• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
* * * - - 2 votes

Never Be Sick Again

raymond francis the project to end disease

  • Please log in to reply
71 replies to this topic

#31 Werner

  • Guest
  • 80 posts
  • 6
  • Location:Europe

Posted 13 December 2011 - 11:00 AM

I created this thread because this is a novel concept in health and longevity that I came across a few years ago and wanted to share with you all. I have not been sick and wanted to share this video of an interview of an author of a book I read called Never Be Sick Again. Simple system. Every disease is caused by a malfunctioning cell; either by toxicity or by deficiency. 1 disease: 2 causes. And the way to prevent disease we need to not only eat a proper diet but also supplement appropriately (quality supplements are hard to find) and reverse toxic overload to allow our bodies to heal naturally.

Interview


Also check out The Gerson Institute for cancer (controversial for some), The Project to End Disease for education. Paleo is better than a lot of other alternatives to be sure. But it's not best I'm afraid.

The question becomes not whether or not you can prevent and cure disease. But whether or not you can afford it..


This sounds very interesting, I'm tempted to buy the book, but first I' am going to check out the site. Nutrition and supplements can really get so confusing and the premise he is basing this on is really a no-brainer -if cells were healthy, we would not get sick and most likely, aging would slow down significantly as well.Thanks for sharing this! :)


Very welcome! The only thing I could see people take issue with his stance on dairy. The alternative would be the Weston A Price stance but in that case it's raw milk which has probiotic benefits and is different than what you consume from the typical supermarket. But the truth is dairy is not necessary for good health.

Dairy is very bad for your health.
There is probably no other nutrient that accelerates aging
as much as dairy. The reason is dairys A1 beta casein.
  • like x 1
  • dislike x 1

#32 JChief

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 638 posts
  • 109
  • Location:US of A
  • NO

Posted 13 December 2011 - 12:22 PM

Dairy is very bad for your health.
There is probably no other nutrient that accelerates aging
as much as dairy. The reason is dairys A1 beta casein.


Casein is discussed in great length in the book. "Big four" list of things to avoid from the book:


1. Sugar
2. White Flour
3. Processed Oils
4. Milk and Dairy Products

The point I made earlier about raw milk was mainly to distinguish it from the fact that the pasteurization of milk is contributing to disease - it creates toxins and destroys nutrients. But of course casein is present regardless. If you must drink milk then it should be raw milk.

Edited by JChief, 13 December 2011 - 12:24 PM.


sponsored ad

  • Advert
Click HERE to rent this advertising spot for NUTRITION to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#33 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 13 December 2011 - 12:59 PM

Dairy is very bad for your health.
There is probably no other nutrient that accelerates aging
as much as dairy. The reason is dairys A1 beta casein.


What's the evidence for this? Is it (claimed to be) true for everyone, or only a subset of people?

#34 JChief

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 638 posts
  • 109
  • Location:US of A
  • NO

Posted 13 December 2011 - 01:47 PM

Check out The China Study, one of the largest nutritional studies ever conducted which describes a direct correlation between casein administered to rats and the promotion of cancer cell growth when exposed to carcinogens. He discovered that cancer growth could be turned on and off by adjusting the amount of casein protein in the diet (1) A 2001 study suggests another milk protein, whey protein, but not casein, may play a protective role against colon tumors in rats (2), which is interesting.

(1) Campbell, T. Colin and Campbell, Thomas M. The China Study. Benbella Books, 2006, pp. 60, 65.
(2) Parodi, P.W. "A Role for Milk Proteins and their Peptides in Cancer Prevention," Current Pharmaceutical Design, Vol. 13, No. 8, March 2007, pp. 813–828.

Edited by JChief, 13 December 2011 - 01:48 PM.

  • like x 1

#35 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 13 December 2011 - 06:35 PM

Check out The China Study, one of the largest nutritional studies ever conducted which describes a direct correlation between casein administered to rats and the promotion of cancer cell growth when exposed to carcinogens. He discovered that cancer growth could be turned on and off by adjusting the amount of casein protein in the diet (1) A 2001 study suggests another milk protein, whey protein, but not casein, may play a protective role against colon tumors in rats (2), which is interesting.

(1) Campbell, T. Colin and Campbell, Thomas M. The China Study. Benbella Books, 2006, pp. 60, 65.
(2) Parodi, P.W. "A Role for Milk Proteins and their Peptides in Cancer Prevention," Current Pharmaceutical Design, Vol. 13, No. 8, March 2007, pp. 813–828.


I don't have a copy of The China Study handy, but this sounds like rodents were force-fed an unnatural (to them) protein, along with carcinogens. If so, then I'm not really surprised that had a bad outcome for the rodents, but what does that have to do with humans consuming dairy? For what it's worth, The China Study has been widely criticized by knowledgeable scientists. PETA and Heather Mills McCartney love it, though.

Anyway, I was wondering if Werner had any evidence to back up his bold statement about dairy.

#36 Werner

  • Guest
  • 80 posts
  • 6
  • Location:Europe

Posted 13 December 2011 - 11:10 PM

Dairy is very bad for your health.
There is probably no other nutrient that accelerates aging
as much as dairy. The reason is dairys A1 beta casein.


What's the evidence for this? Is it (claimed to be) true for everyone, or only a subset of people?

A good question. Research with A1 beta casein is not frequent.
Maybe the milk industry is not happy with such a research and is
succesful in preventing it.
Nevertheless, scientific evidence is sufficient to say that this form
of casein is extremely harmful.
Milk has two other substances that are harmful: ß-lactoglobulin and
galactose.
Milk propaganda is telling us to dring milk in order to get calcium
for our bones and teeth. Truth is different. In countries with high
dairy consumption you find the highest numbers of osteoporosis.
Third world countries with low dairy consumption have the lowest
osteoporosis numbers.
It is claimed that these damages are true for everyone with high
dairy intake.

#37 Werner

  • Guest
  • 80 posts
  • 6
  • Location:Europe

Posted 13 December 2011 - 11:22 PM

Check out The China Study, one of the largest nutritional studies ever conducted which describes a direct correlation between casein administered to rats and the promotion of cancer cell growth when exposed to carcinogens. He discovered that cancer growth could be turned on and off by adjusting the amount of casein protein in the diet (1) A 2001 study suggests another milk protein, whey protein, but not casein, may play a protective role against colon tumors in rats (2), which is interesting.

(1) Campbell, T. Colin and Campbell, Thomas M. The China Study. Benbella Books, 2006, pp. 60, 65.
(2) Parodi, P.W. "A Role for Milk Proteins and their Peptides in Cancer Prevention," Current Pharmaceutical Design, Vol. 13, No. 8, March 2007, pp. 813–828.


I don't have a copy of The China Study handy, but this sounds like rodents were force-fed an unnatural (to them) protein, along with carcinogens. If so, then I'm not really surprised that had a bad outcome for the rodents, but what does that have to do with humans consuming dairy? For what it's worth, The China Study has been widely criticized by knowledgeable scientists. PETA and Heather Mills McCartney love it, though.

Anyway, I was wondering if Werner had any evidence to back up his bold statement about dairy.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21335999
There is a lot of stuff in the internet.

#38 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 14 December 2011 - 12:32 AM

Anyway, I was wondering if Werner had any evidence to back up his bold statement about dairy.

http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/21335999
There is a lot of stuff in the internet.


Um, that paper seems to be evidence against your argument, not for it. Here's the abstract:

Nestle Nutr Workshop Ser Pediatr Program. 2011;67:187-95. Epub 2011 Feb 16.
Milk A1 and A2 peptides and diabetes.
Clemens RA.

Regulatory Science, School of Pharmacy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Food-derived peptides, specifically those derived from milk, may adversely affect health by increasing the risk of insulin-dependent diabetes. This position is based on the relationship of type 1 diabetes (T1D) and the consumption of variants A1 and B β-casein from cow's milk. It appears that β-casomorphin-7 (BCM-7) from β-casein may function as an immunosuppressant and impair tolerance to dietary antigens in the gut immune system, which, in turn, may contribute to the onset of T1D. There are thirteen genetic variants of β-casein in dairy cattle. Among those variants are A1, A2, and B, which are also found in human milk. The amino acid sequences of β-casomorphins among these bovine variants and those found in human milk are similar, often differing only by a single amino acid. In vitro studies indicate BCM-7 can be produced from A1 and B during typical digestive processes; however, BCM-7 is not a product of A2 digestion. Evidence from several epidemiological studies and animal models does not support the association of milk proteins, even proteins in breast milk, and the development of T1D. Ecological data, primarily based on A1/ A2 variations among livestock breeds, do not demonstrate causation, even among countries where there is considerable dairy consumption.

PMID: 21335999


It hardly sounds like dairy is the health scourge you are making it out to be.

#39 Lufega

  • Guest
  • 1,815 posts
  • 274
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 14 December 2011 - 12:48 AM

What do you guys of the longevity promoting effect of drinking yogurt and kefir regularly ? Does fermentation affect the casein in any way?

#40 JChief

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 638 posts
  • 109
  • Location:US of A
  • NO

Posted 14 December 2011 - 02:40 AM

Check out The China Study, one of the largest nutritional studies ever conducted which describes a direct correlation between casein administered to rats and the promotion of cancer cell growth when exposed to carcinogens. He discovered that cancer growth could be turned on and off by adjusting the amount of casein protein in the diet (1) A 2001 study suggests another milk protein, whey protein, but not casein, may play a protective role against colon tumors in rats (2), which is interesting.

(1) Campbell, T. Colin and Campbell, Thomas M. The China Study. Benbella Books, 2006, pp. 60, 65.
(2) Parodi, P.W. "A Role for Milk Proteins and their Peptides in Cancer Prevention," Current Pharmaceutical Design, Vol. 13, No. 8, March 2007, pp. 813–828.


I don't have a copy of The China Study handy, but this sounds like rodents were force-fed an unnatural (to them) protein, along with carcinogens. If so, then I'm not really surprised that had a bad outcome for the rodents, but what does that have to do with humans consuming dairy? For what it's worth, The China Study has been widely criticized by knowledgeable scientists. PETA and Heather Mills McCartney love it, though.

Anyway, I was wondering if Werner had any evidence to back up his bold statement about dairy.


Exactly what contributes to health and disease has been "widely criticized by knowledgeable scientists" my friend. Everyone has their input here. The China Study has plenty of proponents and good job throwing PETA et al into the camp. I guess T. Colin Campbell is an idiot eh? Something tells me you visited this web page . Great job. As Campbell said in his response "But, not all readers agree. A small number (5-10%) have not only disagreed, but have done so rather vigorously and vehemently." Perhaps you are one of those. Australian Dairy Council disagrees too. Anyway I said it early in this thread. Dairy folks will take issue with it. Do whatever you feel works well for you. I personally do not care. Instead of dairy I consume almond milk. I love the taste, plus more calcium.

Casein also has a molecular structure quite similar to that of gluten FWIW (which means nothing until we get more studies).

Edited by JChief, 14 December 2011 - 02:45 AM.

  • like x 1

#41 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 14 December 2011 - 03:18 AM

Check out The China Study, one of the largest nutritional studies ever conducted which describes a direct correlation between casein administered to rats and the promotion of cancer cell growth when exposed to carcinogens. He discovered that cancer growth could be turned on and off by adjusting the amount of casein protein in the diet (1) A 2001 study suggests another milk protein, whey protein, but not casein, may play a protective role against colon tumors in rats (2), which is interesting.


I don't have a copy of The China Study handy, but this sounds like rodents were force-fed an unnatural (to them) protein, along with carcinogens. If so, then I'm not really surprised that had a bad outcome for the rodents, but what does that have to do with humans consuming dairy? For what it's worth, The China Study has been widely criticized by knowledgeable scientists. PETA and Heather Mills McCartney love it, though.

Anyway, I was wondering if Werner had any evidence to back up his bold statement about dairy.


Exactly what contributes to health and disease has been "widely criticized by knowledgeable scientists" my friend. Everyone has their input here. The China Study has plenty of proponents and good job throwing PETA et al into the camp. I guess T. Colin Campbell is an idiot eh? Something tells me you visited this web page . Great job. As Campbell said in his response "But, not all readers agree. A small number (5-10%) have not only disagreed, but have done so rather vigorously and vehemently." Perhaps you are one of those. Australian Dairy Council disagrees too. Anyway I said it early in this thread. Dairy folks will take issue with it. Do whatever you feel works well for you. I personally do not care. Instead of dairy I consume almond milk. I love the taste, plus more calcium.

Casein also has a molecular structure quite similar to that of gluten FWIW (which means nothing until we get more studies).


Everyone has opinions, but not all of those opinions are correct. That why we have science; to sort the wheat, as it were, from the chaff. I didn't say Campbell was an idiot, but it does sound like he's a vegan ideologue who's twisting the science to make the points that he's already attached to. I'd never seen that site, but now that you mention it, what are they getting wrong? If the 5-10% of readers that disagree "vigorously and vehemently" are the people who know what they're talking about, and the rest of them are the vegetarian choir to which Campbell preaches, well, maybe we should be listening to the 5-10%. To be honest, I've never really had a stake in The China Study, but now that I look at it, I'm afraid I'm going to have to go with the 5-10%. As for casein, Werner was kind enough to link a very recent study, the abstract of which I've posted upthread, which finds no link between casein and T1D, FWIW. I only occasionally drink milk and am not connected to the dairy industry. I'd just like to get to the truth regarding nutrition and health.

#42 JChief

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 638 posts
  • 109
  • Location:US of A
  • NO

Posted 14 December 2011 - 04:50 AM

Cancer is the second most common causes of death in the United States. Polls show about 1.3% of Americans consider themselves vegan. So of 308,000,000 Americans, over 4,000,000 are vegans, and if veganism makes no difference, 23%, or over 900,000 of them should die of cancer every year. Vegans may be younger on average, when cancer might not turn up as much, but if a vegan diet does not stop cancer, surely we can come up with a single vegan who developed cancer. If you come across any, please let me know.

BTW, who the hell gave this thread one star?!?! Haha everybody has an agenda.

Edited by JChief, 14 December 2011 - 04:51 AM.

  • like x 1

#43 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 14 December 2011 - 05:06 AM

Vegans don't get cancer? Is that the claim? If I really thought that would work, I might go vegan.

#44 JChief

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 638 posts
  • 109
  • Location:US of A
  • NO

Posted 14 December 2011 - 05:15 AM

Vegans don't get cancer? Is that the claim? If I really thought that would work, I might go vegan.


Hey I'm just as curious as you. I honestly would like to find one case of a raw vegan that died of cancer. Diet was only one part of the equation anyhow. Reduce exposure to toxins and supplement appropriately as it is very difficult these days to eat a perfect diet (many of us are still trying to figure out what is a good diet to begin with). That's another reason why I thought the Gerson Clinic, which has reversed cancer from raw vegetables, was applicable to the discussion. If I were to be in a minority, niner, it would not be the ones that believe a primarily plant-based diet isn't healthy (anti-China Study types) it would be the minority that are primarily raw vegans. Look at all the health transformations people have made. Google juice feasting for instance. Just sayin!

Edited by JChief, 14 December 2011 - 05:16 AM.


#45 JChief

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 638 posts
  • 109
  • Location:US of A
  • NO

Posted 14 December 2011 - 05:37 AM

If raw vegans start coming out of the woodwork and get cancer then I would consider the theory that Raymond Francis (MIT educated biochemist) presented to be much more questionable than I do currently. Which, to recap for those that do not start at beginnings of threads, is that if you provide all the nutrients your body needs and reduce your exposure to toxins you cannot get sick. I would wonder if a genetic predisposition to cancer could not be overcome at times; that it simply cannot be prevented. I currently wonder about the extent that nutrition can influence gene expression. What I mean is can cancer genes be turned OFF. Speaking of genetics I came across a recent book called The Genie In Your Genes linking consciousness to genetic change. It's about epigenetics. Epigenetics is the study of heritable changes in gene expression or cellular phenotype caused by mechanisms other than changes in the underlying DNA sequence. Fascinating stuff if you ask me and I intend to research more into that in the near future.

Actually, Raymond has a book out (surprise surprise) that I have not read. It's called Never Fear Cancer Again. Hmmm.. haha he really is putting his reputation on the line here eh? Pretty bold. Fun times :)

Edited by JChief, 14 December 2011 - 05:42 AM.

  • like x 1

#46 Werner

  • Guest
  • 80 posts
  • 6
  • Location:Europe

Posted 14 December 2011 - 10:19 AM

Anyway, I was wondering if Werner had any evidence to back up his bold statement about dairy.

http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/21335999
There is a lot of stuff in the internet.


Um, that paper seems to be evidence against your argument, not for it. Here's the abstract:

Nestle Nutr Workshop Ser Pediatr Program. 2011;67:187-95. Epub 2011 Feb 16.
Milk A1 and A2 peptides and diabetes.
Clemens RA.

Regulatory Science, School of Pharmacy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Food-derived peptides, specifically those derived from milk, may adversely affect health by increasing the risk of insulin-dependent diabetes. This position is based on the relationship of type 1 diabetes (T1D) and the consumption of variants A1 and B β-casein from cow's milk. It appears that β-casomorphin-7 (BCM-7) from β-casein may function as an immunosuppressant and impair tolerance to dietary antigens in the gut immune system, which, in turn, may contribute to the onset of T1D. There are thirteen genetic variants of β-casein in dairy cattle. Among those variants are A1, A2, and B, which are also found in human milk. The amino acid sequences of β-casomorphins among these bovine variants and those found in human milk are similar, often differing only by a single amino acid. In vitro studies indicate BCM-7 can be produced from A1 and B during typical digestive processes; however, BCM-7 is not a product of A2 digestion. Evidence from several epidemiological studies and animal models does not support the association of milk proteins, even proteins in breast milk, and the development of T1D. Ecological data, primarily based on A1/ A2 variations among livestock breeds, do not demonstrate causation, even among countries where there is considerable dairy consumption.

PMID: 21335999


It hardly sounds like dairy is the health scourge you are making it out to be.

Did you read this: "Food-derived peptides, specifically those derived from milk, may adversely affect health by increasing the risk of insulin-dependent diabetes. This position is based on the relationship of type 1 diabetes (T1D) and the consumption of variants A1 and B β-casein from cow's milk."
Look at this Lancet article:
Cell-mediated immune response to β casein in recent-onset insulin-dependent diabetes: implications for disease pathogenesis.
http://www.thelancet...2065-3/fulltext
"The association between IDDM and early consumption of cows' milk may be explained by the generation of a specific immune response to β casein. Exposure to cows' milk triggers a cellular and humoral anti-β casein immune response which may cross-react with a beta-cell antigen. It is of interest that sequence homologies exist between β casein and several β-cell molecules."
IDDM=Insulin dependent diabetes mellitus
But this is only diabetes. BCM7, this is ß-casomorphin, a milk peptide created
during the digestive process is linked to neurological diseases.
Look, I would be glad to eat cheese because I like cheese very
much. But I try to avoid it because I fear negative consequences.

#47 Werner

  • Guest
  • 80 posts
  • 6
  • Location:Europe

Posted 14 December 2011 - 10:49 AM

Vegans don't get cancer? Is that the claim? If I really thought that would work, I might go vegan.

T
Vegans get less cancer. There is a strong connection between
meat and intestinal cancer. If you don't eat meat you have no problem.
Nevertheless, the vegan diet is a bad diet. They eat a lot of wheat
products. Wheat is bad (see WGA = wheat germ agglutinins).
Tofu = bad, lot of nuts = bad, muesli = bad, seeds = bad.

#48 JChief

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 638 posts
  • 109
  • Location:US of A
  • NO

Posted 14 December 2011 - 12:44 PM

Vegans don't get cancer? Is that the claim? If I really thought that would work, I might go vegan.

T
Vegans get less cancer. There is a strong connection between
meat and intestinal cancer. If you don't eat meat you have no problem.
Nevertheless, the vegan diet is a bad diet. They eat a lot of wheat
products. Wheat is bad (see WGA = wheat germ agglutinins).
Tofu = bad, lot of nuts = bad, muesli = bad, seeds = bad.


Vegan is indeed a broad term. The author states to avoid cooked foods for the most part. And the supplements all wheat-free among other things. Greens in abundance, fresh vegetables, whole fruits (not juices), lentils, nuts and seeds are given the OK. Lean meat and fish too as long as it does not exceed 7% (yes 7..) of the diet, he claims. The grains he recommends does not include wheat but quinoa, amaranth, buckwheat and some others are found acceptable. It is possible to avoid wheat and eat seeds and nuts unless I am not following you.

Update: he states "Non-gluten grains such as buckwheat, millet, brown rice, quinoa and amaranth are healthy in moderation."

Edited by JChief, 14 December 2011 - 01:05 PM.


#49 JChief

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 638 posts
  • 109
  • Location:US of A
  • NO

Posted 14 December 2011 - 12:50 PM

Quote from the author of the book:

How did we get ourselves into such a mess, and what can we do to get out of it? Our problems started
with the industrial revolution as people moved off farms and into cities to work in factories. The challenge
to feed all these people led to the birth of commercial farming and the processed food industry. These in
turn have led to a dramatic reduction in the nutritional content of our foods, as well as a significant
increase in their toxic content. The problem is so bad that in 1998 the National Academy of Sciences
announced that even those who eat lots of fruit and vegetables are not getting the vitamins they need
for good health. Supplements have become a necessity!

Current agricultural technology utilized to grow and get food from farms to supermarkets is
overwhelmingly destructive. Commercial farming depletes soils of essential minerals. Produce is often
harvested before it is ripe, stored for long periods, and subjected to harmful methods to artificially ripen
or color it for presentation in the “fresh” produce section of the supermarket. Many produce items have
lost nearly all of certain vitamins and minerals by the time they roll down the supermarket checkout lines,
with additional losses by the time we get around to eating them. Food manufacturers almost always favor
qualities such as shelf life, taste, appearance and marketability, rather than nutrition and health.
Physicians, who typically lack nutrition education, usually tell us wrongly that we get all the nutrition we
need from a standard diet. With such misinformation, we tend to make irrational and harmful decisions.
Processing is the worst robber of all. Handling and preparation methods, (from extended storage of foods
through refrigeration and freezing, to refining, grinding, bleaching, hydrolyzing, hydrogenating, chopping,
and mashing), rob foods of many nutrients such as vitamins and minerals that we believe we are
consuming.

Too little of our food, virtually none for many people, is eaten raw. Cooking damages the nutritional value
of most foods. Some cooking methods, particularly those that use high heat or that char foods, create
powerful mutagens and carcinogens. The way we eat our foods, such as inadequate chewing, often
prevents us from getting optimal nutrition even from good diets. We eat the wrong combinations of foods
(meat and potatoes for example), which interferes with effective digestion and assimilation.
Most Americans are trying to achieve the impossible—trying to maintain health while eating a diet that
does not support health. Although our stomachs may be full (and our bellies fat), malnutrition is our leading cause of disease. We are indeed what we eat, and this cliché should guide the choices we make
about the foods we consume. The four worst food choices, sugar, white flour, processed oils, and milk
products, as well as all the many thousands of products containing these make-believe foods, comprise
the bulk of the average American diet and are disastrous to the health of our population.




#50 JChief

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 638 posts
  • 109
  • Location:US of A
  • NO

Posted 14 December 2011 - 01:09 PM

Also, for those curious (as I was) about how to go about adopting that diet there is a recipe book . I highly recommend as it's one thing to have an idea of what to eat and what to avoid but going about implementing it is another task indeed. Especially if you intend to sustain it over your lifetime.

#51 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 14 December 2011 - 02:44 PM

Anyway, I was wondering if Werner had any evidence to back up his bold statement about dairy.

http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/21335999
There is a lot of stuff in the internet.


Um, that paper seems to be evidence against your argument, not for it. Here's the abstract:

Nestle Nutr Workshop Ser Pediatr Program. 2011;67:187-95. Epub 2011 Feb 16.
Milk A1 and A2 peptides and diabetes.
Clemens RA.

Regulatory Science, School of Pharmacy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Food-derived peptides, specifically those derived from milk, may adversely affect health by increasing the risk of insulin-dependent diabetes. This position is based on the relationship of type 1 diabetes (T1D) and the consumption of variants A1 and B β-casein from cow's milk. It appears that β-casomorphin-7 (BCM-7) from β-casein may function as an immunosuppressant and impair tolerance to dietary antigens in the gut immune system, which, in turn, may contribute to the onset of T1D. There are thirteen genetic variants of β-casein in dairy cattle. Among those variants are A1, A2, and B, which are also found in human milk. The amino acid sequences of β-casomorphins among these bovine variants and those found in human milk are similar, often differing only by a single amino acid. In vitro studies indicate BCM-7 can be produced from A1 and B during typical digestive processes; however, BCM-7 is not a product of A2 digestion. Evidence from several epidemiological studies and animal models does not support the association of milk proteins, even proteins in breast milk, and the development of T1D. Ecological data, primarily based on A1/ A2 variations among livestock breeds, do not demonstrate causation, even among countries where there is considerable dairy consumption.

PMID: 21335999


It hardly sounds like dairy is the health scourge you are making it out to be.

Did you read this: "Food-derived peptides, specifically those derived from milk, may adversely affect health by increasing the risk of insulin-dependent diabetes. This position is based on the relationship of type 1 diabetes (T1D) and the consumption of variants A1 and B β-casein from cow's milk."


Sure, that's the statement of the hypothesis that they set out to test. The part that I put in bold at the end of the abstract is the result of their test, where they found the hypothesis to be false.

Look at this Lancet article:
Cell-mediated immune response to β casein in recent-onset insulin-dependent diabetes: implications for disease pathogenesis.
http://www.thelancet...2065-3/fulltext
"The association between IDDM and early consumption of cows' milk may be explained by the generation of a specific immune response to β casein. Exposure to cows' milk triggers a cellular and humoral anti-β casein immune response which may cross-react with a beta-cell antigen. It is of interest that sequence homologies exist between β casein and several β-cell molecules."
IDDM=Insulin dependent diabetes mellitus
But this is only diabetes. BCM7, this is ß-casomorphin, a milk peptide created
during the digestive process is linked to neurological diseases.
Look, I would be glad to eat cheese because I like cheese very
much. But I try to avoid it because I fear negative consequences.


This 1996 Lancet paper looks at the milk-IDDM hypothesis in a different way. They consider the possibility that early consumption of cow's milk exposes one to an antigen that immunologically cross-reacts with an antigen on pancreatic beta cells. Indeed, they find that in half of patients with IDDM, their T lymphocytes react with beta casein, while only three percent of healthy people's did. The question is, is the IDDM a consequence of drinking milk, or is the reactivity to beta casein a consequence of IDDM? The 2011 Clemens paper says that IDDM (T1D) doesn't appear to be caused by milk consumption, so that would suggest that the cross reactivity is an artifact of IDDM.

I really like cheese too. I don't drink much milk, but I eat good cheese and I use cream in my coffee. That strikes me a safe tradeoff.

#52 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 14 December 2011 - 02:50 PM

Also, for those curious (as I was) about how to go about adopting that diet there is a recipe book . I highly recommend as it's one thing to have an idea of what to eat and what to avoid but going about implementing it is another task indeed. Especially if you intend to sustain it over your lifetime.


Thanks JChief, I like the idea of healthy recipes. Getting this stuff into practice is where the rubber hits the road, and often spins out. They had a couple example recipes at the site, but the files for them were missing. If you have the book, would you be willing to post a favorite recipe? I'm particularly interested in getting more raw foods into my diet in a way that could displace cooked foods.

#53 JChief

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 638 posts
  • 109
  • Location:US of A
  • NO

Posted 14 December 2011 - 05:34 PM

Also, for those curious (as I was) about how to go about adopting that diet there is a recipe book . I highly recommend as it's one thing to have an idea of what to eat and what to avoid but going about implementing it is another task indeed. Especially if you intend to sustain it over your lifetime.


Thanks JChief, I like the idea of healthy recipes. Getting this stuff into practice is where the rubber hits the road, and often spins out. They had a couple example recipes at the site, but the files for them were missing. If you have the book, would you be willing to post a favorite recipe? I'm particularly interested in getting more raw foods into my diet in a way that could displace cooked foods.


Sure. I'll do a couple appetizers, a salad, sandwich, and a main course.

Lemon Garlic Hummus:
3 cups cooked organic garbanzo beans
1/2 cup raw organic sesame tahini
1/4 cup fresh lemon juice (one lemon)
4 cloves garlic
1/8 - 1/4 tsp Real Salt (to taste)
1/2 tsp. ground cumin
1-2 T. flax oil

Soak 1 1/2 cups of garbanzo beans in pure water overnight or all day. Drain. Place the beans in a saucepan and cover with pure water by about an inch. Bring the beans to a boil, reduce heat, cover and simmer for one hour or until tender. Drain, reserving some of the cooking water. Combine the lemon juice, garlic cloves, tahini, salt and cumin in the blender. Mix until smooth. Add 3 cups of the cooked and slightly cooled garbanzo beans. Blend again until smooth, adding a few tablespoons of the cooking water or plain water if needed for the texture you prefer. Slowly pour the flax oil into the blender while blending. Chill and serve with raw vegetables. The hummus will thicken slightly when refrigerated, so make it slightly thinner than you want it, once chilled. Note: Tahini is sesame seed butter. Most packaged hummus products contain processed, toxic oils and other unhealthy additives. Use the smaller amount of oil if you are seeking to reduce weight. See the bean section for tips blah blah blah ok moving on..

Basil Stuffed Mushrooms:
35-40 med. crimini mushrooms or baby portobella, washed
3 cups fresh basil (or 4 oz)
3 cups raw spinach
1/4 cup lemon juice (1 lemon)
1 med. zucchini, washed, ends cut off and quartered
4 cloves garlic
3/4 cup raw walnuts
1/2 tsp. Bragg's Liquid Aminos or Real Salt
1/4 cup nutritional yeast

After washing the mushrooms, remove the entire stem, including the base. This will provide a hollow area that you can fill with the stuffing. Place the mushrooms, cap side down, on a serving plate or dehydrator tray (if dehydrating to warm). Place all of the remaining ingredients into a food processor. Pulse until well combined but not completely smooth. Using a teaspoon, fill each mushroom cap with the mixture. Chill and serve. For warm mushrooms that are still enzyme active, place the stuffed mushrooms in the dehydrator at 100 degrees for 2-3 hours or until warm. If you do not have a dehydrator and want to serve them warm, try warming them in a 325 degree oven, just until heated. This will kill the enzymes and you will not have an all raw food appetizer, but they will still be nutritious and tasty. Note: If there is extra filling, it is delicious stuffed in Roma tomatoes. Cut each tomato in half lengthwise and scoop out the seeds. Fill, chill and enjoy.

Mandarin Spinach Salad:
8-10 oz. baby spinach, washed
1/2 large red onion, cut into thin, 1/2 in slices
2 cups cauliflower, chopped
5 large mandarins, peeled and divided into sections (4 cups)
1/2-1 cup raw cashew pieces (amount depends on your taste)

Toss all of the above ingredients, except the cashew pieces in a large bowl. Chill. Most mandarins are seedless, but if there are seeds, remove seeds carefully. Prepare dressing below.

Mandarin Cashew Dressing:
1/3 cup raw cashew pieces
3 large or 4 smaller mandarins, peeled and seeded
1 tsp. lemon or lime juice
2 T. raw honey
2 T. raw apple cider vinegar (Bragg's is what I use)

Place all dressing ingredients into a high-powered blender, cashew pieces first. Blend briefly, until smooth. Toss just enough of the dressing on the spinach mixture in the bowl to coat it. Chill. Add the remaining raw cashews just before serving. Note: Extra dressing may be saved in a jar with a lid in the refrigerator for several days.


Build Your Own Veggie Sandwich:
2 slices sprouted whole grain bread
2 slices tomato
1/3 avocado, sliced
4-6 cucumber slices
romaine, leaf lettuce, or spinach
1/2 cup sprouts (any variety)
1 thin slice of onion
organic mustard, Grapeseed Oil Vegenaise or hummus (see above!)
Michelle's Low Salt Seasoning

Spread the topping of choice, hummus, mustard or vegenaise, on the bread. Press the thinly sliced avocado over the topping. Layer with any of the vegetables desired, lightly sprinkling the tomato slices with the Low-Salt Seasoning. Place the second slice of bread on top. Cut in half and serve. Note: Different combinations may be made using these ingredients. Add any vegetables desired to the mix. For less bread, use a romaine lettuce leaf on top instead of a second slice of bread.

Stuffed Peppers:
3 large green bell peppers
1 1/2 cups dry lentils
3 cups water
1/2 tsp. Michelle's Low-Salt Seasoning
1/2 cup crisp brown rice cereal crumbs or whole grain bread crumbs
1 T. ground flax seed
3 T. warm-hot water
1/2 cup onion, finely chopped
2 cloves garlic, minced
2 tsp. oregano
1 tsp. basil
1 tsp. organic pizza seasoning or Italian seasoning
1/4 cup fresh parsley, finely chopped
1 tsp. Real Salt, divided
24 oz. Bionaturae Organic Strained Tomatoes
1 T. whole grain flour of choice
1 scant tiny scoop of KAL Pure Stevia Powder

Rinse lentils and place them in a skillet with three cups of water and Michelle's Low-Salt Seasoning. Bring it to a boil, reduce heat, cover and simmer for 25 minutes or until tender. While the lentils are cooking, wash the bell peppers, carefully cut the top off, rinse and remove all seeds. Remove the lid from the lentils after they are tender and allow any excess water to cook away. Remove from heat. Using a potato masher, mash the lentils. Place them in a large mixing bowl. Place the ground flax seeds into the warm water. Stir and set aside for five minutes. This will act as a replacer for the egg. Preheat the over to 350 degrees. Prepare a deep covered casserole dish by greasing it with coconut oil. Once the lentils have cooled slightly, add the chopped onion, garlic, oregano, basil, pizza seasoning and parsley along with 1/2 tsp of the salt. Add the slightly thickened flax mixture. Mix well as if you were preparing meatballs. Then add the bread or cereal crumbs. Mix again. Once it is thoroughly mixed and will hold together, stuff each pepper, pressing the mixture down firmly and heaping the filling to form a rounded top on each pepper. Place the peppers in the prepared deep casserole dish. Open the strained tomatoes, add the stevia, remaining 1/2 tsp of salt and the flour to the glass bottle of tomatoes. Replace the lid and shake and combine well. If necessary, use a long, iced-tea spoon to stir it a bit and then put the lid back on and shake well. Pour the tomato mixture evenly over all of the peppers. Cover and bake for 2 - 2 1/2 hours or until peppers are tender when pricked with a sharp knife. Each pepper makes two servings. Serve with the tomato gravy they cooked in. Garnish with red hot pepper flakes at the table, if desired. Note: The Bionaturae Strained Tomatoes are the only organic tomatoes I have found that are sold in glass, rather than cans, and have no salt or sugar added. Most health food stores carry them or will order them upon request. They also make a tomato paste that is sold in glass jars.
  • like x 1

#54 Werner

  • Guest
  • 80 posts
  • 6
  • Location:Europe

Posted 14 December 2011 - 08:15 PM

Vegans don't get cancer? Is that the claim? If I really thought that would work, I might go vegan.

T
Vegans get less cancer. There is a strong connection between
meat and intestinal cancer. If you don't eat meat you have no problem.
Nevertheless, the vegan diet is a bad diet. They eat a lot of wheat
products. Wheat is bad (see WGA = wheat germ agglutinins).
Tofu = bad, lot of nuts = bad, muesli = bad, seeds = bad.


Vegan is indeed a broad term. The author states to avoid cooked foods for the most part. And the supplements all wheat-free among other things. Greens in abundance, fresh vegetables, whole fruits (not juices), lentils, nuts and seeds are given the OK. Lean meat and fish too as long as it does not exceed 7% (yes 7..) of the diet, he claims. The grains he recommends does not include wheat but quinoa, amaranth, buckwheat and some others are found acceptable. It is possible to avoid wheat and eat seeds and nuts unless I am not following you.

Update: he states "Non-gluten grains such as buckwheat, millet, brown rice, quinoa and amaranth are healthy in moderation."

The most perfect food in terms of health (in sequence) is: 1) fruits, 2) salads, 3) veggies, 4) fish, 5) beans.
The most miserable food is: 1) pork drippings , 2) liver sausage, 3) pork, 4) cow milk products,
5) other meat, 6) wheat products, 7) seeds, 8) nuts.
Pork drippings+liver sausage+pork+other meat => CVD+cancer,
cow milk products => neurological disorders, diabetes,
wheat products => systemic degeneration with bones, joints
seeds, nuts => destroyers of calcium and zinc

#55 Werner

  • Guest
  • 80 posts
  • 6
  • Location:Europe

Posted 14 December 2011 - 08:45 PM

Anyway, I was wondering if Werner had any evidence to back up his bold statement about dairy.

http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/21335999
There is a lot of stuff in the internet.


Um, that paper seems to be evidence against your argument, not for it. Here's the abstract:

Nestle Nutr Workshop Ser Pediatr Program. 2011;67:187-95. Epub 2011 Feb 16.
Milk A1 and A2 peptides and diabetes.
Clemens RA.

Regulatory Science, School of Pharmacy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

...digestion. Evidence from several epidemiological studies and animal models does not support the association of milk proteins, even proteins in breast milk, and the development of T1D. Ecological data, primarily based on A1/ A2 variations among livestock breeds, do not demonstrate causation, even among countries where there is considerable dairy consumption.

PMID: 21335999


It hardly sounds like dairy is the health scourge you are making it out to be.

Did you read this: "Food-derived peptides, specifically those derived from milk, may adversely affect health by increasing the risk of insulin-dependent diabetes. This position is based on the relationship of type 1 diabetes (T1D) and the consumption of variants A1 and B β-casein from cow's milk."


Sure, that's the statement of the hypothesis that they set out to test. The part that I put in bold at the end of the abstract is the result of their test, where they found the hypothesis to be false.

Look at this Lancet article:
Cell-mediated immune response to β casein in recent-onset insulin-dependent diabetes: implications for disease pathogenesis.
http://www.thelancet...2065-3/fulltext
"The association between IDDM and early consumption of cows' milk may be explained by the generation of a specific immune response to β casein. Exposure to cows' milk triggers a cellular and humoral anti-β casein immune response which may cross-react with a beta-cell antigen. It is of interest that sequence homologies exist between β casein and several β-cell molecules."
IDDM=Insulin dependent diabetes mellitus
But this is only diabetes. BCM7, this is ß-casomorphin, a milk peptide created
during the digestive process is linked to neurological diseases.
Look, I would be glad to eat cheese because I like cheese very
much. But I try to avoid it because I fear negative consequences.


This 1996 Lancet paper looks at the milk-IDDM hypothesis in a different way. They consider the possibility that early consumption of cow's milk exposes one to an antigen that immunologically cross-reacts with an antigen on pancreatic beta cells. Indeed, they find that in half of patients with IDDM, their T lymphocytes react with beta casein, while only three percent of healthy people's did. The question is, is the IDDM a consequence of drinking milk, or is the reactivity to beta casein a consequence of IDDM? The 2011 Clemens paper says that IDDM (T1D) doesn't appear to be caused by milk consumption, so that would suggest that the cross reactivity is an artifact of IDDM.

Clemens paper: "...doesn't appear to be caused by milk" means that they don't know it.
If there is an anti-ß-casein immune response the result is a reaction somewhere in the body.
The reaction takes place in the pancreas because of sequence homologies exist between
β-casein and several β-cell molecules. To me it seems to be a logical conclusion.
In this context I have quite a lot of mistrust. The study situation is difficult due to the
massive influence of the milk industry. They give the money for studies and they expect
an appropriate result. I think this is the largest problem to get reliable results.

#56 JChief

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 638 posts
  • 109
  • Location:US of A
  • NO

Posted 15 December 2011 - 05:59 AM

seeds, nuts => destroyers of calcium and zinc


I'm not following. Nuts are supposed good sources of zinc (and B12 since we were discussing that earlier). And almonds in particular are a source of calcium. I do not believe that nuts and seeds in moderation in addition to a diet with an abundance of greens (calcium etc) plus my supplementation of both minerals are reason enough to believe I do not need to worry about a zinc or calcium deficiency.

#57 Googoltarian

  • Guest
  • 113 posts
  • 65
  • Location:EU

Posted 15 December 2011 - 06:12 AM

I found in a biochemical journal "The retention time of the n- octacosanol was identical with that of ^3-tocotrienol. Since a-tocopherol also has the same retention time as n-octacosanol and /3-tocotrienol on the 4%-SE-30 column it was necessary to ensure that the ..." but this isn't my field of study. All I see is an association being made. I cannot view any more of the journal without purchasing to get a better frame of reference.


It means only that those two compounds cannot be separated using those settings - looks like gas chromatography. These molecules are different, and this citation tells nothing about bioactivity.

#58 Werner

  • Guest
  • 80 posts
  • 6
  • Location:Europe

Posted 15 December 2011 - 10:58 AM

seeds, nuts => destroyers of calcium and zinc


I'm not following. Nuts are supposed good sources of zinc (and B12 since we were discussing that earlier). And almonds in particular are a source of calcium. I do not believe that nuts and seeds in moderation in addition to a diet with an abundance of greens (calcium etc) plus my supplementation of both minerals are reason enough to believe I do not need to worry about a zinc or calcium deficiency.

It's the phytate problem of nuts (content): hazelnuts 1.9%%, Brazil nut 2.0-6.3%,
walnut 0.7-2.4%, almond 1.4-3.2% ...
"Phytate forms complexes with cations in the following descending order of strength:
Cu²+ > Zn²+ > Co²+ > Mn²+ > Fe3+ > Ca2+
(according to Reddy and Sathe et al., 2001)
You see that nuts destroy not only zinc and calcium but other minerals as well.
With nuts you have also the lectin problem, a really ugly thing.

#59 JChief

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 638 posts
  • 109
  • Location:US of A
  • NO

Posted 15 December 2011 - 11:03 AM

this citation tells nothing about bioactivity.


Well I could tell at least that much :sleep:

#60 JChief

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 638 posts
  • 109
  • Location:US of A
  • NO

Posted 15 December 2011 - 11:05 AM

It's the phytate problem of nuts (content): hazelnuts 1.9%%, Brazil nut 2.0-6.3%,
walnut 0.7-2.4%, almond 1.4-3.2% ...
"Phytate forms complexes with cations in the following descending order of strength:
Cu²+ > Zn²+ > Co²+ > Mn²+ > Fe3+ > Ca2+
(according to Reddy and Sathe et al., 2001)
You see that nuts destroy not only zinc and calcium but other minerals as well.
With nuts you have also the lectin problem, a really ugly thing.


What about if you soak them to make them more digestible? Does that help any of that S > O > L stuff?




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users