Ok so here are all the major China Study critiques on the web I'm aware of, see below.
We need some volunteers to do concise summaries of the argument and content of these critiques.
We're looking for commonalities in subject matter (there are plenty as you'll see) so we can address them all (along with Denise's) in one comprehensive rebuttal.
Let me know if you find any others. Thanks folks.**Format for summaries:
Title of critique:
(summary should be done on a point-by-point basis for easy reference)Chris Masterjohn
"The Truth about the China Study" (2005) http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com/China-Study.html
"Response to T. Colin Campbell" (2007)
"Denise Minger Refutes the China Study Once and For All" (2010)http://www.westonaprice.org/blogs/denise-minger-refutes-the-china-s...
(Masterjohn's fawning review of Denise's latest critique)Anthony Colpo
(originally posted under pseudonym 'JayY')
"The China Study: More Vegan Nonsense!" (2006)http://www.anthonycolpo.com/the_china_study.htmlDr. Mercola
"Why the China Study is Flawed"http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2006/02/23/why-t...
(annoyingly you have to subscribe to his mailing list to read the article)
Thought I'd list these here too, I'll start with the ones I'm aware of:
-Idea that saturated fat/animal fat doesn't cause heart disease at all (skepticism of 'lipid hypothesis'), rather it's refined grains and sugars (compare to Denise's assertion based on the China Project data that wheat is more pathogenic/carcinogenic than meat). Also that high cholesterol is good and dietary cholesterol is a nutrient.
-"healthy animal protein" to counter Campbell's assertion that all animal protein is carcinogenic, whey protein isolate is the sole example.
-cultures that eat tons of animal products are healthy/disease free/long lived (e.g. Masai, inuit, Tuoli, etc.)
-vegan diets are inherently unsustainable and/or unhealthy
-raw/free-range/grass-fed animal products do not pose the same health problems as cooked/pasteurized/grain-fed/factory farmed varieties