 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Prostate Cancer / February 2008Re: Skeptik Diet
Skeptik wrote: >should I deny myself my few >pleasures left such a good quality chocolate, etc., based on an >unproven anecdote about sugar? >Red meat is another one we all hear...but someone in this group >mentioned he was a vegetsarian for 20 years and still was dx'd with >pca. >I'd also hate to give up a nightly glass of wine with my meal. >So, bottom line: does diet/food even enter in the discussion at this >stage of the game? Skeptik, the foods you don't want to give up chime with me. I'll add the dreaded coffee. Look at all the maybes, and buts, and ifs and ands and pots and pans in the diet advice above. In this great and exclusive club of ours, the ifs and buts of all the myriad treatments we might or might not have are what dominates -and clouds -our future. And so at least as regards diet, the advice which surely clamours to be heard is - Enjoy! Tell your Pca it can go stuff itself, while you eat what you enjoy and drink what you enjoy- all done in moderation. Viva Skeptik - and the rest of our band. MikeHi I'll drink to that! > I'll drink to that! Some of you folks need to learn how important it is to provide some context to your posts by including pertinent quotes, an option you can find in your toolbar right now. I have no idea what this post refers to, for example. I.P. >> I'll drink to that! > > I have no idea what this post refers to, > for example. > > I.P. It's pretty obvious it refers to the previous post in the thread, in which MikeHi wrote, just one day before, "Tell your Pca it can go stuff itself, while you eat what you enjoy and drink what you enjoy- all done in moderation." I agree some posts don't seem to make sense bacause they're responding to a response made 4 or 5 posts ago and, like IP said contain no quotes to explain it. I skip that procedure when I'm answering the last post in a thead. So, it's Sunday afternoon, I'm Italian, and I'm gonna have a bowl of macaroni and meatballs and a glass of red wine, otherwise known as the "mediterrannean diet" lol > I agree some posts don't seem to make sense bacause they're responding > to a response made 4 or 5 posts ago and, like IP said contain no > quotes to explain it. > I skip that procedure when I'm answering the last post in a thead. So do some other people, and it often renders their post meaningless. I have no clue what was last said in a thread unless I click through and read complex drop-down menus to reveal old posts. I very seldom bother to do that. I.P. >> I agree some posts don't seem to make sense bacause they're responding >> to a response made 4 or 5 posts ago and, like IP said contain no [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >I.P. I was also surprised at your post, I.P.. Now you explain, I understand better. O.t.o.h. Safire, Skepik and me obviously sort posts by very simple drop-down threads. I certainly assumed everybody did. Do you voluntarily sort by 'latest'? I'm only asking because if yours is not a one off, then I will also have to mind my ways! :>) (is the nose right???). My very best wishes MikeHi MikeHi, You can include me in your list. I never have any problem reading and understanding post. Most respond after the post that is relevant to them. Some users news reader may make it more difficult for some to keep track. That's why I like "TalkAboutNetwork" as it keeps it simple and archives everything. Ron S. -- Message posted using http://www.talkaboutsupport.com/group/alt.support.cancer.prostate/ More information at http://www.talkaboutsupport.com/faq.html > I was also surprised at your post, I.P.. Now you explain, I understand > better. O.t.o.h. Safire, Skepik and me obviously sort posts by very > simple drop-down threads. I certainly assumed everybody did. Do you > voluntarily sort by 'latest'? I'm only asking because if yours is not > a one off, then I will also have to mind my ways! As I always have with every newsreader I've owned, I set mine to display only the TOPIC of each UNREAD post. i.e., I don't see the body of ANY post, and not even the TOPIC line of any post I've read, unless I click on the topic of a new post or visually hunt through old posts via additional drop-down menus of old topic lines. This way I can scan through a day's new posts by each post's topic in a glance, and click on and read the ones of interest, all in one screenful. I never see any reference to posts I've already read unless I go look them up, so an orphan comment is often ignored unless it looks *really* important. I.P. I don't blame you. It takes a lot less time to do it right. > So, it's Sunday afternoon, I'm Italian, and I'm gonna have a bowl of > macaroni and meatballs and a glass of red wine, otherwise known as the > "mediterrannean diet" lol That's a good one. If you don't mind, it's going to be my standard retort to the oft-recommended Med diet. On Feb 8, 1:23 pm, Mik...@anon.co.uk wrote: > Skeptik wrote: > >should I deny myself my few [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >So, bottom line: does diet/food even enter in the discussion at this > >stage of the game? I have read that there is some evidence that people who eat a healthy diet have a lower incidence of various cancers than people who don't. However I've also read that they key thing in our dietary habit is not strict adherence to a specific diet, but taking things in moderation. A little wine is good for you. A lot of wine can do you harm. A little fat or sugar or starch is probably okay. A diet that consists of nothing but that, with no green vegetables or fruits, is going to be bad. A certain number of calories are required. Too many calories will make you fat. etc. But I'm no expert. Someone who knows more about nutrition can chime in here. Alan > they key thing > in our dietary habit is not strict adherence to a specific diet, > but taking things in moderation. > > Someone who knows more about nutrition > can chime in here. Let me just say that while moderation is important, greater information and diligence pay off with minimal sacrifice if for no other reason than the giant variation in people's definition of "moderate". It wouldn't surprise me if a few clicks would reveal polls showing that half the obese couch potatoes -- and many lean people who don't know what they're doing -- out there would say their diet is not merely moderate, but fine, when in fact it's harming them significantly. For example, every credentialed author I've seen discuss trans fats says they should have a zero tolerance policy, yet millions eat them all day. I.P. Alan wrote: > people who don't. However I've also read that they key > thing in our dietary habit is not strict adherence to a > specific diet, Health nuts are going to be blowing their minds, dying from nothing in a hospital bed. > but taking things in moderation. That is why we alternate meals here. Chicken, fish, beef, stir-fry veggies, pork, fish. Once or twice a month we'll order an Angus burger at either the Golden Arches or Burger King, and split it. Joe N. How did the Dairy Queen get pregnant? The Burger King flipped his whopper at her. ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.