Study Shows Blood Type Diet Doesn’t Work

Study Shows Blood Type Diet Doesn’t Work

Pseudosciences are in many ways like cargo cults. When observed from afar they seem to have all the trappings of legitimacy. Astrologers, as an example, have their own professional associations and journals. Over the hundreds of years astrology has accumulated an impressive amount of knowledge that’s taught in dedicated colleges.

The impressive sounding trappings don’t change the fact that astrology amounts to little more than made-up nonsense. The location of the stars during birth has no known way to affect personality. And when tested objectively, astrology fails to deliver.

  • Astrologers performed as well as guessing in a double-blind study of astrology
  • In another blinded study (PDF) astrologers failed to beat either random change or laypeople in matching horoscopes to personality types. Furthermore, there was no internal consistency in astrologers’ predictions – predictions by different astrologers didn’t match any better than would be expected from random chance.

In other words, there is no cargo cult alchemy that transforms pure bunk into knowledge, regardless of how impressive the trappings.

Now, with the short introduction alchemically transformed into long detour, we get to the point of the post. PLOS One recently published a study evaluating the popular Blood Type Diet on heart disease risk factors by Wang et al.

I occasionally get emails asking if Blood Type Diet helps acne, so I thought to take a moment to talk about the study and the diet in relation to acne.

Blood Type Diet primer

Let’s start by looking at what the diet is. Blood Type Diet was invented by a naturopathic doctor Peter D’Adamo, following the time-honored naturopathic tradition of just making stuff up.

It seems the theory is based on interesting data regarding differences in susceptibility of different blood groups to diseases as well as the possible interaction of blood type to dietary lectins. Looking at the deceptively names ‘Scientific Basis’ section of Dr. D’Adamo’s website reveals a lot of ‘could be’, ‘possibly’ and ‘perhaps’ type of information.

In addition to differences in disease susceptibility between different blood types, he presents information about possible differences in how red blood cells from different blood types react to lectins. He also points to some observations where people of different blood types showed somewhat different digestive responses to fats, proteins and carbohydrates.

This kind of data is what I call “Oh, that’s interesting” type of results. These are very preliminary findings and we really have no idea whether these have any significance to real world health outcomes. For example, it’s possible that people with different blood groups digest food somewhat differently, yet this difference has no real health effects. It’s equally possible that the findings Dr. D’Adamo points to are just ‘scientific noise’, observations that turned out to be false or unreliable.

What’s completely missing from Dr. D’Adamo’s scientific basis is actual, real science. He presents no data showing that adhering to blood type diet yields better results than adhering to non-blood type, healthy diet.

In other words, the ‘scientific basis’ consists entirely of preliminary and questionable findings that can be interpreted in many ways.

A systemic review from 2013 concluded that

No evidence currently exists to validate the purported health benefits of blood type diets. To validate these claims, studies are required that compare the health outcomes between participants adhering to a particular blood type diet (experimental group) and participants continuing a standard diet (control group) within a particular blood type population.

Blood type diets lack supporting evidence: a systematic review.

However, this doesn’t stop Dr. D’Adamo from employing alt-med alchemy to transform a legitimate and common sense concepts (ancestry affects your dietary sensitivities, personalized medicine) into utter nonsense (you can use blood type to predict your optimal diet and personalize medicine).

Blood Type Diet studied

None of this of course means the diet wouldn’t or couldn’t work. To determine whether adhering to the blood type diet has an effect on heart disease risk factors analyzed 1455 participants to the Toronto Nutrigenomics and Health study. Each participant was asked to track their diet for 1 month using a diet questionnaire that tracked the type and amount of foods eaten. From this data the investigators determined how well each participant adhered to each of the blood type specific diets, and for each participant an adherence score for each blood type specific diets was calculated. So one individual could have adherence score of 50 (out of 100) for diet for blood type A and 20 for diet for blood type C, as an example. Blood type of each participant was determined from a blood sample.

The researchers then asked several questions from this data:

  1. Is adherence to a particular blood type diet associated with better health, regardless of blood type. So for example, are people with higher adherence score to blood type diet A in better health than people with low adherence score?
  2. Does adhering to correct blood type diet improve health outcomes? In other words, are people with high adherence scores to correct blood type diet in better health than people with low adherence scores? So are people with blood type A who stick to the diet for blood type A in better health than people who don’t stick to it or stick to a wrong diet?

Here are the main findings for the question #1:

  • People who adhered to the diet for blood type A (lots of fruits and vegetables and grains, minimal dairy and meat) had lower BMI, blood pressure, insulin and blood sugar levels.
  • Adherence to diet for blood type B (fruits and veggies and moderate amounts of grains, dairy and eggs) was associated with slight improvements in HDL cholesterol levels but nothing else.
  • Adherence to AB diet (similar to type A diet but with more restrictions) was associated with lower insulin, cholesterol and triglyceride levels.
  • Adherence to O diet (lots of fruits and vegetables and meat, similar to paleo) was associated with lower triglyceride levels but nothing else.

There’s nothing surprising about these results. All the blood type diets call for large amounts of fruits and vegetables and reductions in processed and junk foods. So it’s not surprising that higher adherence scores are linked to better health.

So what about the question #2? The real money question.

Here’s what the investigators wrote:

In order to examine whether individuals would benefit more from following their own ‘Blood-Type’ diet, the levels of cardiometabolic disease risk factors were compared between individuals with the matched blood group and the unmatched blood group while sharing similar diet adherence. However, no significant interaction effects were observed between diet adherence and blood group for most of the risk factors, suggesting that effects of following ‘Blood-Type’ diets is independent of an individual’s blood group.

In other words, blood group had no effect on health outcomes.

Study criticism

To be honest, this was not the strongest of studies and suffers from many problems. For example, the participants weren’t asked to follow the blood type diet, instead the data was drawn from another study and analyzed again for the purpose of this study. As a consequence, most participants didn’t receive high adherence scores for any diet.

Dr. D’Adamo called the study flawed and outlined many other problems with it. I would agree with him that we shouldn’t dismiss the blood type diet idea based on this study alone. However, when you combine a very implausible idea with negative study results, weak as they may be, defending the very implausible idea becomes so much harder.

What about acne? Can Eating Right For Your Type help acne?

And finally we come to acne. I’m sure you’ve read stories at acne forums where people swear that the blood type diet cured their acne.

I actually don’t doubt those stories. It’s very much possible that going on blood type diet helps your skin, but this has nothing to do with ‘eating right for your type’.

Another recently published study shows that people with moderate to severe acne eat much more sugar and junk food than people with mild or no acne.

It’s well-known that eating a lot of sugar spikes acne-causing hormones and that reducing sugar and other bad carbohydrates also reduces acne. The diets for all blood types make some very sensible recommendations, such as reducing sugar, fast carbohydrates and processed food, and recommends eating more fruits and vegetables.

Anyone who makes such diet changes will improve both their overall and skin health. There’s no need to complicate things by adding blood type on top of that.


There’s no question that the Blood Type Diet is popular. Dr. D’Adamo has sold over 7 million copies of his various ‘Eat Right For Your Type’ books. But the popularity has less to do with the scientific merits of the idea and more to do with people’s desire for simple solutions to complex problems, i.e., all the answers can be found with a simple blood test. And it helps to have Dr. Oz and other celebrity peddlers of nonsense singing praise for your book.

Perhaps time will prove Dr. D’Adamo correct, but as things stand now there’s no evidence that blood type has any effect on the optimal diet for you.

‘Eating right for your type’ can indeed help acne. Not because you are somehow optimizing diet for your body, but because you are implementing common sense dietary recommendations and eating fewer foods that are known to aggravate acne – for all body types.

About Me

Hi, I am Acne Einstein(a.k.a. Seppo Puusa). I'm a bit of a science nerd who is also passionate about health. I enjoy digging through medical journals for acne treatment gems I can share here. You can read more about my journey through acne and how I eventually ended up creating this.

6 thoughts on “Study Shows Blood Type Diet Doesn’t Work”

  1. Keep posting, I really love your posts on quackery, they are so funny and informative. The blood type diet makes little sense. I was hooked for a while and thought that it’s true that most people with blood type A don’t like eating meat, even started asking my friends but it still makes little sense. Of course, nothing can beat the moon diet when it comes to stupidity and I’m ashamed to admit that I even tried it once.

    • Glad to hear you like the posts. I’m afraid you represent the minority as I mostly just get hate mail from people for writing posts that are critical of their ‘woo of choice’. I think you also mentioned that you didn’t like me much at first, lol. Anyway, I’ll write these every now and then 🙂

      Nothing to be ashamed of if you believed into the blood type diet. On the face of it, it’s not entirely ridiculous idea, and there can be differences in how different blood groups react to foods. The problem is that while such a thing is possible, there’s no good evidence it actually happens, or that eating right for your type would be better than just eating plain-vanilla healthy diet.

      Moon diet, lol. Had to Google that… and *facepalm*

  2. Hi, I agree with you wholeheartedly however I would like to make a mention about naturopaths. As a naturopath myself (and also a dietitian) I would like to mention that this diet in no way, shape or form is aligned with recommendations we would make (in either modality). It is just as shocking and nonsense to us as it is to you that such a diet has been developed, publicised and promoted with absolutely no scientific evidence of its efficacy; we find it extremely unethical. In Australia to practice naturopathy the degree is now only available as a major in a bachelor of health science (as it should be) where it was previously available in short courses and diplomas. We have fought hard for this to eliminate the non-science grounding works of the shorter courses and fight for the legitimacy of the degree. like other majors in the bachelor all recommendations need to be formulated based on current legitimate, research, like you would expect from a bachelor of health science. Alike my dietetics degree, the nutrition component of my naturopathy degree stemmed from the brilliant works of the NHMRC and similar global medical research organisations, government regulations and published peer reviewed articles obviously. Please don’t associate the non-professional workings of some naturopaths to be associated with all of us, Thanks.

    • Hi Melissa!

      Thanks for your comment. You actually voiced my frustrations with naturopathy pretty well. We all know that traditional docs are time-starved and often dismiss dietary and natural solutions too easily.

      I would like nothing better than to be able to tell people to consult a naturopathic doctor. Unfortunately, it’s such a hit and miss with them. The whole profession has a reputation of promoting pseudoscientific nonsense, such as dubious food sensitivity tests, homeopathy, denying the effectiveness of common vaccines, etc.

      I do hope that naturopaths can establish science-based standards of care and weed out the pseudoscientific nonsense from the profession. If you are doing that in Australia, then I wish you nothing but success.

      • It’s happening everywhere around the world not just in Aus; but unfortunately when a stereotype is put in place it sticks; and we see a lot more ‘celebrity’ type naturopaths or bloggers who claim to be from the modality (but who generally don’t actually have a degree) misrepresenting the modality and fueling that fire. What are consumers meant to think? Of course, I get it- and it’s just as infuriating for us! There are obviously still poor practitioners (like you would expect from any modality, or job for that matter) which cause this really vivid stereotype to continue to be grounded regardless for the rest of us. That stereotype unfortunately isn’t going to go away quickly no matter how many changes have been made in the last decade or so. However, the reality is you now can’t pass a bachelor naturopathy degree without being evidence based and i think it’s just (sadly) atm a matter of researching a practitioner that fits the ideal of what you want to see- and who is practicing based on the EB principles of how we were taught, and thats really easy to do. As regulations for follow up study and regulations for practice get stricter in this field all naturopaths will be practicing within scope like the rest of us who already are and we won’t have to hear things like this about our modality on a daily basis. Even though I’v met some doozy naturopaths, I know a lot more incredible, intelligent, ethical ones practicing in scope who dedicate their lives to changing the lives of others, like absolutely any field of health science whether it be natural health or allopathic medicine.

Comments are closed.