Jump to content

9nines

Members
  • Posts

    469
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by 9nines

  1. It was well written but on the first part, I feel that it is somewhat misleading in its implication, that soy is one of a few plant proteins that have all essential amino acids. I hate reading this in pro-vegetarian essays because the pro-vegetarian is helping to maintain the myth about incomplete and complete protein and implications of quality, when it is simply a quantity issue. Instead I would hope to see the following in the first part: All the common material plant protein sources, form potatoes, to wheat, to corn, to rice, to greens, to some fruits, to all green vegetables, grains, nuts, etc. have all the essential amino acids; it is just per a given quantity of protein that they have less than the arbitrary ideal profile would have. In those cases, the lesser essential amino acids are around 75% of the amount in the ideal profile and it is typically just one or two amino acids, with the remaining six to seven essential amino acids being 100%+ in quantity that the same amount of protein of the so-called complete protein would have. Also, this is a measurement of quantity not quality. It is asinine for people to equate a quantity measurement to quality, as they do when they opine that that measurement makes it a lower “quality” protein. And it is even more asinine, to conclude that 75% means absent, as the same critics do when they state an essential amino acid is missing. For example, if 20 grams of rice protein has 1.5 grams of lysine and 20 grams of a so-called complete protein has 2 grams of lysine (and this is what is meant by the rice having 75% of the lysine of the so-called complete protein), how is the 1.5 grams of lysine ,of the rice considered missing, while the 2 grams of lysine, of the other source, consider there, as the critics imply by saying it is lacking in lysine. To show how absurd this popular position about plant proteins is, I ask, does one, weighing 200 pounds, consider himself alone, as he is walking next to his friend that weighs 150 pounds? On part 2, while this point was discussed, I would more emphasize the fact that the phyto-estrogen are actually anti-estrogen in most cases, with more detail about how estrogen receptors, to which phyto-estrogen bind, are then precluded from accepting the real estrogen, which is factors (ranges from around 100 to 1 to 5000 to 1) stronger than the phyto-estrogen – therefore, estrogen uptake is reduced (not increased) as the weaker phyto-estorgen binds with these receptors, eliminating the uptake of the factors stronger real estrogen. Again, this situation is discussed in the article but it seems minimal, when instead it might be better as the main point of the rebuttal against the myth of part 2.
  2. Ever play these games, permanent death mode? That is where, if you die in the game, you delete the character. Many guilds form, in the online games to do this. If played seriously, it makes you very much more cautious and take the game slower paced.
  3. No online games like Everquest, Dark age of Camelot, World of Warcraft?
  4. We do need amino acids, as our bodies builds certain amino acids from others. The source amino acids come from diet and from the break-down of our own protein as fuel (example, burning own muscle during exercise.) Essential amino acids, as other pointed out, are certain amino acids that supposedly our bodies can not build from just any amino acids - instead those exact amino acids must be provisioned, from diet or our own protein tissue breakdown, to build them. A note I would like to add: any material dietary protein source has all the essential amino acids needed. The so-called incomplete proteins are just lower in certain essential amino acids than an ideal profile, that is arbitrary. Also, most of the so-called incomplete proteins are just low, in comparison to the suspected arbitrary ideal amino acid profile, by a small degree. For example rice is said to be an incomplete protein because it is lower in lysine but it is called low because for any given amount of an ideal amino acid profile protein it has ~75% of the lysine. Yet again many try to imply that it is absent in lysine. I guess these same people would argue that if they only ate 75% of a donut they did not eat one.
  5. http://dubai.isnuts.googlepages.com.nyud.net:8080/
  6. Hazel nuts have a nice flavor and texture. Cashews, peanuts and walnuts are good raw.
  7. What is the best training approach to be able to do one hand push-ups? Mytriceps and chest seem strong enough but I can not balance, with one arm. I assume your core muscles must be very strong to keep balance - is that it? Is getting your core muscles strong enough, the trick? Any suggested training steps to get to the point where I can do them? Edit: I searched and found that to start you spread your legs wide, for balance. I was trying to do them with legs together, which should be my goal but not initial practice maybe. So I guess I need to do them with legs spread apart, and over time, bring the legs closer together as I progress on a weekly basis. Is that a good way to master them?
  8. Something interesting, from a policy standpoint, is that the business is an economic failure. The report stated that if that company were to just meet the bare standards of waste management that any town must meet, it would operate at a loss. Those costs are being put on other people, involuntary, with that company escaping ist direct cost - it is socializing the waste cost onto society. So for the economy as whole, which must bare those costs, that company is a drain. Instead, if that company were in a true free market, where it and its customers had to bare the full cost of that waste, it would not be because it would consistently run at a loss and would cease to exist financially. So the question could also be an economic one - why is this allowed, from a policy standpoint?
  9. I might go eat here: http://www.indoamerican-news.com/houston/anand_bhavan_2004.htm I have never eaten Indian food. Recommendations?
  10. I think this is a good investigation. It hits on problems "all" should want to avoid, so it is good to share on non-vegetarian sites too.
  11. On the original post, some famous economist (I forgot who) stated that the suburbs will likely go down in history, as the most inefficient allocation of resources, in the history of mankind, for the exact inefficiency (all the roads, cars, houses) that you mentioned.
  12. I disagree. I think the most people say, yes there is a pollution problem but my pollution is so small compared to the world as a whole, it does not matter. Without government action to establish regulations and actively enforce them, I think the majority of people will simply continue to heavily consume and create much waste, while still wanting a clean environment, using the excuse, my trash does not really matter compared to everyone else's.
  13. Just say, "you are cute I wanted to say hi" and then see what the response is.
  14. I have heard more than one doctor say that sweetness in the mouth creates an insulin response and therefore, these low or no-calorie sugar substitutes cause insulin to be put into the blood, as we taste it and this leads to more hunger. Dr. McDougall had a study, in his last month newsletter, that found noticeable weight gain, based on drinking diet sodas because of this.
  15. Nice find. Thanks for positing it. When people make comments about my food being healthful but appearing bland, I tell them that taste is just habit and you just think that something tastes good, over time. They look at my as if I am crazy and few stay to hear me say, if you quit eating what you eat now, you can form a new habit on more healthful food and will find it is your preferred taste, after it becomes your habit.
  16. Here is mine: I usually do not respond to things such as organizations asking for personal updates etc. but now I am viewing it as a way to spread benefits of vegan diets. This might be a good positive way to spread the idea of vegan diets, when people are unguarded, casually reading stuff (so possibly in better frame of mind to accept it.) Here is what I responded to a personal update request from organization to which I belong: XXXXXXXX (name) I will soon have my third anniversary of eating a vegan diet. My total cholesterol level is 125 (down from 180, when I ate the standard American diet.) My body fat percentage is 10% (down from 18%, when I ate the standard American diet.) I can honestly say that my waist is smaller and I am in better physical shape than when I was 20 years of age and I have more physical endurance (can run longer and exercise longer, with no fatigue, require less sleep, etc.) I would contribute it completely to my plant based diet.
  17. Is there a way to respond to him? I searched but could not find any contact information, except to his press secretary. As I posted, last week and shared a study, of many medical studies, phyto-estorgen is generally anti-estrogen (reduces your estrogen up-take.) It binds to estrogen receptors, where your body up-takes the real hormone but it is factors less potent than real estrogen, therefore if the bind holds, you are uptaking less estrogen because it is preventing more potent real estrogen from binding. If the bond breaks (it is a weaker bond than real estrogen), then the receptor is open to bind with real estrogen (males produce it too) and therefore there is a neutral effect (it neither raises nor lowers your estrogen uptake.) The only time it increases your estrogen up-take is when your body is deficient in estrogen and there was no estrogen to bind to the receptor but that is a good thing because it is helping to reduce your deficit of estrogen. In other words, phyto-estorgen is either neutral or beneficial but not bad. Also, many plants have phytoestrogen and soy does not even rank highest. For example, Flax seed has factors more phytoestorgen than soy.
  18. I find many problems in that paper: 1) On primates eating some insects. The author writes, "All monkeys, lemurs and apes are classified as vegetarians and/or fruitivors, but they consume a small amount of animal protein by unconsciously eating the small insects, their eggs and larvae on the plant foods they select to eat." Because they eat stray insects on vegetation (does he propose they thoroughly wash their food first) he wants to not label them vegetarians? What about herbivores, does he think they do not routinely eat insects in the grass and other plants they eat? Even for primates that purposely eat insects, it is not material amount of calories (maybe 2% to 3% of total calories) and all primate researchers I have read indicate chimps kill meat ritualistic (to show off, which is why they offer it to other chimps) versus for diet. This argument seems to just be an agenda versus true implications. 2) "The protein and minerals in the meat cannot be utilized without the nutrients in the fat." There are some fat soluble vitamins than need fat in order to digest them (I think they are fat, anyway) but protein does not require fat and I am fairly certain no minerals do. Also, fat is in plants (5% to 30%, of calories, depending on source), so why specifically search it out. 3) The article states many times that "ancient" human diet was primarily meat. I often hear this but I question it. One can look at the human body and tell it would be a poor hunter, without tools (weapons.) So, before frequent tool making, ancient man or hominids would not eat much meat, if any, so he sesm to just be picking a convenient stage of man and I question that stage too: Even after human starting frequently using weapons, I doubt their primary diet was meat because it would not be easy to get. First, a community could not spend much of its time hunting. Defense from other humans or animals of prey, protection from weather problems, etc. would take up a lot of time. Second the animals were not conveniently in a pasture or slaughter house, it would likely take a whole day to multiple days to get any large quantities of meat. Then what was obtain would not last long, since they had little ways to preserve it, so it had to be eaten then. My question is did they starve during the next few days before successfully hunting again or instead did they likely eat plant based meals since that was likely genetic ancestor's diet before tools and easy to obtain. So, to me, I would think meat consumption was infrequent, because of these time problems and by definition "infrequent" is not "primary", as the author states meat was to their diet. 4) When the author writes, " Unlike humans, the digestive tract of gorillas is equipped to manufacture the essential amino acids", he shows that he does not understand this subject and I would therefore question his credibility. Amino acids from protein are broken down, in the digestive system, abosrobed into blood and then at the cellular level, not digestive tract as the article states, the body reassembles them into chains of different amino acids to be utilize. Some specific amino acids can not be synthesized by a particular animal (different species can and can not synthesize different amino acids - it is not same for all creatures) and for that animal species, those amino acids are considered "essential" because it is essential that they are obtained from the diet. So, gorillas, or any animal, can not produce essential amino acids because if they can produced those specific amino acids, as the article states they can, then they are not "essential", in the first place. So by the wuthor writing what he did, I think chances are high that he does not understand what he is writing.
  19. On the soy being estrogen (phytoestrogen adn there are many mroe plan tsources than soy.) From readings, I foudn phyto-estrogen to range from being neutral to anti-estrogen. It has estrogen like components but they are very mild estrogen. They can link to body estrogen receptors. If they hold to the receptors, they keep actual estrogen (males make it also) from binding with receptor. They are something around 1/100 to 1/5,000 as strong as our own estrogen, so if they bind and block the receptors, then your body is up-taking less estrogen, so in that case they are anti-estrogen. Their bond is weaker than the bind of our estrogen, so in many case our estrogen will bump them off and bind itself, in which case they do nothing and are estrogen neutral. Here is an article I quickly found, searching for phytoestrogen and receptors: http://www.planetherbs.com/articles/phytoestrogens.htm It makes a third case, that if your body is producing too few estrogen hormone, then the phyto-estrogen can bind and, while weaker, be an estrogen supply and therefore beneficial.
  20. I would take Richard's advice and bury it. It is a long shot but you might be able to get a message out: Call your local newspaper and television news and inform them that you won a really nice gift from the mall. Tell them that you are very touched by the gift and planned to do some good with it and ask them to witness. Local news like to cover feel good stories during holidays so they might bite on your invitation. If you can talk any into covering the event, get the item and bury it, with the news watching. Show pictures of animals that have been used for fur and make points that all of those animals died in terror and while you can not change that you would like to try to at least show some respect for this dead animal by burying its remains. Again a long shot but it might work and if it does, it send so many messages (the fur should not be worn it is remains of dead animals, points about how the animals are treated if you show pictures, etc.)
  21. I am going to try to watch this episode but I do not watch the show, so I am not sure what will be seen. I think popular television can help spread ideas, by incorporating the ideas into a show. Although it is a double edge sword since the show could promote a bad idea too.
  22. I do not know chemistry but what many state (bonding of chemicals) makes sense but I would use this information not to advocate avoiding certain plant based foods but instead to promote eating more nutrient dense food, which are plant based food. Eating more nutrient dense food will increase your ratio of micro nutrients to calories which should mitigate any chemical bonding caused loss of absorption, simply by consuming many more micro nutrients. Not only should eating, with the goal of concentrating on nutrient dense food, improve your health but it is a good angle to argue for a plant based diet, since that is more nutrient dense and less dense tend to be animal based foods and heavily processed foods.
  23. Side note, I would imagine that true body building would be inverse of longevity; it is very stressful on your body.
  24. You are likely just hungry and like that food. I do not really think that our body, that mostly tastes via smell, can tell the difference between a food with 20% of its calories as protein from one with 30%, to signal any preference. If you do not want to eat that much of that food, just quit. After not eating it and eating something else your tastes and preferences will change.
×
×
  • Create New...