Vegetarianism
The introduction of the author is surprising, as his personal point of view may seem open and scalable, but is sometimes on the verge of insult on vegetarianism, contradicts scientific data it then reports (not to mention those he could not tell, instead of fault perhaps). A he understood and accepted the foundation and all the stakes of this way of eating (and not this food mode)? Not sure, especially when one reads its shortcuts on the reasons for vegetarianism and according to him he directs the reader to what he calls the argument "the most serious" namely the health of the human being ...
To recap on the nutritional quality of the two regimes: no more deficiencies in vegetarians than in omnivores.
In fact, resuming point by point all his writings, there is in the bottom of many contradictions between what he thinks (his own thinking but also his choice omnivorous as a nutritionist / person) and what he advises or addresses. Repeated use double quotes certain words and turns of phrase other intellectual orientation leave a trace that back to the sacrosanct consumption of animals and animal products (that is cultural!). But the author warns more or less directly of his intentions from the beginning, like what to read a bit before buying the book avoids mistakes.
Slimming recipes
None of revenues includes, for example, nutritional values (calories, contributions, etc.). He just said that these recipes will help you lose weight especially through their fibers and absence of bad fats' There is no schedule of meals to illustrate what to do, not follow in time.
The advice on how to feed added after some recipes are already known, but may help some people.
The interesting parts of this book are a synthesis of nutritional intake, on the general properties and diversity of "new" foods.
The majority of revenue is certainly original for non regulars: amaranth salad, tofu soup with lemon, seitan stir-fry vegetables, spinach almond bread, etc.