Resize Font Increase Font Size Decrease Font Size Reset Font Size

Home / Letters To The Editor

Posted On March 30, 2008
printable version email to a friend join our e-mail list



Group promotes meatless myth

By: David Martosko
Newspaper: Battle Creek Enquirer

Vegetarian eating is a fine choice for the tiny fraction of Americans who practice it. But there's no evidence that it's a sure ticket to weight loss or a valid treatment for cancer or diabetes. ("Hold the meat, please," March 23)

The principal promoter of this myth is an animal rights group called the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM). Despite its noble-sounding name, less than 4 percent of PCRM's members are actually physicians. And more than two-thirds of its $9 million budget comes directly from Nanci Alexander, the wealthy founder of the Animal Rights Foundation of Florida. She's also PETA's biggest donor.

It's doubly ironic that "The Cancer Project" is weighing in with its own brand of tofu promotion. Its parent group (Guess who? The same "Physicians Committee") advises Americans not to donate to more than 75 cancer charities, because they fund life-saving research using lab rats and other animals.



printable version email to a friend join our e-mail list

Letters To The Editor

Letter was unoriginal
Leave it to the pushy animal rights movement to use a trade dispute in South Korea as an excuse to spew anti-meat propaganda with a form letter. read more here »

Eat meat
Susan Levin went a little overboard in her conclusion that Oprah Winfrey's three-week experiment with meatless and dairy-free eating is "one of the best things to ever happen to public health." read more here »

IN-VITRO MEAT?
One national animal rights group's push for an "in vitro" chicken-meat substitute is among the more hypocritical things it has done in recent memory. read more here »

Op-Eds

Food only part of obesity problem
The cause of obesity isn't what you think. read more here »

Leave calorie counts off the menu; Nutrition is more complex than a few figures can convey.
Although The Times’ editorial was right that "laws that protect consumers from their own unhealthful habits have more than a whiff of the nanny state about them," its support for menu labeling is wrong. read more here »


About Us | Contact Us | Please Help Us | Site Map
Ad Campaigns | Press Center | Daily News Archive | Email Subscription | Op-Eds | Cartoons | Games | Link To Us
Copyright © 1997-2008 Center for Consumer Freedom. Tel: 202-463-7112.