Readers Say

When it comes to health & wellness…there are a lot of myths, rumors and false information out there. What I trust and love about “Health Tips from the Professor” is that you cite the study you are referencing. You validate the study and give the reader the facts both good and bad, and you separate what is fiction & non-fiction. And, if the findings are still out there “unknown” you let us know that too.
Information based on science…not fads or hype… is important to you, and that is important to me! Many times I will read statements from many of the “well-known” Health magazines only to find out that there is no clear evidence of where that statement came from. I’ve learned not to believe everything I read!!! I appreciate the fact that you will always cite the published study and where it can be found!!! You describe what the study consisted of. You are always clear about all the proper information.

Pamela

I love “Health Tips from the Professor” because you analyze studies and teach in an honest forthright way that we readers have learned to trust. It is also something relating to our health. Your writing is personable and not stuffy. Here is a clue of how important I see your information, when I receive your article, I do not delay in opening it for I know it will relate to something that matters to my health or to others. But most important, Because of your science background / experience I know of no one else who has the expertise to understand and breakdown the truth behind current studies and health related news. Online occasionally I have searched other health news but most are so biased, either because they are selling the product they discuss or work for a company that is selling the product so it is difficult to sort out what is truth on other websites or blogs. Thanks for taking the time to share your knowledge and expertise.

Jean

I whole-heartedly recommend that people go to your blog. First of all, there is so much confusion in this arena that people do not know who to trust. They want the facts without all the bias, and that’s hard to find these days. You have the credentials to report on these health topics and you do so in a way that is accurate and balanced. My readers have come to trust what you say and they look forward to every one of your Health Tips.

Your topics are relevant and usually coincide with information that has been in the news, so people are inclined to read them. As a professor, you are a great communicator of complex information. You can write on a serious subject and lighten things up with humor, and you can take a complicated topic and explain it clearly to the average person.

You provide practical information that people can act on. Many people feel helpless about their health problems or fear getting a disease. You provide practical information that empowers us take responsibility for our health and feel more in control by doing something positive that is supported by science and common sense.

Your articles inspire us to think objectively about subjects that will enhance our ability to make better health decisions. There are very few resources like yours, Dr. Chaney, and I thank you from the bottom of my heart for all you do!

Nancy

I like hearing about non-biased nutritional information from credible sources such as you, who can break down complicated, confusing research articles and make them easy to understand. Having a reliable and trustworthy source to explain the ins and outs of what the latest research means and doesn’t mean is invaluable.

Ruth

Your information is important to me because I trust the source…your credentials, your experience and, I like the way that you relay your information. For me, you have exactly the right combination of technical/science info and lay-person regular language. You make it easy for everyone to understand the studies that you are breaking down for them. I own a fitness and nutrition business and I crave the latest and greatest information. I LOVE this stuff and can’t get enough of it. I do, however, always consider the source of the information and often discount other sources as the nonsense that they are. You always have solid, credible research and solid, credible explanations.

Ginny

Your information is important to me as a person who chooses to maintain and improve health – for myself, my family and those of like-mind with whom I come in contact. As a scientist, you speak factually, and I am comfortable quoting your blogs and referring others to the latest current research which you synthesize and make available in layman’s language.

Mary

Your information is of value because keeping my family fit is at the top of my list. I trust your articles because you give full disclosure of your sources along with an explanation which has no hidden meaning or motive.

Valerie

You cut through misinformation and anti-nutrition bias from the media for us to think clearly and see clearly how to manage our own health. You speak with balance and common sense and a bit of humor. You cut through the sacred shibboleths of science and bring it into human terms. You are a rare scientist, one who recognizes that science can try to fix things, but it is nature which keeps us from needing the fix. We can’t not listen to you if we are looking for answers we can trust.

Connie

I want to have the latest information on any research studies in that area of interest. However, I also want to be assured that such information is valid and not skewed . I feel assured that your informative newsletters gives me that feeling of validity that I can pass along to others.

Dolores

The information is important to me because it is factual and is backed by scientific proof. I am seeking this kind of information for the health education of myself, my family, and those I can share it with. I am concerned that there is too much “fictional” information out there and you have to get your information from someone you trust. Many people believe everything they read in newspapers and magazines, etc. They don’t realize that many times there is a monetary backing to these articles.

As a doctor and in education you have the resources, knowledge, and experience of helping people. I trust your information because I have read your emails over the years and know that you look for the scientific research backing the information you talk about. I know that you do the research to share information that shows the scientific proof not just what someone says for marketing purposes. This is information that can help others make educational choices to improve their health.

Virginia

Life is so busy that there is not always enough time to keep abreast of all the research on nutrition and holistic living. Having one source that synthesizes the information and presents it in a clear, concise and comprehensive manner makes it easier to stay informed and make better choices.

Joanne

The tips you provide are trustworthy resources for information. My main goal is to share responsibly with others. I like that you address current issues/studies/reporting. With so much going around on the internet it can be hard to acquire information that I feel comfortable or confident in sharing. Many times online posts by others are merely spam or biased based on someone trying to promote their product lines – that’s not the case with you.

Betty

Recent Videos From Dr. Steve Chaney

READ THE ARTICLE
READ THE ARTICLE

Latest Article

What Is The Planetary Diet?

Posted May 21, 2019 by Dr. Steve Chaney

Is Your Diet Destroying The Planet?

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

 

Earth Day has come and gone, but you are still committed to saving the planet. You save energy. You recycle. You drive an electric car. But is your diet destroying the planet?

This is not a new question, but a recent commission of international scientists has conducted a comprehensive study into our diet and its effect on our health and our environment. Their report (W. Willet et al, The Lancet, 393, issue 10170, 447-492, 2019 ) serves as a dire warning of what will happen if we don’t change our ways. I touched on this report briefly in a previous issue of “Health Tips From The Professor,” What Is The Flexitarian Diet , but this topic is important enough that it deserves an issue all its own.

The commission carefully evaluated diet and food production methods and asked three questions:

  • Are they good for us?
  • Are they good for the planet?
  • Are they sustainable? Will they be able to meet the needs of the projected population of 10 billion people in 2050 without degrading our environment.

The commission described the typical American diet as a “lose-lose diet.” It is bad for our health. It is bad for the planet. And it is not sustainable.

In its place they carefully designed their version of a primarily plant-based diet they called a “win-win diet.”  It is good for our health. It is good for the planet. And, it is sustainable.

In their publication they refer to their diet as the “universal healthy reference diet” (What else would you expect from a committee?). However, it has become popularly known as the “Planetary Diet.”

I have spoken before about the importance of a primarily plant-based diet for our health. In that context it is a personal choice. It is optional.

However, this report is a wake-up call. It puts a primarily plant-based diet in an entirely different context. It is essential for the survival of our planet. It is no longer optional.

If you care about global warming…If you care about saving our planet, there is no other choice.

How Was The Study Done?

The study (W. Willet et al, The Lancet, 393, issue 10170, 447-492, 2019 ) was the report of the EAT-Lancet Commission on Healthy Diets from Sustainable Food Systems. This Commission convened 30 of the top experts from across the globe to prepare a science-based evaluation of the effect of diet on both health and sustainable food production through the year 2050. The Commission included world class experts on healthy diets, agricultural methods, climate change, and earth sciences. The Commission reviewed 356 published studies in preparing their report.

 

Is Your Diet Destroying The Planet?

When they looked at the effect of food production on the environment, the Commission concluded:

  • “Strong evidence indicates that food production is among the largest drivers of global environmental change.” Specifically, the commission reported:
  • Agriculture occupies 40% of global land (58% of that is for pasture use).
  • Food production is responsible for 30% of global greenhouse gas emissions and 70% of freshwater use.
  • Conversion of natural ecosystems to croplands and pastures is the largest factor causing species to be threatened with extinction. Specifically, 80% of extinction threats to mammals and bird species are due to agricultural practices.
  • Overuse and misuse of nitrogen and phosphorous in fertilizers causes eutrophication. In case you are wondering, eutrophication is defined as the process by which a body of water becomes enriched in dissolved nutrients (such as phosphates from commercial fertilizer) that stimulate the growth of algae and other aquatic plant life, usually resulting in the depletion of dissolved oxygen. This creates dead zones in lakes and coastal regions where fish and other marine organisms cannot survive.
  • About 60% of world fish stocks are fully fished and more than 30% are overfished. Because of this, catch by global marine fisheries has been declining since 1996.
  • “Reaching the Paris Agreement of limiting global warming…is not possible by only decarbonizing the global energy systems. Transformation to healthy diets from sustainable food systems is essential to achieving the Paris Agreement.”
  • The world’s population is expected to increase to 10 billion by 2050. The current system of food production is unsustainable.

When they looked at the effect of the foods we eat on the environment, the Commission concluded:

  • Beef and lamb are the biggest contributors to greenhouse gas emissions and land use.
  • The concern about land use is obvious because of the large amount of pasture land required to raise cattle and sheep.
  • The concern about greenhouse gas emissions is because cattle and sheep are ruminants. They not only breathe out CO2, but they also release methane into the atmosphere from fermentation in their rumens of the food they eat. Methane is a potent greenhouse gas, and it persists in the atmosphere 25 times longer than CO2. The single most important thing we can do as individuals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is to eat less beef and lamb. [Note: grass fed cattle produce more greenhouse gas emissions than cattle raised on corn because they require 3 years to bring to market rather than 2 years.]
  • In terms of energy use beef, lamb, pork, chicken, dairy and eggs all require much more energy to produce than any of the plant foods.
  • In terms of eutrophication, beef, lamb, and pork, all cause much more eutrophication than any plant food. Dairy and eggs cause more eutrophication than any plant food except fruits.
  • In contrast, plant crops reduce greenhouse gas emissions by removing CO2 from the atmosphere.

 

What Is The Planetary Diet?

In the words of the Commission: “[The Planetary Diet] largely consists of vegetables, fruits, whole grains, legumes, nuts, and unsaturated oils. It includes a low to moderate amount of seafood, poultry, and eggs. It includes no or a very low amount of red meat, processed meat, sugar, refined grains, and starchy vegetables.”

When described in that fashion it sounds very much like other healthy diets such as semi-vegetarian, Mediterranean, DASH, and Flexitarian. However, what truly distinguishes it from the other diets is the restrictions placed on the non-plant portion of the diet to make it both environmentally friendly and sustainable. Here is a more detailed description of the diet:

  • It starts with a vegetarian diet. Vegetables, fruits, beans, nuts, soy foods, and whole grains are the foundation of the diet.
  • It allows the option of adding one serving of dairy a day (It turns out that cows produce much less greenhouse emissions per serving of dairy than per serving of beef. That’s because cows take several years to mature before they can be converted to meat, and they are emitting greenhouse gases the entire time).
  • It allows the option of adding one 3 oz serving of fish or poultry or one egg per day.
  • It allows the option of swapping seafood, poultry, or egg for a 3 oz serving of red meat no more than once a week. If you want a 12 oz steak, that would be no more than once a month.

This is obviously very different from the way most Americans currently eat. According to the Commission:

  • “This would require greater than 50% reduction in consumption of unhealthy foods, such as red meat and sugar, and greater than 100% increase in the consumption of healthy foods, such as nuts, fruits, vegetables, and legumes.”
  • “In addition to the benefits for the environment, “dietary changes from current diets to healthy diets are likely to substantially benefit human health, averting about 10.8-11.6 million deaths per year globally.”

What Else Did The Commission Recommend?

In addition to changes in our diets, the Commission also recommended several changes in the way food is produced. Here are a few of them.

  • Reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the fuel used to transport food to market.
  • Reduce food losses and waste by at least 50%.
  • Make radical improvements in the efficiency of fertilizer and water use. In terms of fertilizer, the change would be two-fold:
    • In developed countries, reduce fertilizer use and put in place systems to capture runoff and recycle the phosphorous.
    • In third world countries, make fertilizer more available so that crop yields can be increased, something the Commission refer to as eliminating the “yield gap” between third world and developed countries.
  • Stop the expansion of new agricultural land use into natural ecosystems and put in place policies aimed at restoring and re-foresting degraded land.
  • Manage the world’s oceans effectively to ensure that fish stocks are used responsibly and global aquaculture (fish farm) production is expanded sustainability.

What we can do: While most of these are government level policies, we can contribute to the first three by reducing personal food waste and purchasing organic produce locally whenever possible.

What Does This Mean For You?

If you are a vegan, you are probably asking why the Commission did not recommend a completely plant-based diet. The answer is that a vegan diet is perfect for the health of our planet. However, the Commission wanted to make a diet that was as consumer-friendly as possible and still meet their goals of a healthy, environmentally friendly, and sustainable diet.

If you are eating a typical American diet or one of the fad diets that encourage meat consumption, you are probably wondering how you can ever make such drastic changes to your diet. The answer is “one step at a time.”  If you have read my books “Slaying The Food Myths” or “Slaying the Supplement Myths,”  you know that my wife and I did not change our diet overnight. Our diet evolved to something very close to the Planetary Diet over a period of years.

The Commission also purposely designed the Planetary Diet so that you “never have to say never” to your favorite foods. Three ounces of red meat a week does not sound like much, but it allows you a juicy steak once a month.

Sometimes you just need to develop a new mindset. As I shared in my books, my father prided himself on grilling the perfect steak. I love steaks, but I decided to set a few parameters. I don’t waste my red meat calories on anything besides filet mignon at a fine restaurant. It must be a special occasion, and someone else must be buying. That limits it to 2-3 times a year. I still get to enjoy good steak, and I stay well within the parameters of the Planetary diet.

Develop your strategy for enjoying some of your favorite foods within the parameters of the Planetary Diet and have fun with it.

The Bottom Line

 

Is your diet destroying the planet? This is not a new question, but a recent commission of international scientists has conducted a comprehensive study into our diet and its effect on our health and our environment. Their report serves as a dire warning of what will happen to us and our planet if we don’t change our ways.

The Commission carefully evaluated diet and food production methods and asked three questions:

  • Are they good for us?
  • Are they good for the planet?
  • Are they sustainable? Will they be able to meet the needs of the projected population of 10 billion people in 2050 without degrading our environment.

The Commission described the typical American diet as a “lose-lose diet.”  It is bad for our health. It is bad for the planet. And it is not sustainable.

In its place they carefully designed their version of a primarily plant-based diet they called a “win-win diet.”  It is good for our health. It is good for the planet. And, it is sustainable.

In their publication they refer to their diet as the “universal healthy reference diet” (What else would you expect from a committee?). However, it has become popularly known as the “Planetary Diet.”

The Planetary Diet is similar to other healthy diets such as semi-vegetarian, Mediterranean, DASH, and Flexitarian. However, what truly distinguishes it from the other diets is the restrictions placed on the non-plant portion of the diet to make it both environmentally friendly and sustainable (for details, read the article above).

I have spoken before about the importance of a primarily plant-based diet for our health. In that context it is a personal choice. It is optional.

However, this report is a wake-up call. It puts a primarily plant-based diet in an entirely different context. It is essential for the survival of our planet. It is no longer optional.

If you care about global warming…If you care about saving our planet, there is no other choice.

For more details read the article above.

 

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

 

UA-43257393-1