Talk:Macrobiotics

Removed paragraph
This is an interesting and possibly very useful addition to the article. However, I really don't like the sources -- the first is pure gibberish from a hypochondriac altie, the second is probably more guilty by association but still suspect due to coming from a macrobiotics website. Anyone got any ideas? EVDebs 00:53, 5 January 2008 (EST)

I based these points on what I was told by a long-time practitioner of macrobiotics who knew Ohsawa personally. In a fairly hasty search of the web I didn't manage to come up with better sources. They both, however, confirmed what I was told 15 years ago. PoorEd 13:49, 7 January 2008 (EST)

By the way, what could be a better source for the beliefs of macrobiotic believers than a macrobiotic web site? PoorEd 14:15, 7 January 2008 (EST)
 * A fair point, but such a thing is worthless without some balance from people who actually understand the human diet. I wonder if any of the open access archives have papers on the subject... or Quackwatch for that matter, though Quackwatch is still only a secondary source. EVDebs 21:09, 7 January 2008 (EST)

If the article were about what diet is best, you might have a point. The article is about macrobiotics, and should therefore include a discussion of the beliefs of those who advocate the diet. I am not, obviously, advocating the macrobiotic diet. I am suggesting that listing some of their whackier beliefs and contradictory atitudes is the most powerful form of debunking. PoorEd 09:29, 8 January 2008 (EST)

Balance
So, if meat is "extremely yang", and alcohol is "extremely yin", wouldn't this mean that you could balance it out and eat a perfectly healthy diet by consuming large quantities of meat and liquor?

This is the best diet ever. Benmullins 07:24, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * That's like setting your hand on fire to treat frost bite. --Logic and Empricism (talk) 22:25, 20 April 2012 (UTC)