I've heard an awful lot about this movie from my friends, some of whom have acquiesced to the deceptive endorsement of a "whole foods" diet, so I reluctantly gave it a watch. Since this vegan propaganda isn't worth much of my time, I'm gonna keep this short. Here are four red flags that should have you discounting everything this movie endorses -- except, of course, the importance of whole foods.
Red Flag #1: Fear Factor
Among all the things that motivate people, fear is largely regarded as the most potent. Evolution explains this. The entire first act of this movie is a conflation of the fact that you are going to die. Soon. You will get heart disease. You will get cancer. And it's all because of your western diet: processed foods and industrialized meats.
Well, that's somewhat true. But they don't need to instill the fear of God in me before presenting the facts, because that's overtly manipulative. A logically sound presentation will suffice. So from the very outset of this movie, we are already immersed in a world of emotion and sensationalism, then dragged through image of heart surgery after image of fat-attaching-to-our-arteries (an idea from the Eighties, by the way). That's a red flag.
Red Flag #2: False Designation
I'd guess that they said the phrase "whole foods, plant-based diet" about 100 times throughout the mindless drivel and half-truths that were this film. But guess what? This vegan diet is not composed entirely of whole foods, because grains are not whole foods -- even 'whole grains' are still highly processed. Their processing is necessary to make them edible. So, they're lying.
Also, double lie, because this is not a plant-based diet. This is a plant-dominated diet, consisting of 100% plants. The USDA food pyramid is plant-based. Hell, almost every diet is plant based. McDonald's menu is plant-based. It's clear they're using false buzzwords to further deceive us. That's another red flag.
Red Flag #3: Campbell Got Fired From a Prestigious Institution
The movie quickly paints this red flag with a sense of controversy. The shady meat-loving Powers That Be must have had it out for Campbell because he had the courage to tell the truth. That, or not that, are two possibilities.
One thing I love about scientists: they are very careful about what they say. You'll often see an abstract where the data overwhelming concludes something, yet the scientist will still end up saying, "More research is needed in this area." It's nearly ubiquitous. I love that. It's humble and responsible.
Another thing. Scientists understand clearly that correlation is not causation. They understand that if you find a correlation, which is what Campbell did, you still need to take that idea to the lab to conduct real science: randomized controlled trials. Then, after you find something, and others confirm it, and a biological mechanism is revealed, then, and only then, can you start running around declaring that you have something to say.
Campbell went around saying that all animal foods cause all the degenerative diseases, based almost entirely on correlations he found with the worst kind of data: government data. A scientist would never say something like this because it drastically oversteps the bounds of their evidence. Anyone with any level of statistical knowledge would not say this. I wonder why he got fired.
If you'd like more detail about the half-truths, check this out.
