Corrections: (1) Last week, we accidentally kept the wrong "subject headers" for the survey response e-mails; don't worry, if you responded, we're counting your vote according to the low-fat diet question, not the Federal Reserve question from before; (2) in the previous issue, we mentioned the Bolivian Communists were overthrown after World War II by a military junta, but it was actually a civilian junta (a military junta did intervene five years later against the same Communists, but was overthrown when the Communists again seized power); (3) in that same article, we stated that the Communists have not returned to power since the 1960s, but the Communist MNR did return in the mid-1980s, although its position was apparently too weak to re-impose the police-state dictatorship.

"Issues of World War III" Survey

"Should people be encouraged to eat low-fat diets?" Forty percent of respondents said it didn't matter whether a person eats a low- or high-fat diet. The balance of answers were versions of the general notion that a low-fat diet is preferable, though with variations; one person, for example, suggested the problem is synthetic, rather than naturally-derived, fats. Here are excerpts of some notable comments:

• "I think we should eat fats that are natural, not fats like margarine, for example, manufactured in the laboratory…"
• "…There is no evidence that saturated fat (from animals) does any good. So moderate intake of unsaturated fat is still the way to go."
• "…[People] should be encouraged to eat low-fat diets and be better educated."

Factual Background:
For most of the twentieth century, the Public Health movement has struggled to convince the public that variations in diet make the difference between health and disease, even between life and death.

During the 1800s and early 1900s, it was discovered that the body requires certain essential nutrients — vitamins, minerals, certain specific amino acids (not all of them) — because these particular items cannot be manufactured by the body, and thus the body needs to receive them through food intake.

But the notion that non-essential foods must be "balanced" for health was not supported by any such evidence. Public Health radicals were trying to frighten people with the idea that a person's health is jeopardized by too much sodium (salt), too much cholesterol, too much fat (as opposed to other types of food), etc., claiming these lead to heart disease and other terrible conditions. As large studies were finally conducted after World War II on some of these questions, the answers repeatedly came back the same: No effect could be found from changing up or down the levels of salt, cholesterol, or fat in the diet. Not in humans, not in laboratory animals. Given the same overall calorie intake and no shortage of essential vitamins and nutrients, it simply didn't make a difference whether a person's diet was heavy in proteins, fats, or carbohydrates, etc.

Unwilling to let facts interfere with Public Health fear-mongering, the federal agencies under Public Health control, such as the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH), pushed forward with the same propaganda while now trying to identify "good" fats and "bad" fats — such as declaring saturated fats "unhealthy" and unsaturated fats "healthy." But again the evidence has never really supported this, despite desperate attempts to bias and twist experimental data (scientists who challenge these Public Health notions on the basis of the true data find themselves unable to get funded, or with other career difficulties).

Now, a new, large study from the Harvard School of Public Health has confirmed what smaller studies have said all along: that high-fat diets, even of the so-called "bad" fats, have absolutely zero effect on heart disease, stroke, cancer, or even on the ability to lose weight.

Why would this be? Doesn't it make sense that eating more cholesterol or fat would clog up arteries with cholesterols and fats?

The biological reality of living organisms is that they do not function by the logic of machinery. They are dynamic, self-reshaping systems that adapt to their environment, rather than being limited by it. If a person increases his intake of cholesterol, for example, the body compensates by reducing its production of cholesterol and increasing its elimination of cholesterol — resulting in the same cholesterol level as before. The same happens in reverse: If a person reduces his dietary cholesterol, the body actually increases production so that the cholesterol levels return to the set-point established by the body's own metabolism (much like the body's temperature compensates for heat or cold)! That same happens with fats (whether "good" or "bad"), and so forth. (For that matter, even the "clogging" of arteries may not be a cause of heart disease; according to a study mentioned to me years ago by a UC Berkeley scientist, death by heart disease turned out to have no connection to arterial clogging. But I haven't yet seen a copy of the study, so I can't vouch for the conclusions.)

The human body, like all living organisms, is able to adapt to a wide variety of environments without breaking down. This allows us to live with great flexibility in our diets and exposure to chemicals and other "dangers" without fear.

But the Public Health movement is determined to create an anxious obsession with health, which creates paranoid mental attitudes conducive to revolution. People who are frightened and believe themselves to be in danger can easily be turned into cannibalistic monsters who will not object to drastic policial measures, even genocide. The mind unbalanced by fear and depression is highly subject to manipulation and agitation — precisely the state needed by the Communists, and a major reason they support Public Health so aggressively.

Relevant Torah Principles:
1) Torah in general, and Hasidus in particular, teach that every living thing is driven by a soul; a body without a soul is what we describe as "dead." This animalistic soul (a vegetative one in plants) guides the chemistry of the body according to a higher order of information. Through the body, the soul acts upon the environment, rather than being determined by environmental conditions.

2) As a matter of halacha (religious law), we are required not to live in ways that unnecessarily endanger our health for no higher purpose. But by the same token, we are not permitted to make health a high priority. The purpose of health is only to carry out our mission according to Torah Law (whether the 613 Commandments for Jews or the 7 Noahide Laws for non-Jews), and not for its own sake. Any time health becomes such a preoccupation that we regularly spend time altering our habits to accomodate it, we have made health too high a priority. Unless a person has unusual sensitivities to diet or other environmental factors, he should only avoid going out of his way to do risky, clearly unhealthy actions, rather than going out of one's way to pursue "healthy" actions.

3) The Rambam (Maimonides) did discuss diet as a major factor in health in his work, the Mishneh Torah. But he was dealing with a Medieval population whose life expectancies and general health were far lower than we have today. In other words, people at that time were unhealthy and exceptionally sensitive to some dietary factors, and thus he gave his advice (while acknowledging that, even in his times, diet was not the most important factor in health). The Lubavitcher Rebbe has concluded that the Rambam's advice applied only to people of his time (and his region of the world), and not to people today.

4) The Kitzur Shulchan Oruch (the condensed Code of Jewish Law, written within the last two centuries), in giving guidelines for health, de-emphasizes diet and focuses its main attention on proper mental attitude — meaning confidence and optimism, rather than anxiety and worry.

Analysis:
The loud drive to frighten people about dietary balance does not originate in scientific data, but rather from Marxist Public Health activists receiving tens of billions of dollars annually of government funding, as well as wide-ranging regulatory power to enforce their arbitrary decrees.

Thus it is not enough simply to ignore their bad (and health-endangering) advice. The Public Health movement must be entirely banned and suppressed, including the abolition of numerous government agencies entirely dedicated to the Public Health agenda.

Once medical science is allowed to return to honest evaluation of the data, we will find that all propaganda for "balanced" diets will disappear quickly. Modern, healthy people simply don't have to worry about the balance of fats, cholesterol, and the arbitrarily chosen "food groups."

And now for this week's survey question:

In recent years, there has been growing controversy over the Endangered Species Act. Should the government protect animal species from going extinct? (1) No, humans come before animals. (2) Yes, but some species should be taken off the endangered list. (3) Yes, we can't afford to allow any species to go extinct. (4) Other

Only one answer per e-mail address will be accepted; only e-mail addresses on our subscription list are eligible. Please send your input by Tuesday, February 28th, 2006, 12pm PST.

THE HALL OF SHAME…
Have Some Chabad Shluchim Betrayed Their Rebbe?

This week's example:
Rabbi Tzvi Barnett, Lubavitch Yeshiva, Brooklyn, NY

A JAHG-USA volunteer showed Rabbi Barnett our Proclamation (which lists the Torah rules requiring everyone to get involved with JAHG-USA's PLO-defunding campaign) last June 24th. The rabbi acknowledged that the Proclamation was correct and that he agreed with it, but stated bluntly that he just didn't want to sign (for completely unspecified reasons).

Being that it was obvious Rabbi Barnett was simply worried about some kind of controversy, we decided to try again, now that a number of former "refuseniks" have recently changed their minds and endorsed JAHG-USA's campaign. So a volunteer approached him again on January 10th; again Barnett stated only that he just didn't want to sign, even after he saw the vastly expanded list of endorsers.

What makes this all the more pathetic is the fact that most of Barnett's colleagues, his fellow teachers at the Lubavitch Yeshiva system, have been endorsing. If most of the major rabbis inside and outside of Lubavitch can sign, and most of his fellow yeshiva teachers also endorse, why can't Rabbi Barnett? What makes him so nervous? And why doesn't the mandate of Jewish Law, which requires his participation, move him in the slightest?

We live in spiritually dark times, now in the final moments before the coming of Moshiach, the annihilation of Amalek (including, of course, the PLO), and the Final Redemption.

…AND THE HALL OF FAME
Some Chabad Shluchim Are Helping the JAHG-USA Campaign

This week's examples:
Rabbi Yaakov Bryski, Yeshiva Chanoch Lenaar, Brooklyn, NY; and
Rabbi Menachem Gerlitzky, Congregation Lubavitch (770 Eastern Pkwy.), Brooklyn, NY

Rabbi Bryski was approached last June with the Proclamation, and after looking it over, signed it a few days later, on the 24th. He is the rosh yeshiva (dean) of the main institution serving troubled Lubavitch boys.

Rabbi Gerlitzky was shown the Proclamation also on the 24th of June, and after reading it, signed a week later, on July 1st. The rabbi is one of the gabboyim (managers) of the large synagogue that serves as Lubavitch world headquarters, at 770 Eastern Parkway, the Lubavitcher Rebbe's own synagogue.

Both Rabbis Bryski and Gerlitzky didn't need to wait for the current wave of PLO terror to realize that everyone must get involved. And that's exactly their message to you by signing: that you, too, must support the JAHG-USA campaign to end PLO funding.

For a complete listing of all rabbis who have received our proclamation, the up-to-date status of their responses, and how you can get help the campaign, visit ATTAC Report at http://www.attacreport.com/plo/.

This week's edition of our sister site, ATTAC Report, presents:

• A profile of Amaleki and Communist infiltration of the Catholic Church over the last eight centuries
• Our first podcast audio program, ATTAC Report This Week, on the phony flu scare
• A map of over 80 concentration camps and prisons in southern Red China that fuel its military and too many goods in American stores

Send your letter to the editor to newsletter@noahide.com.

Be sure to visit our Web site, Noahide.com.