Quoted Textabout validity of btd
In any discussion one can expect a combination of facts, experiences and opinions. All are valid in their own way. Partial stories can be helpful as well.
Some basic facts: the digestive tract normally glycosylates in a manner influenced by age, diet, pathology, species, microbial load, ABO group and ABH secretor status. That is just basic glycobiology and this list of contributing factors is well-known.
The same is true in any scenario characterized by aberrant glycosylation, which in its own right, characterizes an extraordinary range of pathology: malignancy, inflammation, dysbiosis, and aging all show derangement in glycosylation. Indeed in most cases it is their preeminent phenotypic manifestation. So at its very minimum, as a member of this list, ABO/secretor is a partial predictor of all this. Aside from that a variety of phosphatases, brush border hydroxylases, and who knows how much of the microbiome is conditioned by ABO expression in the gut. Any PubMed search should suffice to prove the point.
Out of the box, the basic ABO-only diets developed for each blood group work in about 80% of the people who employ them. That percentage is from over 8000 case reports generated off of our main website from 1999-2003. Certainly not perfect, but then again what is?
Confirmation biases aside (and they are obviously there), the data showed one particularly interesting trend: the 80/20 percentage was consistent across the groups. In other words, 80% of the type Os claimed the diet was beneficial, as did 80% of the Bs, 80% of the As, etc. Now as anyone who has read even the
basic book can tell you, the A diet looks nothing like the O diet. However 20% is obviously a large number of unhappy people, and it is entirely feasible that any given person can reside there. There can be a plethora of reasons why the recommended diet for a blood type could fail, perhaps in the great majority of cases even for reasons that have nothing to do with blood type.
Although cheap as hell, a simple ABO is a still a pretty rudimentary approach and a second gene (FUT2) which controls one's ability to 'secrete' their blood group substance in a free unbound form can be an important additional discriminant. Adding this to the mix does clean up the results a bit, especially by identifying the so-called 'nonsecretors' who are genetically unable to secrete their blood group antigens in an unbound form. Interestingly enough, nonsecretors make up 20% of the population and the literature is rich in references to a variety of pathology issues linked to this
outcome. But that is another story.
Now, what to do about experiences and opinions? They can be honored in their singular nature, but they don't move the discussion very far. To a person who has gotten no results from acupuncture, homeopathy or Ayurveda, these are all useless things. But we all know that in larger data sets they can and do appear to help a great majority of people. Something doesn't have to work in everyone, or every practitioner, to be useful.
Quoted from ruthiegirl
For example, cottage cheese is an "avoid" for Os because it contains some properties that are unhealthy for Os, as these "unhealthy properties" outweigh the benefits. But when evaluated through the Gatherer lens, the risks are smaller and the benefits greater, so cottage cheese becomes a diamond superfood. When evaluated for Os with Cancer, cottage cheese specifically is still an avoid, but other foods are rated differently than the foods for Os without cancer- because the lists are focusing on "anti cancer properties" and that changes the risk/benefit ratio of certain foods.
Yes. This is what is confusing me because as an O gatherer, I still have trouble understanding how cottage cheese can be good for me in one diet and bad in another. I am trying to puzzle it out this way. poison Ivy is either poisonous or it isn't. The fact is that it is poisonous. However, different people have different levels of severity of reaction upon exposure than others.
However, the fact remains that it is poisonous.
so, if I choose to follow the BTD then cottage cheese is "poisonous", but of i choose to follow GTD then cottage cheese isn't. and that's where I start to become very confused. How do I then know which diet to follow if one says I will become sicker with cottage cheese and one says I will become super well with it.
The nature of the cottage cheese has not changed. I have not changed - how then does the nature of the diets change to make one food poison in print in one book and super wellness food in another?
Am I understanding that the "gatherer lense" is in another term "food combining"? meaning that cottage cheese in combination (over all, over time) with the other super foods is different somehow?
Or is it that "o's" are not just "o's" - meaning that there are some O's who do well on cottage cheese and some who do not? And that is what the "gatherer lense" sheds light on?
I have read through the books by the way - and I am still this confused.
You can't combine GTD and BTD on your own- at least, not without a lot of work, confusion, and trial and error. You need to pick one plan- BTD or GTD- and stick to it, and basically ignore the food lists for the plan you're not currently following.
Right. Trying to figure out which is best. I am so glad there is a forum with people willing to help sort things out for new people!
If you're struggling with multiple health problems, SWAMI is probably your best bet.
Quoted from C_sharpThe food lists are for different diets so they will not be the same.
You will need to decide which diet you are following
- The Regular BTD
- The BTD for people with cancer
- The GenoType diet
To compare the Regular BTD diet versus the GenoType diet,
take this online quiz.
Regardless of the results of the quiz, in your case, I would follow the diet in the cancer book or a SWAMI diet.
Quoted from KimonoKat
I may be wrong in this, but it is my understanding this diet is also geared, to reduce the expression of potential health issues in future generations.
When you take "you" as a whole, --vs just your blood type-- some foods will serve you better than others. They will help turn down the volume of the negative expression of some genes and ramp up the volume on others.
Sharing with the best of intentions.