This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Nathan Pritikin
PO Box 5335 Santa Barbara, CA 93108

JAMA. 1984;251(9):1160-1161.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.—

Since 1976, JAMA has consistently reported the Pritikin Program unfairly. I thank Dr Lundberg for this opportunity to set the record straight, at least on the most recent examples.

In 1981, JAMA reported a study by Hutchison and Brown in an article entitled "Pritikin vs AHA Diet: No Difference for Peripheral Vascular Disease."1 The so-called Pritikin diet used in the study was neither the Regression diet used at my centers and in all my research since 1974 nor the Maintenance diet described in my books meant for asymptomatic patients. My diet guidelines are as follows: less than 10% fat, 10% to 15% protein, 75% to 80% mainly complex carbohydrates, less than 25 mg of cholesterol (Regression diet), and less than 100 mg of cholesterol (Maintenance diet). Hutchison's subjects consumed twice the fat and three times the cholesterol permitted on my more lenient Maintenance diet for well people! . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Footnotes
Edited by John D. Archer, MD, Senior Editor.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?