 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Nutrition / March 2008Kwasniewski - a kook or the next Nobel price winner?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Optimal_Diet http://homodiet.netfirms.com/misc/cv_jk.htm http://www.cybernaut.com.au/optimal_nutrition/ New Diet: 'Fit Through Fat' Featuring Foods Including Lard, Heavy Cream & Veal Brains (CBS) From decadent jelly-filled paczkis to savory fat-saturated kielbasas, Polish cuisine has never been regarded as health food. But, as CBS News Correspondent Cynthia Bowers reports, what a nutritionist would call a recipe for heart attacks is just what one doctor ordered for Izabela Strepak. She went from a size 14 to a size 4. "I guess that's a lot," she says. She lost a lot by eating a lot - a steady diet of lard, cream and fatty meats. It's a diet she's convinced keeps her lean and healthy. "We have in our heads - our brain - that fat is bad for you," says Strepak. "Fat is good for you, actually." The "fit through fat" idea comes from Poland and Dr. Jan Kwasniewski. After decades of working as a dietician in a military hospital, he wrote a book called the "Optimal Diet," an even higher-fat, low-carb Atkins-like regimen. He said the diet works because the animal fat provides energy. He's talking about eating 250 grams per day, three times more than most health guidelines. To eat that much you have to start early. Breakfast would require a four egg-yolk omelet cooked in lard, a side of bacon and sausage, toast bathed in butter - all washed down with a cup of heavy whipping cream. And that's just a third of your fat goal. In what passes for the diet's American headquarters - a small market in a heavily Polish Chicago neighborhood - Tomasz Zielinski sells everything you need for the Optimal lifestyle: veal brains in aspic (14 percent fat), spicy lard (62 percent fat) and bread (43 percent fat). Lucyna Biganski says she could barely walk before she started the diet. "It's a change of style of life," she says. "It's not only for a week (or) a month. "You lose weight, you feel better - that's it." With only a handful of followers in the U.S., don't look for the Optimal diet to replace South Beach or Atkins anytime soon. While cardiologists cringe, if you believe the faithful and can stomach it, fat may be a new fad. Taka" > He's talking about eating 250 grams per day, three times more than > most health guidelines. To eat that much you have to start early. > Breakfast would require a four egg-yolk omelet cooked in lard, a side > of bacon and sausage, toast bathed in butter - all washed down with a > cup of heavy whipping cream. And that's just a third of your fat goal. Such guidelines are for ill people. For different illnes seperate recomendations. For healthy are the three recommediations: 1. Carbs below 50 grams per day, 2.Ratio proteins/fat 1/1,5 -3.5. The ratio is for grams. 1.5 is for weight lossing. 3.Alkohol 4 grams. But the most important recommendation is that the all should be the animal products. But not only meat. All parts of animals should be eaten. So eggs and cream are the best (they are complete - from egg grows chick, from cream calf). It is simply (for healthy) French cooking with English breakfast. For diabetes - the John Rollo diet. S* > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Optimal_Diet > [quoted text clipped - 52 lines] > cardiologists cringe, if you believe the faithful and can stomach it, > fat may be a new fad. Dr. Kwasniewski also says, oddly enough, that the Japanese diet is also a good diet--very low fat, largely plant based with rice a staple in the diet. I am not surprised that the lady who lost so much weight on the Dr.'s diet did so since it is essentially an Atkins diet and no one questions that an atkins diet promotes weight loss. So does starvation which produces the same reaction in the body as ketosis. Dolores One thing these people like Taubes and Kwasniewski should control for is the PUFA versus SFA intake but none of them does ... J Clin Epidemiol. 1998 Jun;51(6):443-60. The questionable role of saturated and polyunsaturated fatty acids in cardiovascular disease. Ravnskov U. A fat diet, rich in saturated fatty acids (SFA) and low in polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA), is said to be an important cause of atherosclerosis and cardiovascular diseases (CVD). The evidence for this hypothesis was sought by reviewing studies of the direct link between dietary fats and atherosclerotic vascular disease in human beings. The review included ecological, dynamic population, cross- sectional, cohort, and case-control studies, as well as controlled, randomized trials of the effect of fat reduction alone. The positive ecological correlations between national intakes of total fat (TF) and SFA and cardiovascular mortality found in earlier studies were absent or negative in the larger, more recent studies. Secular trends of national fat consumption and mortality from coronary heart disease (CHD) in 18-35 countries (four studies) during different time periods diverged from each other as often as they coincided. In cross- sectional studies of CHD and atherosclerosis, one group of studies (Bantu people vs. Caucasians) were supportive; six groups of studies (West Indians vs. Americans, Japanese, and Japanese migrants vs. Americans, Yemenite Jews vs. Yemenite migrants; Seminole and Pima Indians vs. Americans, Seven Countries) gave partly supportive, partly contradictive results; in seven groups of studies (Navajo Indians vs. Americans; pure vegetarians vs. lacto-ovo-vegetarians and non- vegetarians, Masai people vs. Americans, Asiatic Indians vs. non- Indians, north vs. south Indians, Indian migrants vs. British residents, Geographic Study of Atherosclerosis) the findings were contradictory. Among 21 cohort studies of CHD including 28 cohorts, CHD patients had eaten significantly more SFA in three cohorts and significantly less in one cohort than had CHD-free individuals; in 22 cohorts no significant difference was noted. In three cohorts, CHD patients had eaten significantly more PUFA, in 24 cohorts no significant difference was noted. In three of four cohort studies of atherosclerosis, the vascular changes were unassociated with SFA or PUFA; in one study they were inversely related to TF. No significant differences in fat intake were noted in six case-control studies of CVD patients and CVD-free controls; and neither total or CHD mortality were lowered in a meta-analysis of nine controlled, randomized dietary trials with substantial reductions of dietary fats, in six trials combined with addition of PUFA. The harmful effect of dietary SFA and the protective effect of dietary PUFA on atherosclerosis and CVD are questioned. PMID: 9635993 It seems that the low carb is a winner at least in the modern world full of refined carbs and PUFAs: SOURCE: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/12/071203091236.htm QUOTE: The current work concludes that "lowering total and saturated fat only had a small effect on circulating inflammatory markers whereas reducing carbohydrate led to considerably greater reductions in a number of pro-inflammatory cytokines, chemokines, and adhesion molecules. These data implicate dietary carbohydrate rather than fat as a more significant nutritional factor contributing to inflammatory processes." UNQUOTE. Taka On Mar 22, 7:55 am, Taka <taka0...@gmail.com> wrote:carbohydrate- induced lipogenesis << One might wonder now .. HOW .. do .. plants kill ya .. there .. Taka .. How doooo .. plants kill ya .. ? Figure that one .. out .. you'll make a million .. Here .. run with it .. The iron and carbs .. **react** .. with each other .. Sooo .. what carbs did these guys USE .. ? Beans .. ? I have a hard time believing eating a carbohydrate rich five-bean soup is going to cause me to have an 'inflammatory reaction' .. but hey .. Who loves ya. Tom Jesus Was A Vegetarian! http://tinyurl.com/2r2nkh Man Is A Herbivore! http://tinyurl.com/a3cc3 DEAD PEOPLE WALKING http://tinyurl.com/zk9fk > It seems that the low carb is a winner at least in the modern world > full of refined carbs and PUFAs: [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Taka carbohydrate rich five-bean soup << http://www.carbs-information.com/carb-in-legumes/carbs-chick-peas.htm Chick Peas and Diet Legumes (like Chick Peas), have a high carb count but a much lower "net carb" or "digestible carb" content. They contain several vitamins and minerals. They are a good source of dietary fiber, which has a number of health benefits. For example, fiber helps protect against digestive disorders and disease. According to at least one clinical diet study, an eating-plan rich in beans can help patients with either type 2 or type 1 diabetes to reduce their daily insulin intake. Healthy low carb diets typically recommend beans in later phases of the diet plan. Who loves ya. Tom Jesus Was A Vegetarian! http://tinyurl.com/2r2nkh Man Is A Herbivore! http://tinyurl.com/a3cc3 DEAD PEOPLE WALKING http://tinyurl.com/zk9fk > On Mar 22, 7:55 am, Taka <taka0...@gmail.com> wrote:carbohydrate- > induced lipogenesis << [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > > - Show quoted text - > carbohydrate rich five-bean soup << > [quoted text clipped - 69 lines] > > > - Show quoted text - The problem with beans is that they can give you CHD - it's all in the latest Cordain newsletters: http://www.thepaleodiet.com/newsletter/back_issues.shtml The problem is called *** LECTINS *** For most of our evolution we did not have fire - can you eat beans and grains in raw? The answer is NO. Can you eat meat in raw? The answer is YES. Can you eat fruits in raw? Of course YES. The best human diet is eating meat in the winter and fruits in the summer and leave the other vegetables to herbivores and birds who have developed special digestive organs/symbionts to deal with them! Taka On Mar 22, 5:49 pm, Taka <taka0...@gmail.com> wrote:The problem with beans is that they can give you CHD << That's kinda contrary to alot of studies .. http://tinyurl.com/2jnbae Frequent Bean Eating May Reduce Risk of Heart Disease | AORN ...Frequent Bean Eating May Reduce Risk of Heart Disease from AORN Journal in Health provided free by Find Articles. findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FSL/is_4_71/ai_64424040 - 35k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this Beans and Peas Can Cut Heart Disease RiskBulking up the diet with legumes such as beans and peas can lower the risk of heart disease. Men and women who ate legumes at least four times a week had a ... curezone.com/art/read.asp?ID=1&db=13&C0=74 - 41k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this WHFoods: Kidney beansA study published in the Archives of Internal Medicine confirms that eating high fiber foods, such as kidney beans, helps prevent heart disease. ... www.whfoods.com/genpage.php?tname=foodspice&dbid=87 - 33k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this Food for Thought: Beans, Beans, Good for the Heart, Science News ...9 Jul 2005 ... One serving of black beans a day helps stave off heart disease, ... Beans protected the study participants against heart disease ... www.sciencenews.org/articles/20050709/food.asp - 45k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this Beans Glorious Beans | Active.com On Mar 22, 5:49 pm, Taka <taka0...@gmail.com> wrote:it's all in the latest Cordain newsletters: http://www.thepaleodiet.com/newsletter/back_issues.shtml The problem is called *** LECTINS *** << I think I already pointed out to you the problem with lectins .. "Deferoxamine, desferrithiocin inhibited lectin-induced proliferation of both human and murine T cells" Blood 1990 Nov 15;76(10):2052-9 The effect of desferrithiocin, an oral iron chelator, on T-cell function. Bierer BE, Nathan DG Department of Pediatric Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA 02115. Desferrithiocin is a new, potent, orally available iron chelator. To determine whether this drug might be useful not only for iron-overload but also for immunosuppression, we studied the in vitro effects of desferrithiocin on T-lymphocyte function. Like deferoxamine, desferrithiocin inhibited, in a dose-dependent fashion, mitogen- and lectin-induced proliferation of both human and murine T cells. It was active at a concentration of 10 micrograms/ mL. The inhibition of proliferation was reversed by ferrous chloride, but not by other metal salts, recombinant IL-2, or conditioned medium. Desferrithiocin also inhibited proliferation of constitutively dividing, and factor- independent EBV-transformed B cell and leukemic T-cell lines. Although desferrithiocin inhibited the induction of cytotoxic T lymphocyte (CTL) activity, it did not inhibit CTL- or natural killer-induced cytotoxicity. The agent did not inhibit the expression of activation antigens such as the IL-2 receptor on T cells, nor early measures of T-cell activation such as the influx of intracellular calcium. Thus, desferrithiocin, like deferoxamine, is a potent and reversible inhibitor of T-cell proliferation. This anti-proliferative effect inhibits T-cell function. Bioavailability after oral administration is a unique property of desferrithiocin, and would make it an attractive alternative to deferoxamine. Its immunomodulating properties may therefore be exploited in vivo to inhibit graft rejection or autoreactive T cells. PMID: 2242426, UI: 91055106 Who loves ya. Tom Jesus Was A Vegetarian! http://tinyurl.com/2r2nkh Man Is A Herbivore! http://tinyurl.com/a3cc3 DEAD PEOPLE WALKING http://tinyurl.com/zk9fk > > carbohydrate rich five-bean soup << > [quoted text clipped - 87 lines] > > - Show quoted text - > > carbohydrate rich five-bean soup << > [quoted text clipped - 87 lines] > > - Show quoted text - If beans are the seeds of vegetables, then I do not see why you could not eat them raw. Dried is something else. Dried they would have to be cooked. Peas taste best when fresh and raw. The farming of grains is only about ten or fifteen thousand years old. It seems to me that people wouldn't have chosen to farm something that they hadn't already been eating, albeit in smaller quantities. If for most of our evolution we did not have fire, then it also seems reasonable that for most of our evolution we did not have the means to kill enough animals to sustain a mostly meat diet. People will eat what is easily obtainable in their environment. The inuit eat a mostly animal protein diet, but the first thing they do upon slaying a walrus is tear open the stomach to get at the carb- containing clams. And the first thing they do upon killing caribou is tear open the stomach to eat the carb containing contents from these grazers. So it seems likely that our ancestors, living in less harsh conditions would gather any carbs they could get and not leave them just for the birds and other animals. No hunter or group of hunters are lucky enough to make a kill every time they hunt. It stands to reason that there must have been non animal food in the diet at all times of year. Dolores >>> carbohydrate rich five-bean soup << >>> http://www.carbs-information.com/carb-in-legumes/carbs-chick-peas.htm [quoted text clipped - 66 lines] > not eat them raw. Dried is something else. Dried they would have to > be cooked. Peas taste best when fresh and raw. Dried might even be better. Dried, they can be stored for ages. They can be ground up, washed, exposed to the weather, and mixed with other things, such as grains, leaves, spices, vinegar, oil, wine, and ashes. And when eaten dry, they mix better with saliva.  SignatureMarshall Price of Miami Known to Yahoo as d021317c >> carbohydrate rich five-bean soup << >> [quoted text clipped - 66 lines] > leave the other vegetables to herbivores and birds who have developed > special digestive organs/symbionts to deal with them! A few points to consider: First, look up lectins online. They're not just essential plant proteins, they're essential to human metabolism, too, and there are thousands of them. (Cordain's identification of ricin as the first one to be identified is a red herring, as is the whole discussion of peanuts, though even they can be, and are, eaten raw.) Second, note that even Cordain says, "Most dietary lectins are benign and non-toxic to humans...." Third, "most of our evolution" was prehistoric. Who knows "we did not have fire"? Ovens have been found among the oldest known human habitations. Fourth, of course you can eat beans and grains raw. Peas are among the oldest foods in agriculture; you can eat them raw. Before they were cultivated, they must have had ancestors which were eaten by people. The Roman army carried pouches of raw wheat with them, which they ate raw. Fifth, note that Cordain is concerned with cardiovascular disease, but why suspect that prehistoric man had any problem with cardiovascular disease? Sixth, note that lectins bind to carbohydrates, which suggests a simple way to keep them from causing trouble: eating them with things which bind them. I haven't looked into it, but the most obvious candidate for binding legume lectins is grain: the time-honored, world-wide, protein-perfect combination. Seventh, with or without fire, our ancient predecessors surely had water and stones. Many foods in ancient, primitive cultures are prepared by grinding and washing away toxic substances. Eighth, why suggest that only *birds* have symbionts to protect them? So do we. Nine tenths of our cells are non-human, and of astounding, barely investigated, variety. They live in our digestive tracts. Not only do they fight off germs and provide us with vitamins, but they are known to protect us from toxins. Prehistoric people may very well have had varieties which protected them from any conceivable lectins. Ninth, Cordain seems to be inexplicably disturbed by salt, but all kinds of creatures, far more primitive than prehistoric humans, seek it out -- and not only salt, but varieties of mud. They bind many toxic substances in food, and life would be impossible for many creatures without them. Tenth, all of Cordain's speculation about "paleo" diet is just that: speculation. If no legumes have been found so far among the stomach contents of our paleolithic (or paleo-anything) ancestors, that proves nothing more than a present lack of evidence. There was a time when our ancestors lived in trees and ate mostly fruit -- and perhaps, like monkeys, had to seek out certain leaves to cope with stomachaches. There was a time when they lived in the sea and ate mostly fish. There were times when they lived in caves, stone huts, or leather yurts and ate grains and legumes. All we can say for sure was that there was never a time when they went extinct! ;-) SignatureMarshall Price of Miami Known to Yahoo as d021317c > The iron and carbs .. **react** .. with each other .. Carbs have NO double bonds and are therefore MUCH more stable than the molecules with double bonds such as PUFAs (including ALA). Therefore it's PRIMARILY the iron reacting with (poly)unsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) what causes the problem. You are one step late when you look at the products of reactions between oxidized PUFAs and carbs such as AGEs ... Taka >> The iron and carbs .. **react** .. with each other .. > > Carbs have NO double bonds.... Are you sure? SignatureMarshall Price of Miami Known to Yahoo as d021317c > It seems that the low carb is a winner at least in the modern world > full of refined carbs and PUFAs: [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Taka The problem is that one study (possibly the Nurses Study) showed that reducing fat made no difference. However, the fat was supposed to be reduced from around forty to around thirty per cent. This is the amount in the american heart association recommendations which have proved inferior to a truly low fat diet--ten or fifteen percent. And it turned out that those eating the low fat diet were actually eating more than reported. Anytime one says carbs it must be asked what kind of carbs? Most people eat refined breads and pastas, white rice and sugars. Reducing this kind of carb can only be beneficial, but says nothing about a whole foods diet. Polyunsaturated fats have been shown to cause just as much blockage as saturated fats. They are more dangerous since they do seem to reduce risk of cvd because blood cholesterol is lowered. Who cares if the blood cholesterol is in the range that makes doctors happy if at the same time the arteries are clogging up? It seems that those who once recommended very low fat are now recommending nuts and seeds and sometimes flax seed and fish oil. One study showed eating fish was better than just consuming fish oil. The nuts seeds and flax come with other stuff and is better than the refined, processed oils. If all we had to eat were game animals that had to be hunted and which eat their natural diet, I have no doubt that the fat would be healthful. Game animals have about 3 or 4 per cent fat. Hardly in the same league as an artificially fed industrial cow or pig. I bet a totally natural diet of real meat and fish and whole unprocessed foods would be healthy. The amount of fat would be self limiting because there just isn't that much in nature. Refined and processed foods would disappear. Our ancestors probably ate eggs, but they would be limited to the nesting seasons of birds. Dairy is something else. Autopsies of Masai have found clogged arteries. On the other hand there are those who say (Weston Price) that milk, butter and cheese from pastured cows without the addition of hormones or antibiotics is perfectly healthful. Dolores > Anytime one says carbs it must be asked what kind of carbs? Most > people eat refined breads and pastas, white rice and sugars. Reducing > this kind of carb can only be beneficial.... Such statements rouse my suspicions. Having read a number of Carl Pfeiffer's books on trace elements, I'm acutely aware that many minerals once thought to be just plain *bad* are actually necessary for survival. It's a question of amounts. It's undeniable that we're well equipped to use carbohydrates in our diets, and that most people do "eat refined breads and pastas, white rice and sugars." But can you be sure that no matter how little you're getting of these things, it is *always* better to get less -- regardless of your health and physical activity, and the rest of your diet? If so, many millions of healthy people are breaking the rule, and some of them break Olympic records, too, not to mention records for longevity! I heard Jack LaLanne, famous for overcoming childhood illness to become an amazing athlete and health food promoter, once say on television that if you got the right exercise, it didn't much matter what you ate. If all you're eating is a small cup of broth a day, and you're rapidly wasting away, perhaps you ought to consider having a spoonful of rice. It probably wouldn't make things much worse! SignatureMarshall Price of Miami Known to Yahoo as d021317c "Marshall Price" > Having read a number of Carl Pfeiffer's books on trace elements, I'm > acutely aware that many minerals once thought to be just plain *bad* are > actually necessary for survival. It's a question of amounts. People are healthy in the area where the water is hard. You can be healthy in each area if you use unrafined salt. It is proved ond wild animals. > If all you're eating is a small cup of broth a day, and you're rapidly > wasting away, perhaps you ought to consider having a spoonful of rice. Or the Frnch bread. Rice and oast are good because they have very fine starch grains. Leavended bread is good because it contains glycogen (yeasts rework plant starch into glycogen). > It probably wouldn't make things much worse! S* > "Marshall Price" >> Having read a number of Carl Pfeiffer's books on trace elements, I'm [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > People are healthy in the area where the water is hard. You can be healthy > in each area if you use unrafined salt. It is proved ond wild animals. People also die where the water is hard! In America, some people have dangerous levels of arsenic or mercury in their well water. And not all salt is harmless. It, too, can contain toxic minerals. >> If all you're eating is a small cup of broth a day, and you're rapidly >> wasting away, perhaps you ought to consider having a spoonful of rice. > > Or the French bread. Rice and oats are good because they have very fine > starch grains. Leavened bread is good because it contains glycogen (yeasts > rework plant starch into glycogen). I've never heard of "fine starch grains," and as I mentioned elsewhere, I think you're wrong about glycogen in bread. The fact that it breaks down rapidly in slaughtered animals suggests that it wouldn't last long in bread, either. SignatureMarshall Price of Miami Known to Yahoo as d021317c "Marshall Price" <d021317c@yahoo.com> > I've never heard of "fine starch grains," Till now. Here you are (in microns): rice 4-6, oast 6-8, corn 30, wheat 45-55, potato 140-180. >and as I mentioned elsewhere, I think you're wrong about glycogen in bread. >The fact that it breaks down rapidly in slaughtered animals suggests that >it wouldn't last long in bread, either. But in such bread is less starch. In sprouted grains is also less starch. And what with glycogen in alga and mushroom? This issue is not discussed in textbooks. S* > "Marshall Price" <d021317c@yahoo.com> >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > And what with glycogen in alga and mushroom? > This issue is not discussed in textbooks. I find it difficult to take you seriously. SignatureMarshall Price of Miami Known to Yahoo as d021317c "Marshall Price" >>> I've never heard of "fine starch grains," >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > I find it difficult to take you seriously. It is obvious that carbs are in many forms: 1. Sugar ( in many forms) 2. Starch we eat cooked or uncooked and starch has a different grain size. 3. Glycogen we eat as liver, alga, mushrooms and yeast 4. Fiber Sugar and glycogen are digested without cooking. Maybe that that forms are frendly for us. It was wrote here that uncooked starch and fiber are used by bacteria in last part of the digestive tract to produce fat. It is a good job. What are your suggestion (which forms are more healthy) S* > "Marshall Price" >>>> I've never heard of "fine starch grains," [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > Sugar and glycogen are digested without cooking. Maybe that that forms are > frendly for us. > It was wrote here that uncooked starch and fiber are used by bacteria in > last part of the digestive tract to produce fat. It is a good job. > What are your suggestion (which forms are more healthy) I just wish you'd tell us where you're getting your information about glycogen. I've been looking all over for it. As for cooking, I didn't know it had anything to do with this discussion. Certainly using sugar in cooking isn't a problem, is it? As far as I know, there's no glycogen in our food. Fiber isn't digestible, as far as I know. It doesn't produce fat. Cooking generally doesn't affect it. Starchy foods are usually cooked, but not always, and they're still starchy afterwards. So I have no idea what you're talking about or what you're asking me. What sort of suggestions do you want from me? A decision about whether mushrooms are better than potatoes? SignatureMarshall Price of Miami Known to Yahoo as d021317c "Marshall Price" > I just wish you'd tell us where you're getting your information about > glycogen. I've been looking all over for it. Biology by C. A. Villee > As for cooking, I didn't know it had anything to do with this discussion. > Certainly using sugar in cooking isn't a problem, is it? As far as I know, > there's no glycogen in our food. Fiber isn't digestible, as far as I > know. It doesn't produce fat. Cooking generally doesn't affect it. > Starchy foods are usually cooked, but not always, and they're still > starchy afterwards. <drceephd@insightbb.com> wrote: "Secondly, a healthy colon is acidic while a diseased colon is basic or alkaline. Eating meat and high nitrogen foodstuffs allow the bacteria in the colon to produce a variety of alkaline amines which are toxic to the colon and the human. Eating a diet high in carbs and containing refractive starch allow the bacteria to feed on it, ferment it, and produce short chain fatty acids which are good for the colon and colon health." > So I have no idea what you're talking about or what you're asking me. What > sort of suggestions do you want from me? A decision about whether > mushrooms are better than potatoes? I put into your consideration evident fact that carbs are in very forms and nobody knows which of them are healthy. One recommend sugars another starch and I glycogen. And you? S* > "Marshall Price" >> I just wish you'd tell us where you're getting your information about >> glycogen. I've been looking all over for it. > > Biology by C. A. Villee I'm not familiar with that book. Perhaps you might give some information about it and quote the relevant passages. >> As for cooking, I didn't know it had anything to do with this discussion. >> Certainly using sugar in cooking isn't a problem, is it? As far as I know, [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > it, and produce short chain fatty acids which are good for the colon > and colon health." If you use Google to search for "laboratory fecal (or faecal) ph", you'll find some discussions about colon pH. >> So I have no idea what you're talking about or what you're asking me. What >> sort of suggestions do you want from me? A decision about whether [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > nobody knows which of them are healthy. One recommend sugars another starch > and I glycogen. And you? (I assume you mean "various forms.") I don't know how one could get glycogen in one's diet. I suspect athletes would like to do that in order to prepare for races, but they use starches instead (especially pasta) to increase their glycogen stores -- by up to 2kg! Sugars, starches, and fiber are all important components of a healthy diet. In the absence of disease or other special considerations (such as preparing for an athletic contest or a role in a movie), there's no reason I know of to depart from the common, orthodox dietary advice available from many sources, which usually recommends choosing foods from a "food pyramid." I'm sure I can find links to that if you like. High fecal pH (from ammonia, for example) can be lowered (made more acidic) by increasing fiber consumption. It may indicate faulty carbohydrate absorption. Falling into the trap of considering some foods "good" and others "bad" is tempting, but risky. (There are some foods, including margarine, which I avoid entirely, but they're exceptional.) Wholesome nutrition is far more complicated and nuanced than that, but a few simple principles are really all you need to make good dietary choices. The advice kids get in school is perfectly adequate for almost everybody. SignatureMarshall Price of Miami Known to Yahoo as d021317c "Marshall Price" < > (I assume you mean "various forms.") > > I don't know how one could get glycogen in one's diet. Lern from French people. They like goose liver, troffle, alga and Frencz bread (it is long time leavened). S* > I suspect athletes would like to do that in order to prepare for races, > but they use starches instead (especially pasta) to increase their > glycogen stores -- by up to 2kg! Yes. But in my opinion the first 2000 kcal should be from animal and parasite products and the next kalories from sugar and starch or alcohol. S* > "Marshall Price" < >> (I assume you mean "various forms.") [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Learn from French people. They like goose liver, truffles, algae and French > bread (it is long time leavened). They eat very little of those things, except for bread -- and French bread is quite ordinary. I sincerely doubt it contains any detectable glycogen at all. You're wrong about it taking a long time to make. Here's a recipe for homemade French bread from France: http://frenchbread.free.fr/recipes/bakersyeastbread.html None of those other things contain more than trace amounts of glycogen at the most, and you make (and burn) plenty of it yourself every day without even thinking about it. >> I suspect athletes would like to do that in order to prepare for races, >> but they use starches instead (especially pasta) to increase their >> glycogen stores -- by up to 2kg! > > Yes. But in my opinion the first 2000 kcal should be from animal and > parasite products and the next kalories from sugar and starch or alcohol. Why parasites? Why alcohol? Why 2000 kcal? That's all the energy you need for a day anyway. You're going to start eating sugar, starch, and alcohol after eating all that food? Also, none of those things are parasites. What kind of parasites are you planning to eat? You'd have to eat a pound of dry (or three pounds of wet) glycogen to get all those calories, and I can't find any mention of glycogen in human foods anywhere! All I find is authoritative statements that glycogen's role in human metabolism is its use for very short-term storage of energy, usually about one day's worth. And why don't you provide anything for me to go on? You just keep saying crazy things without any evidence. What about that book? What does it say? SignatureMarshall Price of Miami Known to Yahoo as d021317c "Marshall Price" > You're wrong about it taking a long time to make. Here's a recipe for > homemade French bread from France: > > http://frenchbread.free.fr/recipes/bakersyeastbread.html There are the two rise and rolling. Together above 6 hours. Ask your baker if it is short. >> Yes. But in my opinion the first 2000 kcal should be from animal and >> parasite products and the next kalories from sugar and starch or alcohol. > > Why parasites? Why alcohol? Why 2000 kcal? That's all the energy you > need for a day anyway. You're going to start eating sugar, starch, and > alcohol after eating all that food? Calories are related with activity. At low activity 2000 is enough. It should be meat, fat and about 50 grams of carbs. For high activity one need more carbs and/or alcohol. > Also, none of those things are parasites. What kind of parasites are you > planning to eat? Alga, mushroom and yeast. > And why don't you provide anything for me to go on? You just keep saying > crazy things without any evidence. What about that book? What does it > say? In textbook it will be after 250 years. Step by step. First step are observations. Next discusion. Now we are doing it. S* > "Marshall Price" >> You're wrong about it taking a long time to make. Here's a recipe for [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > There are the two rise and rolling. Together above 6 hours. Ask your baker > if it is short. I don't need to ask "my baker." It's normal. >>> Yes. But in my opinion the first 2000 kcal should be from animal and >>> parasite products and the next kalories from sugar and starch or alcohol. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > should be meat, fat and about 50 grams of carbs. > For high activity one need more carbs and/or alcohol. No comment. ;-) >> Also, none of those things are parasites. What kind of parasites are you >> planning to eat? > > Alga, mushroom and yeast. But those are generally not parasites. Parasites, by definition, do harm to their living hosts. >> And why don't you provide anything for me to go on? You just keep saying >> crazy things without any evidence. What about that book? What does it >> say? > > In textbook it will be after 250 years. Step by step. First step are > observations. Next discusion. Now we are doing it. What? The book you mentioned, /Biology/, doesn't exist yet? I just want to know where these ideas are coming from. I'm sorry, but it seems to me you're simply confabulating. SignatureMarshall Price of Miami Known to Yahoo as d021317c "Marshall Price" > I don't need to ask "my baker." It's normal. Todays bread rise 6 hours? >> Alga, mushroom and yeast. > >. I'm sorry, but it seems to me you're simply confabulating. Information about the grain size of starch and glycogen were new for you. S* > ...there's no > reason I know of to depart from the common, orthodox dietary advice > available from many sources, which usually recommends choosing foods > from a "food pyramid." I'm sure I can find links to that if you like. Here: http://www.health.gov/dietaryguidelines/dga2005/document/pdf/DGA2005.pdf You can also go to http://www.nutrition.gov SignatureMarshall Price of Miami Known to Yahoo as d021317c > It seems that the low carb is a winner at least in the modern world > full of refined carbs and PUFAs: [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > as a more significant nutritional factor contributing to inflammatory > processes." UNQUOTE. But note that the article is about nutrition for people with metabolic syndrome, not healthy people, and that the emphasis is on inflammatory processes, not general health. Besides, there's nothing particularly "modern" about "refined carbs and PUFAs." In an eighteenth-century English cookbook I discovered a substitute for cream consisting of white flour mixed with vegetable oil -- and I'm sure the Incas were bleaching their corn meal with lime and gobbling PUFAs galore more than two thousand years before that. SignatureMarshall Price of Miami Known to Yahoo as d021317c On Mar 22, 4:47 am, dorsy1943 <dtm...@usadatanet.net> wrote: Dr. Kwasniewski also says, oddly enough, that the Japanese diet is also a good diet--very low fat, largely plant based with rice a staple in the diet. << Glycogen storage diseases .. One is called .. "it hurts when I do this" .. and the doctor says .. "well we'll try not to do that then" .. IE: no carbohydrates and high fats which **appears** to do .. good .. but in fact is killing them in a different way. Some like to call it .. 'Body Type' .. They are all sick .. Who loves ya. Tom Jesus Was A Vegetarian! http://tinyurl.com/2r2nkh Man Is A Herbivore! http://tinyurl.com/a3cc3 DEAD PEOPLE WALKING http://tinyurl.com/zk9fk > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Optimal_Diet > [quoted text clipped - 63 lines] > > - Show quoted text - " I am not surprised that the lady who lost so much weight on the Dr.'s diet did so since it is essentially an Atkins diet and no one questions that an atkins diet promotes weight loss. " ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ An article in the local paper mentioned a yearlong test comparing the Atkins diet with the Dean Ornish low-fat diet as well as the Zone diet. Along with providing the best weight loss, the Atkins diet improved the blood fat profile, with higher levels of good HDL cholesterol and lower levels of bad triglycerides. There was no significant differences in total cholestrol between each diet. Al Gore Wins Nobel Peace Prize http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21262661/ And operationally proves just how worthless and meritless winning the Nobel Peace Prize actually is. > Al Gore Wins Nobel Peace Prize > http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21262661/ > > And operationally proves just how worthless and meritless winning the > Nobel Peace Prize actually is. It's money; it's prestige; it's recognition. What kind of "worth" and "merit" are you talking about? An honorary doctorate? A pat on the head? A compliment from Rush Limbaugh? SignatureMarshall Price of Miami Known to Yahoo as d021317c
|
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.