Talk:Hay diet

message: this is the only scientific article I found concerning Hay-diet (food combining).
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=10805507&query_hl=23&itool=pubmed_docsum
Redecke 17:43, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  only scientific article I found 

message: Is there any objection to merging the content from this article in food combining? There doesn't seem to be enough verifiable, sourced material here to warrant a separate article, and the Dr Hay Diet can be summarized in the food combining article instead. MastCell Talk 18:01, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, there's an objection.  This is a distinct diet and as such merits coverage in Wikipedia.  "Food combining" is a general heading which includes many other distinct diets as well.  Just because this article is not long does not preclude its growing over time, as editors with expertise show up, as with any other Wikipedia article. We serve an important function and reducing the information we provide to our users does not enhance our project.  Badagnani 19:50, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not talking about reducing the amount of information; I'm talking about centralizing it under one heading. It is a subset of food combining, after all, and Dr. Hay diet could remain as a redirect for people searching that term. If at some point in the future reliable sources turn up that enable an encyclopedic expansion of the topic, it can always be split out again into its own article. But that's my 2 cents; any other opinions? MastCell Talk 20:13, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Also, the external links you've added ( and ) make it explicitly clear that the Hay Diet = food combining. Why are we fighting the merge again? MastCell Talk 20:15, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I don't think that's quite correct - Lappe advocated protein combining (consuming a balance of proteins containing the 8 essential amino acids). Hay and food combining don't deal with essential amino acids - they talk about combining supposedly "acidic" or "alkaline" foods and sequencing of foods throughout the day. These appear to be 2 distinct approaches with (appropriately) 2 distinct articles on Wikipedia. Of course I'm not an expert. MastCell Talk 20:32, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Yes, merge. Timneu22 18:35, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Object to merge. Badagnani 18:42, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: I have queried the sentence, "Dr. Hay began eating only natural foods".  "Natural" has no precise meaning.  What are "unnatural" foods? It should be replaced by a description of what sort of things he ate and what sort of things he avoided.
There should be a summary of the reception of Hay's theories.  The Hay diet is popular, but what do other dietitians say about it?  Marshall46 (talk) 18:44, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Natural"? 

message: A sub-heading "Criticisms" would improve this article. Some one asked "The Hay diet is popular, but what do other dietitians say about it?" Most of them probably say that is a lot of rubbish, as the body is quite capable of digesting the different foods from different groups (e.g. acids and those high in alkalinity simultaneously. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 11:49, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Section on criticisms needed

message: I have removed the following line:
"There is also no evidence to support the notion that acidic and alkaline foods should be eaten separately."
This sentence was connected to the following reference:
Gilman, Sander L. (2008). Diets and Dieting: A Cultural Encyclopedia. New York: Taylor & Francis. pp. 128. .
I checked this source, and, at least on the page indicated, it does not say or imply that there is a lack of evidence for acidic/alkaline separation. On the contrary, the entry (or at least the portion cited) comes off as relatively favorable regarding Hay's ideas. This source would be a useful one for this wikipedia article, if used accurately.
Miconian (talk) 13:06, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The source, on page 128, says "To date, no scientific evidence has proven the theory of food combining"; see second sentence of second paragraph of the article. Yobol (talk) 16:01, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: "no evidence to support the notion" ≠ "no scientific evidence has proven the theory"; there's a huge gap between the two. If you can back the stronger version, give us a citation; otherwise, we must stick to the weaker statement, no matter a huge steaming horseapple of a crackpot theory this is. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:00, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: New source provided, text updated to match new source. Hopefully this will satisfy all concerns. Yobol (talk) 17:16, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent! --Orange Mike | Talk 17:42, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: 'no evidence' claim removed