Vegans Getting Cancer
Published 8.12.2025: Several prominent vegans have recently announced their cancer diagnoses or other health problems. They have not given up their vegan diets (in the two most recent examples that I am thinking of they are whole food plant based and mostly salt, oil, and sugar free (SOS free)), but they are admitting that simply eating a vegan diet does not convey everlasting health. Which I find interesting, which is why it's a topic here.
I actually think it's a healthy development, because the reality is that everyone dies (no one gets out alive) however they eat. A vegan diet doesn't convey immortality. I think it's interesting because there are so many versions of the vegan diet out there, and they are not all equally protective of long term health.
I have a bias here… the vegan diet is, by design, an unbalanced diet. There are simply nutrients that you cannot get from plants, and these imbalances get worse with age. a young body will make what it needs (with the exception of B12) from food. Older, and by definition, less healthy bodies will not. As you age it matters what you put into your pie hole.
Dr Fuhrman is going to host a plant based seminar (may as well read that as vegan) about cancer. Chef AJ (who was diagnosed with lung cancer, which she did nothing about until it was stage 3) recently interviewed Dr Fuhrman about the seminar. One of the questions she asked him is, why do whole food plant based eaters still get cancer?
Basically, his answer is to state that to a certain extent that cancer is the luck of the draw. And that consider what bad shape you'd be in if you hadn't eaten a whole foods plant based diet. While that might be the case, my impression was that Fuhrman came as close as he ever has to saying that McDougall shortened his life by eating the way he did. Fuhrman's schtick is longevity, and his reasons for avoiding meat and fish as less about the animals and more about the toxins or pollutants in said foods— all of which, in his view, would limit longevity.
His issues with Mc Dougall included that he allowed salt and sugar in his diet, which Fuhrman does not. But I think the bigger issue is that McDougall wasn't big on supplements, or admitting that the vegan diet might not be inherently balanced. In addition, McDougall spoke against nuts and seeds (because they are so calorific) but Fuhrman considers a small amount necessary for a healthy diet… even if they bring with them some fat. Both men created diets that permit people to lose tons of weight— but Fuhrman is adamant that you need to eat less. McDougall created a diet that would let you binge on lower energy density foods. In this sense, nuts and seeds, which are high energy density foods, would not fit.
I've heard Dr Fuhrman in interviews say that he's changed his views to some extent because he's seen vegans he admired fail in old age. Now, to be clear, it's not just vegans who fail as they age. There aren't any old carnivores, nor are there likely to be. But if you're going to assert, and many vegans do, that a vegan diet is the healthiest option, then people are going to comment when you die suddenly at a reasonably young age, such as Dr. Baxter Montgomery did recently. Vegans make hay when low carbers die young or carnivore idiots wind up with a stroke (and plenty have done so), which makes turnabout fair play I guess.
I doubt the two are related, but it is interesting that in recent weeks I've heard more than one vegan admit that veganism is not the natural diet or humans and that no society has ever had an exclusively plant based diet. Eating an abundance of plants is healthy, but eating exclusively plants may not be. It could be that as long term vegans (and there are a few) age, people are realizing that the vegan diet is not magic. And as vegans die young, or suddenly (and to date neither Montgomery nor McDougall's families have chosen to publicize the cause of their deaths), people begin to question.
For the record, I'll just note that Nathan Pritikin (who's diet was not vegan, but was resolutely low fat) had no problem revealing that his death had nothing to do with heart disease. (He wound up with leukemia and killed himself after the diagnosis, but his arteries were clear.) One of the things that irritates me most is that vegan doctors, such as Dr Greger, simply assert that Nathan Pritikin was vegan. HE WAS NOT, nor is his diet, which still exists.
DISCLAIMER: I am NOT any type of medical professional. Do NOT take medical advice from me!!
I actually think it's a healthy development, because the reality is that everyone dies (no one gets out alive) however they eat. A vegan diet doesn't convey immortality. I think it's interesting because there are so many versions of the vegan diet out there, and they are not all equally protective of long term health.
I have a bias here… the vegan diet is, by design, an unbalanced diet. There are simply nutrients that you cannot get from plants, and these imbalances get worse with age. a young body will make what it needs (with the exception of B12) from food. Older, and by definition, less healthy bodies will not. As you age it matters what you put into your pie hole.
Dr Fuhrman is going to host a plant based seminar (may as well read that as vegan) about cancer. Chef AJ (who was diagnosed with lung cancer, which she did nothing about until it was stage 3) recently interviewed Dr Fuhrman about the seminar. One of the questions she asked him is, why do whole food plant based eaters still get cancer?
Basically, his answer is to state that to a certain extent that cancer is the luck of the draw. And that consider what bad shape you'd be in if you hadn't eaten a whole foods plant based diet. While that might be the case, my impression was that Fuhrman came as close as he ever has to saying that McDougall shortened his life by eating the way he did. Fuhrman's schtick is longevity, and his reasons for avoiding meat and fish as less about the animals and more about the toxins or pollutants in said foods— all of which, in his view, would limit longevity.
His issues with Mc Dougall included that he allowed salt and sugar in his diet, which Fuhrman does not. But I think the bigger issue is that McDougall wasn't big on supplements, or admitting that the vegan diet might not be inherently balanced. In addition, McDougall spoke against nuts and seeds (because they are so calorific) but Fuhrman considers a small amount necessary for a healthy diet… even if they bring with them some fat. Both men created diets that permit people to lose tons of weight— but Fuhrman is adamant that you need to eat less. McDougall created a diet that would let you binge on lower energy density foods. In this sense, nuts and seeds, which are high energy density foods, would not fit.
I've heard Dr Fuhrman in interviews say that he's changed his views to some extent because he's seen vegans he admired fail in old age. Now, to be clear, it's not just vegans who fail as they age. There aren't any old carnivores, nor are there likely to be. But if you're going to assert, and many vegans do, that a vegan diet is the healthiest option, then people are going to comment when you die suddenly at a reasonably young age, such as Dr. Baxter Montgomery did recently. Vegans make hay when low carbers die young or carnivore idiots wind up with a stroke (and plenty have done so), which makes turnabout fair play I guess.
I doubt the two are related, but it is interesting that in recent weeks I've heard more than one vegan admit that veganism is not the natural diet or humans and that no society has ever had an exclusively plant based diet. Eating an abundance of plants is healthy, but eating exclusively plants may not be. It could be that as long term vegans (and there are a few) age, people are realizing that the vegan diet is not magic. And as vegans die young, or suddenly (and to date neither Montgomery nor McDougall's families have chosen to publicize the cause of their deaths), people begin to question.
For the record, I'll just note that Nathan Pritikin (who's diet was not vegan, but was resolutely low fat) had no problem revealing that his death had nothing to do with heart disease. (He wound up with leukemia and killed himself after the diagnosis, but his arteries were clear.) One of the things that irritates me most is that vegan doctors, such as Dr Greger, simply assert that Nathan Pritikin was vegan. HE WAS NOT, nor is his diet, which still exists.
DISCLAIMER: I am NOT any type of medical professional. Do NOT take medical advice from me!!