i have met people that tried the BTD and did great but they always say it lacks scientific evidence? im like didn't u read the book? isn't ur experience proof enough? what do u guys think?!

It's just lacking the millions of dollars studies that are usually funded by Big Pharma ...

They are parroting what the mainstream media say.  Brainwashing can have a power effect ...

They are asking you to help them find their way through the contradiction.  Hopefully, they want replies to the sceptical voices.

What the media heads are really saying is "I want you to believe that the BTD lacks scientific evidence."  What are the reasons behind this?

  1)  My salary/profit/grant depends upon an understanding about diet, which is threatened by the existence of the BTD.  

When the truth does not help you, a competitive putdown is the way to spin it.

  2)  I don't like the idea of having to change my eating habits but my health is not its best.  My current level of happiness is threatened by the existence of the BTD.

Cynicism is a comfortable way to defend yourself against any new truth that might betray your ignorance.

  3)  Food only feeds you; medicine is what makes you better.

Ignorance can be as pure as the wind-driven snow.

There are many reasons to fear the BTD; we reflexively preserve what has "worked" in the past.  The BTD challenges our notions of food, genetics, personality, pathology, life span, and health.

You will never know why any particular person resists until after they stop doing so.

A little too late to be of use in persuading the person.  

Quoted from paul clucas

They are parroting what the mainstream media say.  Brainwashing can have a power effect ...

They are asking you to help them find their way through the contradiction.  Hopefully, they want replies to the sceptical voices.

What the media heads are really saying is "I want you to believe that the BTD lacks scientific evidence."  What are the reasons behind this?

  1)  My salary/profit/grant depends upon an understanding about diet, which is threatened by the existence of the BTD.  

When the truth does not help you, a competitive putdown is the way to spin it.

  2)  I don't like the idea of having to change my eating habits but my health is not its best.  My current level of happiness is threatened by the existence of the BTD.

Cynicism is a comfortable way to defend yourself against any new truth that might betray your ignorance.

  3)  Food only feeds you; medicine is what makes you better.

Ignorance can be as pure as the wind-driven snow.

There are many reasons to fear the BTD; we reflexively preserve what has "worked" in the past.  The BTD challenges our notions of food, genetics, personality, pathology, life span, and health.

You will never know why any particular person resists until after they stop doing so.

A little too late to be of use in persuading the person.  

have you ever suspected that so called *scientifique ways of allopathic treatments * might be missleaded   

Evidence based medicine... yup... here BTD/GTD is at home ..but now tell me all about Your belief system...

If you just read the first book, you can come to the conclusion that there isn't a lot of scientific evidence for BTD. But once you take a look at Dr D's blogs, the information on this website, all the rest of the books he's written, the textbook he just published, the paramaters for the SWAMI software....

Anybody who claims "there's no scientific evidence" for this work hasn't done their research!

Paul....great response!  

Ruthie, you too!

Ditto with Ruthiegirl ! Bravo !

Paul, are you implying that there are studies involving actual people who either followed the BTD or were in a control group?

I am familiar with studies that describe how the antigens in the various blood types react with certain foods.  But that doesn't qualify as a study of the BTD itself.

If there are studies for Dean Ornish, Atkins, Mediterranean, Jenny Craig, Nutrasweet, Weight Watchers, etc. then why not BTD?  I would think that a few grad students at UB could conduct one for a thesis project.

Oh please, scientific evidence my a**. Anyone who would like to loose weight starts eating whatever c**p the mainstream reccomends at the moment. "My friend lost a ton of weight doing the 90 day diet I should do that too." Same goes for Atkins, The raw food diet and the pills that reduce the absorbtion of fat, and the ones that reduce the absorbtion of carbs and many many more.
People are lazy and unwilling to do alot of changes to theyr eating habits so they'll grab the first thing that is promising to make them loose weight by doing as little changes to theyr diet as possible.
If you look at the BTD or GTD the first thing that strikes you is the list of avoids and usualy the avoids are your favorite foods. So now you just need an wxcuse to not follow this diet that doesn't let you eat what you want. So you read it lacks scientific evidence and that's enough for you to trash it.  
If a diet suits theyr eating habits they'll try it no questions asked. For instance the 90 day diet is so wildly popular and alot of my friends went on it an realy lost the weight and were all excited about it and noone even thought of asking if it was scientifically proven to work. It alows you one day a week in which you can stuff yourself with cake and one day of carbs, one day of meat and so on. You don't have to give up anything. Sure you loose the weight, all my friends did, but in the end when they stopped the diet they all gained all theyr weight back and then some.
People ado not like to be told that they have to change theyr lifestile and eating habbits completely and forever if they want to loose weight, keep it off and stay healthy. That is the main thing. Once you realize that this is the only way you can do it then you are automaticaly driven to the BTD or GTD because it makes so much sense and after you try and see the results you are hooked and that's the only proof I need.  

My body is my own doble blind study, my scientific proof, and my test case.. end of discussion..

and when I don't Eat Right then it's my own demise too..

no one else is as good as all that..

tell me the parameters for becoming *scientifique* ....
as we once mentioned: first they claim us...second:they beat us and deny...third: they relate to us and accept as it was normal their whole life long  

as usual...another *belief system*...

They should be paid or compelled to try Dr D's diets and protocols and they'd learn a lot and have the evidences !!

Most people want EASY and FAST.  Whatever promises that wins, everything else is too much work or ??? - whatever excuse they can find...

Quoted from SquarePeg

Paul, are you implying that there are studies involving actual people who either followed the BTD or were in a control group?

No there are no direct formal, peer reviewed studies.  I wish there were!

Quoted from SquarePeg

I am familiar with studies that describe how the antigens in the various blood types react with certain foods.  But that doesn't qualify as a study of the BTD itself.

The XYZ study looked at women in their thirties wanting to loose at least 30 pounds of weight.  The study divided the women into three groups and tried three basic dietary strategies; low fat, low carb, and mixed.  Each woman was found to do best in one of these attempts to loose weight and the tentative conclusion was that genetics were responsible for selecting the most successful weight loss strategy.  Although this does not prove specific food-blood type reactions it does mimic the essential difference between O, A, and B diets.  

IAP is the necessary digestive agent to break meat down for proper digestion.  The levels of IAP range from low in blood type A to medium in blood type B, and high in blood type O.   IAP is one reason why meat consumption should vary with blood type.  This science is not controversial.

If you put the XYZ study, the role of IAP , and provable blood type specificity together this constitutes a substantial defence against the "no scientific evidence" attitude.  I would take these evidences as well as individual experiences and take my stand in a debate.

Quoted from SquarePeg

If there are studies for Dean Ornish, Atkins, Mediterranean, Jenny Craig, Nutrasweet, Weight Watchers, etc. then why not BTD?  I would think that a few grad students at UB could conduct one for a thesis project.

If I had a million dollars (thank you BNL) .....

Quoted from ABJoe

Most people want EASY and FAST.

Sin in haste, repent at leisure.

Will 50 years of poor eating is expiated by only 5 months of good eating?  No.  I don't believe even Dr. D' Adamo can make that possible.

Diets that promise instant success have a rapid turnover in clientele.  People come back to BTD/GTD after years of being away.  You may reluctantly come back to an unpleasant truth, but not to an unpleasant lie.  The extra-ordinary number of people who have bought Dr. D' Adamo's books and have not passed them on to second-hand/thrift retailers is also a unique distinction.

If the diets were not extra-ordinarily good, what can explain these phenomena?

Plenty of Scientific Evidence in the Generative medicine textbook.

Also in the Individualist wiki:

http://www.drpeterjdadamo.com/wiki/wiki.pl/Welcome

And in these articles:

http://www.dadamo.com/science.htm

I got your scientific proof.  I had three bites of a burger last night.  I was unprepared for a beach BBQ.  I said to myself that I was going to pay.  Sure enough 4 hours later my belly blew up like a ballon and this morning,  you know the term nothing but net, well I had nothing but liquid, if you know what I mean.   Not cheating ever again.

Some people enjoy being ignorant, it does something for them.  People of all blood types will insist  they can eat avoids, that these foods aren't causing them a problem.  I've argued with Os on other boards & my own O sister----wheat & dairy cause weight gain, joint pain & fatigue for Os period but many deny this.  Life is short, I personally don't have time for a scientific study on wheat & dairy.  The blood type diet is for those who have suffered enough already.  

ya know all about agreements ... .........

Most people couldn't understand the scientific evidence if you gave it to them.  It takes a certain amount of study/education to "get it".

Scientific evidence isn't what convinced me.  It was, "What's the worst that can happen?" and the answer is "Nothing", so I tried it and it has paid off.  I've been educating myself since starting, and now I can read the scientific evidence and get a little something out of it, but I have enough evidence in my own experience.

Lack of evidence is not evidence of lack.

Quoted from Dr. D

Lack if evidence is not evidence of lack.

true that

sometimes lack of evidence is just lack of wanting evidence

With some people if they don't know you can't tell them.  

Assuming someone is a shortsighted naysayer, if they aren't curious enough to dig deeper than the mass market hardback in it's hundred somethingth printing (or are too lazy), they probably aren't ready to find the more detailed answers (or have a vested interest in a different outcome). Instead of asking deeper questions into why he might be saying something and if it has validity as a model, the automatic "no" presents. Perhaps, though, in the case of an individual lay person, they don't want it to be true because they aren't ready to take responsibility for their food or life choices.

The form of what Dr. D is doing now requires a more complex form of study than many of the critics are even capable of yet perceiving. And if they aren't open, they aren't going to get there too soon. It doesn't really matter because they can be worked around.

Results are what matters. Most intimately to the individual.

It chunks up from there.  

Spot on PC.

Night all. I had lots of chocolate and mental stimulation today and it just crashed off. R & R and an essay tomorrow for Masters test and this thread relates loosely to one of the essays so I will process that one tonight and probably write it in the morning.