David Perlmutter vs Alan Levinovitz
Recently I was taken aback by a sales oxymoron: in a well known commercial establishment known for displacing books among other items, on the same sales rack, there were two books side by side, on the left, David Perlmutter´s Grain Brain and on the right of it, Alan Levinovitz´s The Gluten Lie.
Why are both books at odds with each other in their content? What do people think when they see both books side by side which contradict one another? Do they think about the irony of it? I forgot to mention that not 10 feet away from the books, lies the pastry and bakery of the establishment, with all sorts of baked goodies, ice cream and even syrups to boot as an ironic statement.
A neurologist (Perlmutter) vs a religion professor (Levinovitz) on what is better for the brain (and body) to consume. Perlmutter argues (not against Levinovitz, since his book came out first), that gluten from grain cereals and sugars may be responsible for creating a kind of brain “diabetes” which may evolve into brain degenerative disease, which may account for why we are currently seeing some many cases nowadays.
Levinovitz claims (his book came out in response to Perlmutter´s), that this is not true, and furthermore, he says that sugar, salt and fat are also all right to eat at will for anyone not suffering from a specific disease. However, he is neither a scientist (nor in my opinion), an expert on the subject, he claims he studied chinese religion to come up with his premise.
So what gives? Is Levinovitz working for the processed foods corporations? Not only that, many M.D´s (who are neither scientists nor experts on the subject either), fully endorse his views. He only left out advocating for cigarettes and mammograms (or maybe he didn´t).
Ironically, Harvard Medical School disagrees with Levinovitz and with the physicians who abide by his recommendations:
For the layman or laywoman, this must be very confusing, but really, it is not so if one focuses on the facts.
Perlmutter´s already an international bestseller, and my guess is that Levinovitz´s will be too shortly. My only question is why is a religiologist (or theologist) debating a neurologist on the nature of the nutritional benefits and side effects of certain foodstuffs in what seems to me more of a neurological-biological question than an an observationally religious one.
Levinovitz seems to be more focused on dietary requirements per se, as a chinese religion observer who is non-certified and non-licensed as a nutriologist, whereas Perlmutter is focused on brain efficiency and is a licensed neuro-scientist.
It should be noted that Levinovitz´s book is -as mentioned earlier- endorsed by many physicians, who as we know, are big-pharma and processed foods-biased, and friendly oriented professionals to those industries (after all, they need sick clients, otherwise, where´s the business?).
So who´s right? Who knows more and best? Anyone who´s ever met me or heard me or read me, knows that I´m a science literate person (or at the very least science-inclined), thus, I must go with Dr. Perlmutter (and probably so should you) and here´s why:
For more on the subject if you haven´t yet bought or read his book:
And not to be unfair, here are Levinovitz´s views:
This is the kind of case in which the reader must read, study and determine a course of action depending on his/her own knowledge, intuition and experience (and belief system), and may the brain be with you.