Reviews of the Plant Paradox by Dr Gundry

Reexamining Steve Gundry's `The Plant Paradox'

Epitome source . Is Steven Gundry a quack? No. He has reasonable hypotheses, then exaggerates the degree of current support for those hypotheses. He cannot be fully trusted, just his ideas should not be dismissed without much amend evidence than we have at present.

My son Hashemite kingdom of jordan challenged me to revisit my views on Steven Gundry'due south volume The Plant Paradox. In order to revisit those views, I googled around to observe blog posts and articles online that were critical of Gundry and followed the links. I'll insert images of these blog posts and articles where I discuss each.

There are 2 parts to this reexamination of Steven Gundry'due south book The Plant Paradox.. Ane is to revisit the central hypotheses I emphasized in my weblog postal service review of The Constitute Paradox: What Steven Gundry'due south Book 'The Establish Paradox' Adds to the Principles of a Low-Insulin-Alphabetize Diet. These I summarized equally follows:

• The War Betwixt Plants and Animals. This is the thought that many of the natural insecticides plants produce to avoid getting eaten quite as ofttimes may have negative furnishings on human health.

• Old and New Natural Insecticides: We and Our Gut Microbiome Have Evolved to Deal With Some Natural Insecticides, Merely Non Others. This is a key qualification: humans and their gut microbes should accept evolved to deal with the natural insecticides from plants that our ancestors take eaten for a hundred thousand years or more, with some significant adaptation to deal with these natural insecticides for things our ancestors have eaten for ten 1000 years or more.

More mostly, apart from natural insecticides, the longer our ancestors have eaten a particular blazon of food, prepared in the way information technology is now prepared, the more assurance we have of its safety. Overall, the dietary at that place are at to the lowest degree 4 big dietary changes evolution may not have fully adapted united states of america for:

1. The Agricultural Revolution, with its Emphasis on Grain

2. The A-1 Mutation in Cows, which Affects Milk Proteins

3. The Introduction of New Earth Plant Food

4. Highly Processed Food

The other views based on The Plant Paradox to reexamine are Steven Gundry'south claims about specific foods.

Note that none of this about the particular class of natural insecticides called "lectins" in general being bad, which is, I think, a distortion of Steven Gundry's views, and certainly not something I would concur with. Lectins in foods that humans and their gut microbes have had plenty of fourth dimension to adapt to should be fine. (The exception to the idea that truly ancient foods should be safety for the typical person is that i might have problems if ane'due south dietary patterns and other environmental factors had killed off a large share of the types of microbes that are of import for dealing with the lectins in those foods.)

I view all of these claims are important hypotheses that accept not been falsified past existing information. One already meets with a general consensus by scholars: (4) the idea that the highly processed food so common in mod diets is quite bad for us. I write virtually why in "The Trouble with Processed Food."

Another claim for which I consider the evidence to exist strong—though not gold-standard evidence—is (2) the claim that A-1 milk is a problem. On that, come across my posts

• Exorcising the Devil in the Milk

• 'Is Milk Ok?' Revisited

• How Of import is A1 Milk Protein as a Public Wellness Issue?

On claim (ane), Grain is by and large a problem because of its high insulin alphabetize. (See "Forget Calorie Counting; Information technology'south the Insulin Index, Stupid.") Whether it is also a problem because of lectins is more speculative. This matters a lot for oatmeal, which is one of the grains that is lowest on the insulin alphabetize. I don't know what to think about oatmeal. Because information technology is relatively low on the insulin index and has some components that are especially satiating, oatmeal has some real benefits for weight loss that may outweigh any lectin dangers it presents.

(Rice is adequately loftier on the insulin alphabetize; for rice in that location is a mystery about why eating a lot of rice hasn't led to more obesity in Eastern asia. I certainly feel very hungry a couple of hours later on I eat any substantial amount of rice. I don't know the answer to why heavy rice-eating hasn't led to more obesity amongst E Asians, especially in the context of increasing available of food to eat if the insulin boot from rice makes them hungry. I wish I knew. Ii possibilities that don't seem sufficient to explain the puzzle are (a) Jason Fung suggests that eating sour things with rice as the Japanese do at least at some meals might reduce the insulin kicking from rice, (b) natural selection may have given many Eastward Asians adaptations for rice eating—maybe, maybe such adaptations are easier than for other grains. Equally far as lectins get, white rice may not exist very high in lectins.)

Claim (3), that new world plant food is likely to exist problematic, is an peculiarly interesting merits. Near the end of this post, I discuss tomatoes in some detail. Potatoes, like grain, are quite high on the insulin alphabetize, so I call up potatoes are very unhealthy quite apart from lectins. Only it is possible that lectins make them worse. Steven Gundry has gotten me worried near cashews and peanuts.

As for the other hypotheses, Stephen Guyenet agrees with me on that. In the mail shown above, he repeatedly indicates his interest in these hypotheses as hypotheses, and writes:

We believe the ideas in this book should have been presented as hypotheses to exist tested rather than as scientific findings.

He rates the following claims by Steven Gundry on a 0 to 4 calibration as follows (I combined the text of the merits as summarized by Stephen Guyenet with the rating he gives a few paragraphs later.)

Merits i: Lectins from grains, legumes, certain types of dairy, fruit, and nightshade and cucumber-family vegetables cause an increase in intestinal permeability ("leaky gut"). Rating: 1.7 out of four.

Claim ii: Grains, legumes, sure types of dairy, fruit, and nightshade and cucumber-family vegetables are fattening foods because their high content of lectins stimulate free energy storage and appetite. Rating: .7 out of 4.

Claim 3: Inside the body, lectins from grains, legumes, certain types of dairy, fruit, and nightshade and cucumber-family vegetables cause chronic autoimmune or other inflammatory reactions leading to a broad range of chronic diseases. 1 out of 4.

On Claim 2, I demand to say that I never establish Steven Gundry's merits that nightshades and cucumber-family vegetables are fattening very convincing. (I take worried about them being harmful in ways other than their being fattening.) Grains (even whole grains), legumes and fruit tin be fattening just because they are somewhat high on the insulin index, which need not have much to exercise with lectins. (Come across "Forget Calorie Counting; It's the Insulin Alphabetize, Stupid.") Given the number of patients that Steven Gundry has seen who have chronic autoimmune or other inflammatory reactions, and has treated with dietary restrictions, I requite a fair corporeality of credence to the interrelated Claims 1 and iii. I concord with Stephen Guyenet that if this is indeed true, Steven Gundry needs to publish peer-reviewed manufactures backing up what he claims he sees in his patients with chronic autoimmune or other inflammatory reactions. If he doesn't practice and so, someone else should test this. It is an important enough and credible enough claim to exist worth either falsifying or confirming, whatever a careful study would prove.

(Interestingly, Stephen Guyenet'south tone in discussing Steven Gundry'southward highly speculative hypotheses is much more friendly than his discussion of Gary Taubes's merits that sugar is very, very, very bad—a claim that has much ameliorate evidence to dorsum information technology upwards. Run across "The Example Against Sugar: Stephan Guyenet vs. Gary Taubes" and "Layne Norton Discusses the Stephan Guyenet vs. Gary Taubes Debate (a Fence on Joe Rogan's Podcast)." One possible reason for the difference in tone is that Steven Gundry, as a medical doctor, is much more "in the gild" than Gary Taubes, who is a journalist with physics training.)

Stephen Guyenet, similar many others questioning Steven Gundry's claims, points to abundant show that whole grains, legumes, fruit, nightshades and cucumber-family unit vegetables assist reduce obesity and pb to other practiced outcomes. In that location is a very basic signal to make here. Oversimplifying, suppose y'all could rank all foods (perchance inside category), from most health to to the lowest degree salubrious. Given the fact that a big share of people are eating very unhealthy foods, if medium unhealthy food replaces very unhealthy food, that is a win. I don't have a full general alphabetize of the healthiness of foods, but in the particular direction of being fattening, permit me accept the insulin index as a reasonably adept mensurate of how fattening a particular food is. And so this thought can be made very concrete. Eating more lentils that have an insulin index of 42 is a big comeback in relation to weight loss if those lentils are replacing potatoes, which have an insulin alphabetize of 88; but if lentils are displacing walnuts that have an insulin index of about five, that substitution of lentils for walnuts may be a fattening change. Similarly, substituting eating whole fruit instead of candy or block or fruit juice is a huge comeback. Just acting as if eating 3 peach-sized pieces of fruit is as healthy equally eating a like quantity of dark-green leafy vegetables is a mistake.

To put a signal on information technology: whenever people cite prove about how healthy a detail type of food is, ane ever needs to inquire "Eaten instead of what?" Even extremely good evidence that a item type of food is an improvement on the typical American diet does not mean that type of food isn't problematic in ways that could be avoided by eating something fifty-fifty healthier.

The big problem in Michael Gregor's set on on Steven Gundry in the video shown just above is Michael Greger'southward uncritical credence of evidence that a certain type of food is a big comeback on what it replaces in the typical American diet as if it were evidence that food was "healthy" full stop. (That is also the big problem with Joel Kahn's web log post "The Plant Paradox and The Oxygen Paradox: Don't Hold Your Breath for Health" and Toby Amidor'southward blog postal service "Ask the Practiced: Clearing Upwards Lectin Misconceptions.")

The other problem with this video is that Steven Gundry is not, in the terminate, anti-edible bean and anti-lentil. He simply says that they need to be cooked carefully—he recommends presoaking and force per unit area-cooking—in order to destroy equally many of the lectins as possible. Presoaking is non at all an unusual type of training for beans and lentils. Some people claim that regular cooking is adequate without pressure-cooking. That is indeed a dispute, simply non a huge dispute.

Steven Gundry takes his view that animate being protein is problematic from T. Colin Campbell and Thomas Campbell, every bit I practice. (See "Meat Is Amazingly Nutritious—Merely Is It Amazingly Nutritious for Cancer Cells, As well?" and "How Sugar, Too Much Protein, Inflammation and Injury Could Drive Epigenetic Cellular Evolution Toward Cancer.") But the Campbells do non seem to realize that Steven Gundry is an marry. As strong proponents of a vegan diet, the Campbells seem to be concerned that by recommending some institute foods over others, Steven is disproportionately limiting the range of options for a vegan diet. They also are concerned that Steven Gundry allows animal foods in moderation in his recommendations.

The most useful aspect of the Campbell's article shown above is that it details how inappropriate Steven Gundry is with his citations. The citations often are to depression-quality sources or to sources that don't back up what Steven Gundry is maxim at all. The Campbells are peculiarly convincing that Steven Gundry is non completely trustworthy in what he says. This of course does not brand Steven Gundry's hypotheses bad hypotheses. It does mean that Steven Gundry can't be trusted to give the states the data to carefully evaluate the limited bear witness and then far on whether those hypotheses are truthful or not.

The almost interesting thing nearly "larkasaur'south" review of The Plant Paradox shown just higher up is his overnice give-and-take of the prove for anticancer properties of lectins. Larkasaur writes:

Some lectins have anti-cancer properties - but at the same fourth dimension, this means they are powerful substances that might also cause harm, as Dr. Gundry proposes.

Indeed, a pigsty in Steven Gundry'south argument that natural insecticides might be hard on cells is that they might exist even harder on cancer cells in a style that fabricated them a very mild, and relatively rubber blazon of preventive "chemotherapy." Of course, I think that fasting is a much better way to go for a probable effective, balmy and safe form of preventive "chemotherapy." My nutrition and health posts focusing on cancer give a fairly skilful treatment of this idea:

• How Fasting Can Starve Cancer Cells, While Leaving Normal Cells Unharmed

• Why You Should Worry about Cancer Promotion by Diet equally Much as You Worry about Cancer Initiation by Carcinogens

• Good News! Cancer Cells are Metabolically Handicapped

• How Sugar, Also Much Protein, Inflammation and Injury Could Drive Epigenetic Cellular Evolution Toward Cancer

• Meat Is Amazingly Nutritious—But Is Information technology Amazingly Nutritious for Cancer Cells, Too?

• My Annual Anti-Cancer Fast

The bottom-line is that if lectins are more than harmful to otherwise healthy cells than fasting is, and no harder on cancer than fasting, so fasting rather than lectins is the amend way to try to prevent cancer. Of course, if certain lectins work as chemotherapy after someone has already been diagnosed with cancer, that would be keen. (Run across for instance this abstruse: "Lectins as bioactive plant proteins: a potential in cancer treatment.") And any anti-cancer effects of lectins have to be weighed in the balance when judging particular foods. Here one would want to know "How difficult on cancer?" and "How hard on healthy cells?" for each unlike blazon of lectin.

One identify where larkasaur powerfully countered one of Steven Gundry's claims about a specific lectin is this passage, which begins with a quotation from The Establish Paradox, followed by larkasaur'due south counter:

The lectin WGA (wheat germ agglutinin) ... tin can attach to the insulin docking port as if it were the actual insulin molecule, simply unlike the real hormone, it never lets go - with devastating results, including reduced musculus mass, starved brain and nerve cells, and plenty of fat.

His reference for this isEffects of wheat germ agglutinin on insulin bounden and insulin sensitivity of fat cells. I didn't run across the total paper, just from the abstruse, this was an in vitro written report where WGA really increased insulin sensitivity at low concentrations, but decreased it at loftier concentrations. I couldn't notice prove from other studies that the actual claret concentrations of WGA that someone might get from their nutrition, could affect insulin sensitivity. I did find some show that increased intake of whole grains vs refined grains (and whole grains accept more WGA) improves insulin sensitivity - e.g.Upshot of whole grains on insulin sensitivity in overweight hyperinsulinemic adults. I fifty-fifty found something aboutwheat germ supplementation alleviating insulin resistance. Wheat germ has a lot more WGA than other wheat products.

Larkasaur besides questions some specific claims about Neu5AC and Neu5GC. I was convinced that I should condone Steven Gundry's claims about Neu5AC and Neu5GC (which I didn't pay very much attention to when I read The Institute Paradox in any example).

I really like larkasaur'due south give-and-take of Steven Gundry's study. Larkasaur writes:

He did a trial on yard people, which was presented at anAmerican Eye Assoc. conference. 800 of them had either an autoimmune disease themselves or a family unit member with an autoimmune disease. They were asked to eat his nutrition, which "consisted of avoidance of grains, sprouted grains, pseudo-grains, beans and legumes, soy, peanuts, cashews, nightshades, melons and squashes, and non-Southern European cow milk products (Casein A1), and grain and/or bean fed animals.", and adiponectin and TNF-blastoff levels were measured every 3 months.

Their levels of TNF-alpha normalized inside 6 months, but the adiponectin levels remained elevated.

And so he concluded that "TNF-alpha tin can be used as a marker for gluten/lectin exposure in sensitive individuals."

But he doesn't say how those 1000 people were selected. Maybe they were cherry-picked to show a skilful outcome.

And, he didn't take a control group. A command group might consist of people eating his Plant Paradox diet, but also taking a capsule with wheat germ agglutinin (wheat lectin), and so that they would exist getting the aforementioned corporeality of lectins that people eating the average American diet do. And at that place would likewise be a test grouping, of people eating his Establish Paradox nutrition and taking a capsule with placebo. That would test whether WGA really has the furnishings that he thinks it does.

In improver to dismissing the dangers of A-1 milk to quickly, Larkasaur is too trusting of the official recommendations well-nigh the daily requirement for Vitamin D. On that, see

• Carola Binder—Why You lot Should Get More than Vitamin D: The Recommended Daily Allowance for Vitamin D Was Underestimated Due to Statistical Illiteracy

Michael Matthews has a strongly worded title to his long mail service: "Dr. Gundry'south Plant Paradox Debunked: 7 Science-Based Reasons It's a Scam." Hither are his Michael's "7 Science-Based Reasons It'southward a Scame":

1. The healthiest people in the world consume a lot of lectins.

2. There's no existent scientific contend near the nutritional value of fruits and vegetables.

3. Lectins don't make you fatty, overeating does.

4. Lectins don't give you heart illness.

5. Lectins don't cause "leaky gut" unless you have celiac disease.

6. Humans take been eating lectins a very, very long time.

7. Cooking lectins nullifies whatever potential negative side effects.

1 and 2 are bailiwick to my point higher up that a food can exist demonstrably better than the typical American diet or other typical modern nutrition, but still have problematic elements. 1 and six are subject to the betoken that Steven Gundry is not claiming that all lectins are harmful, but simply that lectins nosotros have not had acceptable evolutionary time to adapt to are harmful (though Steven Gundry may be somewhat inconsistent in realizing that this is the position he has to be taking given his logic). On 3, the Michael saying that "overeating makes you fatty" leaves unanswered the cardinal question: "What makes y'all overeat?" Steven Gundry is trying to answer the question of "What makes you overeat?" Anyone who thinks the reply to the question "What makes y'all overeat?" is either uninteresting or obvious is misguided given where we are in the science. As for iv and 5, at least in his department headings, Michael is treating "unproven" as the same as "proven false." No! These are important hypotheses that we don't accept adequate evidence on either way. Finally, on seven, Michael might exist right. This is the debate I mentioned earlier about whether pressure-cooking is necessary to destroy most lectins, as Steven Gundry says, or whether regular cooking is plenty. As a minor cavil, I do call back that Michael Matthews uses the word "nullify" inappropriately about the effect of soaking in reducing lectins by 50%. But the following passage every bit a whole is useful:

According to astudy conducted by scientists at the University of Sao Paulo, boiling beans and other lectin-containing foods for 15 minutes is plenty to eliminate almost all of the lectin content. If you use a pressure cooker you tin achieve the same outcome in merely 7.5 minutes, but the stop result is the same.

As the scientists put it,  "In relation to lectins, there seems to exist no residual activity left in properly processed legumes."

Soaking is another effective method for nullifying lectins. In areport conducted by scientists at Michigan State University, soaking cerise kidney beans for 12 hours reduced the lectin content by 50%.

Fruit, Nightshades and Other Vegetables with Seeds

Overall, while I think fruit should be eaten in moderation, I remember Steven Gundry's views are as well negative about fruit. Many types of fruit are relative loftier on the insulin index. Simply I doubt the lectins in fruits are a detail problem. Hence, in relation to fruit, let me recommend that you stick with what I said about fruit in "Forget Calorie Counting; It'southward the Insulin Index, Stupid" and ignore what Steven Gundry says nearly fruit. I am a little torn about whether or non it is OK to swallow the skin, which Steven Gundry advises against.

Other than the nightshades, such as tomatoes, peppers, potatoes, and eggplant, the aforementioned principles should employ to the botanical fruits that nosotros usually phone call vegetables, such as cucumbers—except that eating the seeds (or the pare) might be a problem.

On the nightshades, Steven Gundry recommends that they exist deskinned, deseeded and pressure level cooked. This may be reasonably close to the way many tomato products are made. Considering I love fresh tomatoes, I have tried to enquiry whether there is strong positive evidence that they are healthy that could overturn Steven Gundry's claims that they are problematic. But what I accept found is that the bulk of the prove in nutritional trials about tomatoes is virtually tomato products that accept been processed in the sorts of ways Steven Gundry recommends.

My summary of these abstracts is that while tomato products might reduce inflammation, whole tomatoes are neutral for inflammation, which one might imagine was due to an inflammation-reducing outcome of the balance of the lycopersicon esculentum (at least when cooked) combined with inflammation-increasing effects of the skin and seeds. Just there is some testify that whole tomatoes seem to reduce claret pressure level, enhance practiced cholesterol and reduce oxidative harm. And so, overall, fresh tomatoes sound good overall, though skinned, deseeded, cooked tomatoes might exist better. The large question I take about these studies are whether those benefits are only when tomatoes are added to a typical American diet (likely displacing some very bad foods), or whether those benefits would be there for me given the diet I am starting from (which currently doesn't include any fresh tomatoes).

Sometime I should try to do similar kind of online searching for enquiry about eggplant and peppers. (As I mentioned higher up, I don't feel I demand to do more enquiry almost potatoes because they are then high on the insulin index, I am confident they are best avoided.)

Some Favorable Evidence for Steven Gundry's Claims

On the basic idea that lectins are powerful in their effects on humans, have a look at this abstract:

Finally, here is a mail that is relatively supportive of Steven Gundry'southward claims:

Here are some of John O'Connors grades for Steven Gundry claims, along with quotations from some of the associated text:

• Altered gut microbiome drives lectin sensitivity: C+

Add to the list of medications we take the presence of toxic chemicals in everything from cookware  to mattresses , and the rise of GMO crops sprayed with known carcinogens similar glyphosate , information technology's not unreasonable to assume some people might not exist equipped with the microbes to properly digest certain lectins. Lectins are controversial, but increased pollution, prescription medications and widespread use of antibiotics seems to be changing the shape of our microbiomes. In his paper, Practise Dietary Lectins Cause Disease , allergist David L.J. Freed theorizes that a serious infection could exist the triggering event that alters the microbiome in such a style that we become decumbent to lectin sensitivity and certain autoimmune weather.

The altered microbiome theory is gaining traction as consensus fact , and it'southward imbalances of the gut that drive Gundry's claims nearly lectin. Some have bandage him as an outsider, just he's right in the mainstream of functional medicine. He argues that many people are and so used to low levels of inflammation caused by lectin that a state of reduced performance is their "new normal." Just fifty-fifty assuming that a large percentage of the population thrives on lectin, that doesn't mean we all practise.

For case, could a C-section birth, which is thought to exist deprive babies of important foundational microbes , combined with a serious infection and a few rounds of broad spectrum antibiotics be just what the doctor ordered for a problem with digesting lectins down the road?

• Lectins travel to distant organs: B-

At that place is even some evidence that lectins can travel to the encephalon. This written report  is footnote #v in the Plant Paradox, and information technology demonstrates (admitting in a worm model) that lectins can travel from the gut to the brain by way of the Vagus nerve where they bear upon the function of neurons, offering an culling theory on the cause and development of Parkinson's disease.

Again, the written report cited by Gundry is a worm model, and it'southward on the frontier of nutrition science, simply nonetheless, there are other papers that prove benefits to mental health when removing grains, and so it's something to experiment with and keep in heed when testing out theories behind feet for example. This Danish study  showed a 40% reduction in Parkinson'south affliction in people who had their Vagus nerve removed.

• Lectins and heart disease: C

Peanut oil is loftier in lectin. In a study titled "Lectin may contribute to the atherogenicity of peanut oil," researchers found that when lectin was reduced in peanut oil by washing, incidence of heart affliction dropped significantly in animal models (mice, rabbits and primates).

• Lectins can pause down the gut wall: A

Wheat proteins exercise us harm past attacking the gut lining, making the barrier between our intestines and the inside of the trunk more permeable, which for some, can atomic number 82 to symptoms ranging from digestive issues to achy joints to problems with mental health. ( R ) Zonulin, a protein which tin can break apart the "intracellular tight junctions" of the gut wall, is produced when we eat wheat. The theory of leaky gut  is that the resulting intestinal permeability lets all sorts of bad guys into our blood stream and the immune organisation goes wild as a upshot. ( R ) One of the well-nigh successful dietary interventions used to treat Rheumatoid Arthritis is a gluten free Vegan/Vegetarian diet. Of annotation: some of these RA diet studies  have found an "association between disease activity and intestinal flora indicating impact of diet on disease progression."

Determination

Steven Gundry's hypotheses should be taken very seriously. Both Steven Gundry himself and other researchers should take them as important claims to be proven or disproven by solid bear witness. In the concurrently, eating low on the insulin alphabetize is likely to become y'all most of the benefits of the Gundry diet. But if yous have any chronic autoimmune or other inflammatory reactions, my recommendation is that it would be worth your while to try to follow the full Gundry yeah and no listing of foods, see if it helps, and if information technology does, merely reintroduce foods you lot have subtracted 1 at a time so you tin can see if some particular food is a problem for y'all.

For annotated links to other posts on diet and health, encounter:

• Miles Kimball on Diet and Wellness: A Reader'south Guide

For case, here is what the first department looks like:

I. The Nuts

• 3 Achievable Resolutions for Weight Loss

• End Counting Calories; It'southward the Clock that Counts

• four Propositions on Weight Loss

• Forget Calorie Counting; Information technology'due south the Insulin Index, Stupid

• Obesity Is Always and Everywhere an Insulin Miracle

• Maintaining Weight Loss

• Why a Low-Insulin-Index Diet Isn't Exactly a 'Lowcarb' Diet

• What Steven Gundry's Volume 'The Institute Paradox' Adds to the Principles of a Low-Insulin-Index Diet

• The Problem with Processed Food

• On Exercise and Weight Loss

• David Ludwig: It Takes Fourth dimension to Adapt to a Lowcarb, Highfat Nutrition

• Competition from Generic Insulin Would Do a Lot to Reduce Medical Costs; But Reducing the Incidence of Blazon Two Diabetes by Changes in the American Nutrition Would Do Much More

• Jonathan Shaw: Could Inflammation Be the Cause of Myriad Chronic Diseases?

hicksobscou.blogspot.com

Source: https://blog.supplysideliberal.com/post/2019/7/30/questioning-steve-gundrys-views

Share this post