Original Source

Children and Adults Should Avoid Consuming Animal Products to Reduce Risk for Chronic Disease: YES

The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition

Volume: 112: 926-930 Issue: 4

05 SEP 2020

Barnard, N. D., & Leroy, F.

23

No

Not reported

From the source and not explicitly listed as conflicts of interest: NDB: is an Adjunct Professor of Medicine at the George Washington University School of Medicine. He serves without compensation as president of the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine and Barnard Medical Center in Washington, DC. He writes books, articles and gives lectures related to nutrition and health and has received royalties and honoraria from these sources. FL: is a board member of various academic nonprofit organizations, including the Belgian Association for Meat Science and Technology (president), the Belgian Society for Food Microbiology (secretary), and the Belgian Nutrition Society. On a nonremunerated basis, he also has a seat in the scientific committee of the Institute Danone Belgium and the Advisory Commission for the "Protection of Geographical Denominations and Guaranteed Traditional Specialties for Agricultural Products and Foods" of the Ministry of the Brussels Capital Region.

Posted on

Summary

This article is part of a debate, where researchers discuss arguments about whether humans should avoid animal products in order to decrease the risk for chronic disease. Although published in a peer-reviewed journal, debates are not subject to peer review.

In this article, one author (Barnard) presents the primary argument that a diet free of animal products avoids several unhealthy food components such as cholesterol, saturated fat, lactose, hormones as well as food contaminated with fecal bacteria. This is supposed to decrease the risk for different types of cancer, cardiovascular disease, obesity, Alzheimer’s disease as well as diabetes. The opposing author (Leroy) refutes by arguing how such concerns are overblown and do not accurately reflect the scientific literature. Among the strengths of this article is the back and forth between pro and contra arguments, as well as the broad overview of the effects of different food components. Some limitations are that due to the shortness of the article; many points are presented as absolute instead of nuanced and with due skepticism. The first author (Barnard) comes to the conclusion that for the avoidance of infectious and noninfectious diseases, the consumption of animal products as well as “the commercial practices that support it” should be abandoned.

Cannot be posted