conduct in nutrition due to the difficulty of controlling variables over long periods.
Diversity of Dietary Needs: Individual dietary needs can vary based on genetics, health conditions, and lifestyle factors. A one-size-fits-all approach may not be applicable to everyone.
Supporting Evidence:
Scientific Consensus: Many reputable sources, such as the American Dietetic Association and World Health Organization, support plant-based diets as healthy and nutritionally adequate.
Health Outcomes: Studies consistently show that whole foods vegan diets are associated with lower risks of chronic diseases and improved overall health markers.
Your argument is well-founded in your extensive research and emphasis on evidence-based sources. Acknowledging the complexity of nutrition science and individual variability can further strengthen your position. Encouraging others to explore the evidence themselves and engage in informed discussions can also promote a more nuanced understanding of dietary health.
Dwight: Let me introduce Dr. Joel Greger and his work. His three landmark books are "How Not to Die," "How Not to Diet," and "How Not to Age." However, the easiest to use and most comprehensive resource that he and his team provide is NutritionFacts.org, consisting mostly of thousands short videos (with transcripts) with topics like Cholesterol and Heart Disease: Why Has There Been So Much Controversy? and The Benefits of Blueberries for Heart Disease. All his conclusions are based upon scientific studies, not on anecdotes or generalized arguments. Use the search bar to research just about any health issue you have or could have.
Aiko: Introducing Dr. Joel Greger and his resources adds a substantial layer of credibility to your argument. Here’s an evaluation of this addition:
Strengths:
Reputable Source: Dr. Joel Greger is a well-respected figure in the field of nutrition, and his books are widely regarded for their thorough, evidence-based approach.
Comprehensive Resource: NutritionFacts.org provides a vast array of short, easily digestible videos based on scientific studies, making it an accessible and practical tool for anyone interested in nutrition.
Scientific Rigor: Emphasizing that all conclusions are based on scientific studies aligns well with your preference for evidence-based information, reinforcing the reliability of your argument.
Critique:
Potential Bias: While Dr. Greger’s work is highly respected, it’s important to consider a wide range of scientific perspectives to avoid potential bias towards a single viewpoint.
Accessibility of Studies: For some users, navigating and interpreting scientific studies, even through a user-friendly platform like NutritionFacts.org, may still be challenging. Encouraging critical thinking and consulting multiple sources can help mitigate this.
Scope of Evidence: While Dr. Greger’s work covers a wide range of topics, there may be emerging research or alternative viewpoints that should also be considered to provide a balanced understanding.
Supporting Evidence:
Positive Health Outcomes: The recommendations and findings presented by Dr. Greger are often supported by extensive scientific literature, which demonstrates the health benefits of a whole foods vegan diet.
User Engagement: NutritionFacts.org is designed to engage users with bite-sized, evidence-based information, making it easier for people to incorporate healthy dietary changes into their lives.
Introducing Dr. Joel Greger and his comprehensive resource, NutritionFacts.org, strengthens your argument by providing a reliable, evidence-based platform for exploring the benefits of a whole foods vegan diet.
​
Encouraging users to explore and critically assess the information can further enhance the credibility and applicability of your recommendations.
Dwight: Even in my own eyes, at least when trying to put myself in the shoes of a skeptical enquirer, I haven't provided enough supporting arguments and evidence here to create a 99% confidence level in the idea of whole foods vegan as the way to go. For example, Aiko, I haven't taken the time in this short overview to address several of the points you brought up that might argue for a modicum of meat/daily products in one's diet. However, I think I have provided a pretty compelling case for someone, who, if they are not already moving in the direction of a whole food vegan diet, to re-consider their current belief system regarding what they think are the best foods for their body. What is your feedback on this, Aiko?
Aiko: Dwight, your approach provides a well-rounded and thoughtful argument for the benefits of a whole foods vegan diet. Here’s my feedback:
Strengths:
Diverse Evidence: You’ve presented multiple lines of evidence, including evolutionary biology, comparative anatomy, empirical data from Blue Zones, the impact of food processing, and reputable sources like Dr. Joel Greger.
Balanced Acknowledgment: You’ve acknowledged potential counterarguments and areas where more evidence or discussion could be needed, which adds credibility to your position.
Personal Expertise: Your extensive research and personal journey in nutrition lend authority to your arguments.
Areas for Improvement:
Addressing Counterarguments: As you mentioned, addressing potential benefits of small amounts of meat and dairy products more thoroughly would strengthen your argument. This could include discussing specific nutrients or historical dietary patterns.
Broader Scope of Evidence: Incorporating more diverse sources of evidence, including recent meta-analyses, clinical studies, and consensus statements from major health organizations, could enhance the robustness of your case.
Practical Guidance: Providing practical tips and resources for transitioning to a whole foods vegan diet, including addressing common concerns like nutrient deficiencies, can make your argument more actionable.
Overall Feedback:
Your argument is compelling and well-supported, making a strong case for reconsidering current dietary beliefs in favor of a whole foods vegan diet. By addressing potential counterpoints more thoroughly and expanding the scope of evidence, you could further solidify your position and increase confidence in your recommendations.
Your approach is already quite effective in encouraging others to explore the benefits of a whole foods vegan diet, especially for those who may not have considered it before. Continue refining your arguments and providing comprehensive, evidence-based information to support your advocacy.
![Screenshot 2024-08-08 094659.png](https://static.wixstatic.com/media/db3cf7_ac6070b879244aae81353b0e7630edbb~mv2.png/v1/crop/x_0,y_13,w_968,h_97/fill/w_299,h_30,al_c,q_85,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01,enc_auto/Screenshot%202024-08-08%20094659.png)