Page 26 - Spring2012

affects cancer growth. When the aflatoxin dose through the hearts of statisticians everywhere—
is sky high, animals eating a low-protein diet correlation doesn’t equal causation, these as-
don’t get cancer because their cells are too busy sociations in conjunction with Campbell’s other
dying en masse, while animals eating a higher- research are supposed to make a compelling case
protein diet are still consuming enough dietary for animal foods being legitimately harmful.
building blocks for the growth of cells—whether But were the results of the China Study
healthy or cancerous. When the aflatoxin dose really a sparkling endorsement for plant-based
is more moderate, animals eating a low-protein eating?
diet develop cancer while their higher-protein It seems this conclusion is based, in large
counterparts remain in mighty fine health. part, on unreliable blood variables rather than
In a nutshell, the animal protein fear-mon- actual foods. In his book, Campbell states that
gering in The China Study stems from wildly he and his research team “found that one of the
misconstrued science. What Campbell’s rat strongest predictors of Western diseases was
experiments really showed wasn’t that animal blood cholesterol,” and proceeds to treat cho-
17
protein is a vengeful macronutrient of doom, but lesterol as a proxy for animal food consumption.
the following: throughout this chapter, we learn that the China
Study data found associations between choles-
1. High-quality protein promotes cell growth terol and many cancers, as well as cholesterol
no matter where it comes from; and animal protein intake—implying that animal
2. Protein deficiency thwarts the liver’s ability protein and those same cancers must themselves
to detoxify dangerous substances; and be intimately linked.
3. With more realistic doses of aflatoxin, But because blood cholesterol can be af-
protein is actually tremendously protective fected by a number of non-dietary factors and
against cancer, while protein-restricted diets can even rise or fall as a result of disease, ex-
prove harmful. amining the relationship between food itself and
health outcomes is likely to be more informative
DID tHe Real CHIna StuDy than using cholesterol as an overworked, fickle
SHoW tHat anImal FooDS middleman. But the direct relationship between
aRe aSSoCIateD WItH DISeaSe? animal protein and diseases isn’t discussed in
The China Study only devotes one chapter The China Study for one monumental reason:
to its namesake study, but that doesn’t mean it’s that relationship doesn’t exist. an examination of
not a doozy. also known as the China-Cornell- the original China Study data shows virtually no
oxford Project, the China Study was an enor- statistically significant correlation between any
Likewise, for mous epidemiological endeavor exploring diet type of cancer and animal protein intake. only
18
heart disease and disease patterns in rural China—a project fish protein correlates positively, but probably

and stroke, coined “the Prix of epidemiology” by the New non-causally, with a small number of cancers:
York Times. Spanning sixty-five counties and nasopharyngeal cancer, a rare disease that only
plant protein collecting data on a whopping three hundred strikes one out of every seven million people;
has a positive sixty-seven variables, it generated over eight liver cancer, which shows up in fish-eating
correlation thousand statistically significant correlations regions because aflatoxin proliferates in humid
between nutrition, lifestyle factors and a variety areas near water; and leukemia, which is likely
while animal of diseases. linked to other elements of the industrialized
15
protein and although a project of such magnitude inevi- lifestyles associated with coastal regions (and
19
fish protein tably found some contradictory and non-causal thus fish consumption) in the China Study.
links, Campbell asserts in his book that the data
Ironically, when we look at plant protein—
have negative generally pointed in one direction: “People who which The China Study argues so vigorously is
or nearly ate the most animal-based foods got the most cancer-protective—we find almost three times as
neutral chronic disease,” and “People who ate the most many positive correlations with various cancers
plant-based foods were the healthiest and tended as we do with animal protein, including colon
correlations. to avoid chronic disease.” although—as echoes cancer, rectal cancer, and esophageal cancer.
20
16
26 Wise Traditions SPRING 2012 SPRING 2012 Wise Traditions

89494_text.indd 26 3/13/12 1:47 AM