MarkTenney

This is a principle within the church that has been the source of both tremendous insight and tremendous frustration for me. A little background: - I'm a biomedical scientist that studies metabolism, particularly obesity and diabetes. - Low-carbohydrate diets are so effective at improving both, that many people are able to stop all medications for type 2 diabetes. - Naturally, such an approach relies on meat. Some members believe this conflicts with the Word of Wisdom. I disagree strongly. - Because this scripture has been weaponized against me (I've been accused of both teaching bad science and teaching ideas against church doctrine), I've explored it at length. To answer your question directly, and to share some additional thoughts (again, I've had to explore this deeply, in part to defend my job at BYU): - I have a deep conviction that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, and I believe the Word of Wisdom was a genuine revelation. - However, I believe it is problematic for a member of the church to invoke only select parts of the Word of Wisdom to literally interpret, like many have done. - Many believe we should eat little meat by nature of the word “sparingly”; interestingly, this is usually the only part of the Word of Wisdom members believe should be interpreted literally. President Benson (April 83) defined this as “the Lord is telling us to avoid indiscriminately killing animals.” This is a sentiment similarly expressed in DC 49:21, which states “…wo be unto man that sheddeth blood or that wasteth flesh and hath no need.” Also, the idea that “sparingly” should mean eating very little meat is also challenged in DC 49:19, which states that we “might have in abundance” meat for food. - The modern push for vegan/vegetarian lifestyle is warned against by the apostle Paul.  In prophesying signs of the latter days, Paul tells Timothy (1 Tim 4:3) that one of the “doctrines of devils” will be “commanding to abstain from meats”. This, in combination with DC 49:18 (“whoso forbiddeth to abstain from meats, that man should not eat the same, is not ordained of God”) makes clear that no faithful member of the church can promote the avoidance of meat. - If we continue to apply the same exactness in literal interpretation, the same literal logic should be applied to fruits and vegetables, (i.e. “herbs”) that apparently should only be eaten “in the season thereof”.  Yet how many members of the church chastise another member for eating an apple in the spring? Of course, apples are not in season in the spring. Truly, if one believes meat should truly only be eaten “sparingly” (however one might define that), one must logically only eat fruits and vegetables when they’re in season. - Similarly, of the grains we have available, a literal interpretation of the Word of Wisdom would suggest that we humans can only eat wheat and certainly never oatmeal or other grains because corn is for the ox, oats for the horse, etc. This is bad news for someone with Celiac disease. - Regarding grains, they aren’t what they used to be. Whereas cows are cows (i.e. same fats and proteins in them in recent history), grains are not the same—we’ve changed them substantially.  Wheat, for example, has less than half the amount of protein it used to, and almost double the amount of starch.  In fact, the wheat that we grow now, the most predominant grain, is so different than the wheat that Joseph Smith had, that this older wheat, which still grows, is now called spelt—they’re simply not the same plant.  The same goes for most, if not all, other grains. - “Grains are the staff of life”—this comment is interesting and hard to ignore—it’s a powerful statement.  But it’s also vague.  Does this mean grains are the foundation of all life? If so, that’s not justified. One way this may be realized is that the ground spontaneously grows shrubs and grasses (the origins of most (all?) grains).  Ruminants (i.e. cows, goats, etc.) are able to eat this grass/grain. We, as omnivores, eat the ruminants. This vertical structure of eating (i.e. grass-ruminant-human) is shaped like a staff.  What is clear is that human cannot eat grass, which is the most basic form of all grains, or almost any naturally growing plant. - There is danger in trying to literally interpret the Word of Wisdom and remove one’s wisdom from the equation. In my wisdom as a faithful member of the church and scientist, we are better eating more meat over refined starches and sugars. Vegans/vegetarians have greater depression, suicide, and do not live longer (in studies where they’ve controlled for healthy user bias; all published; they just die of other diseases). - Until the brethren make clear specific proclamations on the application and literal interpretation of the Word of Wisdom, I, as a faithful LDS and scientist believe there is tremendous room for diverse application; we can each choose a diet that we feel best eating. I greatly appreciate that our temple recommend question regarding the Word of Wisdom does not list a set of specific foods to eat or avoid; rather it’s a simple question of adherence. - An additional thought on those who attempt to turn this into a specific diet and teaches these to others, Elder Cook (March 2003) taught: "Certain members have wanted to add substantially to various doctrines. An example might be when one advocates additions to the Word of Wisdom that are not authorized by the Brethren and proselytes others to adopt these interpretations. If we turn a health law or any other principle into a form of religious fanaticism, we are looking beyond the mark." I take this to mean that any member of the church that is attempting to create and preach a diet based on their interpretation of this revelation is going to far. - I was struck by President Nelson’s recent “Think Celestial” talk, where he notes addiction to food. Interestingly, carbs appear to the the only macronutrient to which humans develop an addiction. Not fat. Not protein. Just carbs (with or without fat, but never fat alone). To me, this is the heart of the Word of Wisdom: control addictions. Whatever they may be. - Regarding so called “Blue Zones”, which many invoke to support a plant-based diet, it appears it's garbage science, without any degree of clinical trial to support it. In fact, the whole notion is likely built on fraudulent record keeping: biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/…. As crazy as it sounds, I could continue to add substantially to this. Suffice it to say: meat is good and essential for human thriving and fertility.