9nines

I just broke from my vegan diet because of that article. I am persuaded by fact and science and I can not deny that you can not get more scientific than: “I have come to this conclusion based on almost ten years of extensive postal and e-mail correspondence sent.” I mean who needs control and experimental groups to control variables and then have your results peer reviewed, by other comptenet researchers, when you can just base conclusion on simple email and postal testimonials?

Aim for young people: after concerts is good way or anywhere else young people are.

What about drinking water right before, during or after eating? It might be a concern in this area. I have heard it and one of the doctors, in the nutritional debate USDA forum (see my post with link in the Vegan Ketosis thread), talked about liquids diluting the enzymes and therefore drinking right before, during or after eating should not be done. He stated that doing so was a large cause of indigestion.

Here is another funny part. Some doctors are talking about Dr. Atkins’s own research (he shared his partial study with them) showing many people, strictly following his diet, lost hair, developed bad breath and headaches and were irritable. Dr. Atkins side-stepped some of it but here is what one of his answers was: Whether the sweet smell of 22 ketones is considered bad breath or just sweet breath is a 23 matter of opinion.

Here is an interesting debate with many doctors at a United States Agriculture Agency forum. http://www.usda.gov/cnpp/Seminars/GND/Proceedings.txt The transcript is not as long as it appears (double space with many blank pages.) You can easily read it in under an hour. First 60% is presentations by each doctor and last part is a somewhat debate. Dr. Atkins looks foolish in it. Earlier, a doctor makes a good point that as a doctor or scientist, you do research and from the findings make recommendations (what Drs. Ornish and McDougal did); you do not make recommendations, then try to do research to prove your opinions (what Atkins did or trying – he admits he had done no research at this point 2000.) HE also admits his diet is nutritionally deficient (must take vitamins) and he admits he would not recommend his diet to anyone, except overweight people (he does not answer why he would not recommend it for everyone.) Here is a foolish part where he admits he has done no research (claims he did not have funding, then states he would be first doctor to fund his own research.) Note: To avoid confusion, the numbers are line numbers from the transcript: DR. AYOOB: Just because it was brought out about 22 Dr. Atkins' claim to reverse heart disease, and he said he's 23 working on the data, but he's been making this claim for a 24 long time, and that's what I -- 25 DR. ATKINS: No, I haven't. 124 1 DR. AYOOB: Excuse me. 2 DR. ATKINS: I haven't been -- 3 DR. AYOOB: Excuse me. 4 DR. ATKINS: -- making that claim. 5 DR. AYOOB: You just did, and you don't have the 6 evidence -- 7 DR. ATKINS: Before. 8 DR. AYOOB: -- to back it up. Now, this diet has 9 been out there for 30 years or close to 30 years. 10 DR. ATKINS: And I haven't been able to fund the 11 study. 12 DR. AYOOB: Excuse me. Excuse me. Ten million 13 books in print, and you can't fund the study? 14 (Applause.) 15 DR. ATKINS: Now I can, and I will be the first 16 doctor to dig into his own pocket to do a study, and it will 17 be me, but it was the first time I had any money left. 18 DR. AYOOB: Ten million books. You market the 19 vitamins. You sell the vitamins -- 20 DR. ATKINS: Now. 21 DR. AYOOB: -- to correct the nutritional 22 deficiencies. 23 DR. ATKINS: That's true. That's why I'm doing 24 the study now. 25 DR. AYOOB: You market them. I keep saying -- 125 1 DR. ATKINS: That's why I couldn't do it before. 2 DR. AYOOB: You market this. I say this is not 3 for the public good. This is marketed. This is a money 4 making proposition.

You should rethink this. First, ketosis is a very dangerous, extreme state for the body. There are two main natural states, in which the body enters this state: 1) some stages of pregnancy (demand caused) and 2) starvation (supply caused), both states of extreme stress on the body, with the body reversing many processes in order to survive. Second, the ketones allows the body to more easily consume its own muscle, so you are going to lose muscle tone.

Warning: does contain animal research: http://www.ehponline.org/docs/1996/104-5/focus.html

Very true. All the mainstream news programs are fairly conservative and pro-business. Their business model (revenues mainly based on advertisements by businesses) dictates a bias toward status quo, nationalism and pro consumption. On a political scale of our news media, I would place all mainstream news stations to the right, at varying degrees, national public radio somewhat un-biased and Pacifica to the left. Actually, people placing CNN etc. to the left, shows how far-right the United States is.

No, genetically engineered products can't be considered organic. An organic field could be contaminated from cross pollination, etc., no? Are there safeguards (like can not grow an organic certified crop X miles from a genetically modified crop) or is this a concern?

My shoulders seem to be getting better. I think it was being caused by putting the dumbbells down at end of sets. Most of the weight is being transferred to smaller shoulder muscles, from larger chest muscles, as I would set the weights downs. I am just doing push-ups for my chests now and after my shoulders are near 100%, I will go back to a barbell for chest presses.

I like nut butters, I just waste them because I do not like to keep them more than two weeks or so (nuts grow mold quickly, I think) and I will not eat them that fast.

I get a sore throat, immediately after eating parsley (about a handful as part of a salad.) Happened about two months ago and I tried eating a material amounts of parsley, this week and it happened again. I have never been allergic to anything. Seem like an allergy?

I would rather shy from added fat but the lettuce and dark green wraps sound good. I will try some. Thanks.

I made my own recipe by trying to get taste and texture of what restaurants serve. I use medium ripe avocados. I mush, with a fork, until texture of what restaurants serve. I spread it out evenly in a big bowl. I then sprinkle garlic powder, to cover about 40% of it, cilantro to cover all of it, then sprinkle black pepper to cover about 10%, then I put diced onions in it - size depends on taste (I used dried in a shaker to save time but fresh would be good.) I then mix it all together. Then I put lemon or lime juice on it - size depends on taste. It tastes pretty close to what restaurants serve.

I pretty much eat only food I bring (I rarely go to a restaurant) to work. I bring four to five servings of fruit, a serving of nuts, clifbar or oatmeal, and a lunch ranging from big plate of vegetables and a soup to tofu or avocado sandwiches to large bowl of cereal and rice milk. Eating the above keeps me full but sometimes I am fairly hungry as I leave work or by time I get home. I want to start exercising at a new gym, next to my office. If I do so, I know I will not have enough food. Any ideas for another 300 to 400 calorie source (I do not want processed food)? Thanks for any suggestions.

Anyone eat these? I just learned of them. Very high iron and Vitamin A. Supposedly enhance immune system. Have one of the highest protein contents, in fruit, that i have seen (about 14% of calories are protein; that is almost on par with many grains.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfberry I bought some dried ones at Whole Foods. Taste like a bland rasin. Summary: Nutrient content Wolfberries are nutritionally rich, containing beta-carotene, Vitamins C, B1, B2 and other vitamins, minerals, antioxidants, and amino acids. Companies marketing the berries also claim the berries contain such nutrients as isoleucine and tryptophan (both amino acids), as well as zinc, iron, copper, calcium, germanium, selenium, phosphorus, vitamin B6 (pyridoxine), and vitamin E. Two recent book publications describe exceptional nutritional qualities of wolfberries, advancing a working proposal that wolfberry is one of the most nutrient-rich plant foods on Earth (References: Young et al., 2005; Gross et al., 2006). [edit] Macronutrients Wolfberry contains significant percentages of a day's macronutrient needs – carbohydrates, protein, fat and dietary fiber. 68% of the mass of a wolfberry exists as carbohydrate, 12% as protein, and 10% each as fiber and fat, giving a total caloric value of 370 for a 100 gram serving. Soybean, another ancient Chinese plant among the world's most complete foods, is comparable across macronutrients. Although wolfberries and soybeans are similar as regards their macronutrient content, wolfberries provide a significantly higher source of calories as energy from carbohydrates (soybeans = 173 calories). Blueberries, by contrast, do not have as much macronutrient or caloric value. Seeds contain the wolfberry's polyunsaturated fats such as linoleic (omega-6) and linolenic (omega-3) acids. [edit] Micronutrients Wolfberry's diversity and high concentration of micronutrients brand it as an exceptional health food. 11 essential minerals, 22 trace minerals, 7 vitamins and 18 amino acids profile extraordinary micronutrient richness, with examples below: Calcium. The primary constituent of teeth and bones, calcium has a diverse role also in soft tissues where it is involved in cardiac, neuromuscular, enzymatic, hormonal, and transport mechanisms across cell membranes. Wolfberries and soybeans contain 112 mg and 102 mg per 100 gram serving, respectively, providing about 8-10% of the Reference Daily Intake (RDI). Potassium. An essential electrolyte and enzyme cofactor, dietary potassium can lower high blood pressure. Giving about 24% of the RDI (1132 mg/100 gram), wolfberries are an excellent source, providing more than twice the amount of soybeans. Iron. An oxygen carrier on hemoglobin, iron also is a cofactor for enzymes involved in numerous metabolic reactions. When intake is deficient, low iron levels cause iron deficiency anemia affecting millions of children worldwide. Wolfberry’s exceptional iron content, 100% DRI at 9 mg/100 grams, is twice that provided by soybeans, often regarded as the best plant source of iron. Zinc. Essential for making proteins, DNA and functions of over 100 enzymes, zinc is involved in critical cell activities such as membrane transport, repair and growth, especially in infants. Zinc in wolfberries (2 mg/100 grams) has a high content (double the amount of soybeans), meeting 20% of RDI. Selenium. Sometimes called the “antioxidant mineral”, selenium is often included in supplements. Selenium has unusually high concentration in wolfberries (50 micrograms/100 grams), nearly 100% of the RDI whereas blueberries and soybeans are not important sources (8 micrograms or less). Riboflavin (vitamin B2). An essential vitamin supporting energy metabolism, riboflavin is needed for synthesizing other vitamins and enzymes. A daily wolfberry serving (1.3 micrograms) provides the complete RDI whereas soybeans and blueberries have only trace levels of this important vitamin. Vitamin C. A universal antioxidant vitamin protecting other antioxidant molecules from free radical damage, vitamin C content in dried wolfberries has a range (from different sources) of 29 mg/100 grams to as high as 148 mg/100 grams. Even the lower estimate is a multiple of equal weights of blueberries or soybeans, providing about 35% of the RDI. Reports on vitamin C content from other wolfberry preparations, such as juice concentrate or juice powder, have been significantly higher. The note below offers possible explanation for these discrepancies. [Note on micronutrient contents: differences in the degree of berry maturation at the time of picking, geographic region where the berries were grown, post-harvest handling and processing, duration of storage, residual water content and assay preparation can significantly affect individual nutrient contents, especially those for vitamins and phytochemicals. These factors make data comparisons between different assays or sources difficult to reconcile]. [edit] Phytochemicals Wolfberries contain dozens of phytochemicals whose properties are under scientific study. Four of these are of particular interest: Beta-carotene. A carotenoid pigment in orange-red foods like wolfberries, pumpkins, carrots and salmon, beta-carotene is important for synthesis of vitamin A, a fat-soluble nutrient and antioxidant essential for normal growth, vision, cell structure, bones and teeth and healthy skin. Wolfberry's beta-carotene content per unit weight (7 mg/100 grams) is among the highest for edible plants. Zeaxanthin. Wolfberries are an extraordinary source for this carotenoid important as a retinal antioxidant and pigment filter of ultraviolet light. Wolfberries contain 162 mg/100 grams. Polysaccharides. Long-chain sugar molecules characteristic of many herbal medicines like mushrooms and roots, polysaccharides are a signature constituent of wolfberries, making up 31% of pulp weight in premium quality wolfberries. Polysaccharides are a primary source of fermentable dietary fiber in the intestinal system. Upon colonic metabolism, fermentable or "soluble fibers" yield short-chain fatty acids which 1) are valuable for health of the colonic mucosal lining, 2) enhance mineral uptake, 3) stabilize blood glucose levels, 4) lower pH and reduce colon cancer risk and 5) stimulate the immune system. Polysaccharides also display antioxidant activity. Phenolics. Also called phenols or polyphenols, this group of phytochemicals numbers in the thousands of individual chemicals existing across the plant kingdom, mainly as protective astringents or pigments that give bright colors to plants like the red, ripe wolfberry (photo top right). Phenolic pigments have the metabolic property of high antioxidant capability transferable to animals by eating the plant. New assays have revealed the presence in wolfberries of phenolics such as ellagic acid (86 mg/100 grams) and p-coumaric acid (likely, future research will reveal many more), with a total phenolics content of 1,309 mg/100 grams -- one of the highest values for any plant food yet tested (Young et al., 2005; Brunswick Laboratories). [edit] Oxygen Radical Absorbance Capacity Wolfberry's richness in carotenoids, phenolics and vitamin C creates potential for an extraordinary synergy of antioxidant strength, a measure determined by test tube assays of oxygen radical absorbance capacity (ORAC). In 2004, scientists with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (References, Wu et al.) published an extensive list of ORAC values for over 100 common foods (fruits, vegetables, nuts, seeds, spices, grains, etc.). Values were reported as micromoles (μmol) of Trolox equivalents (TE, vitamin E derivative) per gram both for lipid-soluble ("lipophilic" as for carotenoids) and water-soluble ("hydrophilic" as for phenolics) antioxidant chemicals in foods, thus were a sum of lipophilic and hydrophilic values or total ORAC. The data of Wu et al. showed that all plants have variable amounts of both lipophilic and hydrophilic phytochemicals with antioxidant properties contributing to total ORAC. Spices (clove, cinnamon) showed the highest ORAC values (>250,000, converted to μmol TE per 100 grams) whereas, among commonly eaten foods, dark berries (known to be rich in phenolics), such as cranberry and lowbush blueberry, were highest (around 9,300 μmol TE per 100 grams). By comparison, different species of apples had ORAC values of 4,275 μmol TE per 100 grams or less, white potato was under 1,100, peanut was 3,166 and tomato about 400. In their 2005 book (References), Young et al. report ORAC for dried wolfberries as 30,300 μmol TE per 100 grams, indicating exceptional antioxidant strength likely resulting from the synergy mentioned above for wolfberry's diversity of antioxidant phytochemicals. Among high-antioxidant berries and fruits whose ORAC values have been reported as marketing information (unconfirmed by scientific peer-review) are açaí at 34,000 (freeze dried powder, Sambazon) and pomegranate at 10,500 (References, Brunswick Laboratories).

Thanks. The lobbying group stressed to make sure to tell your rep not to support it if non-sponsor amendments are added. The group fears some amendments to weaken it will be added and some could make the situation worse than it is now. Thanks again because I literally have no rep now (in Tom Delay's district) so I can not call or write mine.

Please call your US representative to voice support H.R. 503, without any amendments, unless those amendments are by the bill's sponosors. Thanks August 18, 2006 Update on H.R. 503 The American Horse Slaughter Prevention Act ! IT’S DO OR DIE TIME FOR THIS BILL ! The House sponsors of H.R. 503 have been promised a House floor vote on H.R. 503 on or about September 7, 2006 when the Congress returns from its August recess. If the bill does not pass, it is dead – as dead as the slaughtered horses it is intended to protect. We must not let this happen! During the recess, we are asking everyone one last time to contact their U.S. Representative and encourage him/her to SUPPORT H.R. 503 WITHOUT ANY AMENDMENTS EXCEPT THOSE, IF ANY, OFFERED BY THE BILL’S SPONSORS. We anticipate that the opposition will try to amend H.R. 503 to make it ineffective or even so bad that we would be better off without it. Thus, it’s important that the message to our U.S. Representatives be that they SUPPORT H.R. 503 WITHOUT ANY AMENDMENTS EXCEPT THOSE, IF ANY, OFFERED BY THE BILL’S SPONSORS. The opposition is working hard during this recess to try and change Housemembers’ minds and get more opposition to H.R. 503. It’s imperative that we counter with calls, letters, faxes, etc. to our Representatives in support of H.R. 503. PLEASE . . . ACT NOW AND CONTACT YOUR REPRESENTATIVE AND . . . PASS THIS ALERT ON TO YOUR FAMILY AND FRIENDS. We are only asking that you make one contact – your Representative. You can find your Representative’s name and contact information by going to www.house.gov/writerep. FACTS AND TALKING POINTS ON HORSE SLAUGHTER Facts: · There are three horse slaughter plants in the United States. All are 100% foreign owned. In 2005 they slaughtered over 90,000 American horses and shipped the horsemeat to Belgium, France and Japan for sale to wealthy diners. No horsemeat is consumed by humans in the U.S. · Texas tried to shutdown the two Texas plants and was thwarted by a federal court decision holding that federal law preempted Texas law. Thus, the only way to stop horse slaughter in the U.S. for human consumption is by the passage of a federal law. The current bill before Congress, H.R. 503, commonly known as the American Horse Slaughter Prevention Act, is scheduled for a floor vote in the House of Representatives in early September. H.R. 503 has bipartisan support and over 200 co-sponsors. It also has the overwhelming support of the American public. Polls taken in Kentucky, Virginia, Texas and Utah respectively show that 82%, 74%, 72% and 69% of those questioned oppose horse slaughter. In California, a ballot initiative banning horse slaughter for human consumption passed with over 60% of the vote. · Horse slaughter promotes horse theft. Bragging “from the stable to the table in four days” healthy horses are stolen, butchered and exported within hours. Horse theft in California dropped 34% when they banned horse slaughter. · Horse slaughter plants are a drain on the economy. They employ less than 200 low paid mostly migrant workers. They require U.S. oversight of the slaughtering process costing U.S. taxpayers millions of dollars. Further the three U.S. horse slaughter plants gross around $60 million a year, and using accounting loopholes pay little or no U.S. income taxes. They also send all of their profits to their foreign owners. Myths and Truths: Myth – Horse slaughter is a viable alternative to euthanasia for those owners who can’t afford or do not want to have their horse humanely euthanized in the traditional manner. Truth – Horse slaughter is anything but humane. From the sale barn to the killing floor, horses are subjected to horrific and inhumane treatment. During transportation many horses are injured and killed from overcrowding; grouping stallions, mares and foals together; traveling over thousands of miles and many hours with no food or water. Also the method of slaughter – use of a captive-bolt gun – is imprecise and leads to injury and/or failure to render the horse unconscious; thus subjecting the horse to having its throat cut while still conscious. Unlike cattle, swine and sheep, horses are not raised for food and being subjected to cramped transportation and the slaughter process is totally foreign to their nature and is cruel and inhumane. Euthanasia is defined as the “relief from pain” - horse slaughter on the other hand is an “inflection of pain.” Myth – Most horses sent for slaughter are typically older, sick, lame, neglected, displaced or retired animals. Truth – Nearly all of the horses (thoroughbreds, quarter horses, standard bred, paints, Arabians, wild mustangs) arriving at the kill plants were purchased by “killer buyers” at regular horse auctions. According to the USDA, 92% of the horses slaughtered at these slaughter plants are in “good to excellent condition with no behavioral problems.” Myth – Without horse slaughter, sick, old and unwanted horses will be left to suffer and die in the field. Truth – There are approximately 9.2 million horses in the U.S. today. Approximately 10% of those horses (920,000) die annually. The vast majority (99%) are not slaughtered, but humanely euthanized by a veterinarian and then sent to a rendering plant or buried. The average cost of humane euthanasia is $225 while the average cost of keeping a horse is around $200 a month. Anyone who can afford to keep a horse can afford to have it humanely euthanized. No special infrastructure is needed to absorb “unwanted horses”. The owner of an unwanted horse has several options: he can sell his horse to someone else, have it humanely euthanized, or donate it to a horse retirement or rescue facility. Myth – If we ban horse slaughter in the U.S., horses will just be exported to Mexico and Canada and will suffer from longer transportation time and the lack of the protections of U.S. humane legislation. Truth – The American Horse Slaughter Prevention Act, will ban transportation of live horses across international borders for the purpose of slaughter. H.R. 503 contains clear enforcement and penalty provisions to prevent this from happening. Myth – The banning of horse slaughter is the product of animal rights activists and could lead to a ban on the slaughter of cattle, swine and sheep in the future. Truth – Horses have never been raised as food animals in America. No one in America eats horsemeat. It’s not the animal rights activists that want a stop to the slaughtering of American horses, it’s the American public. Cattle, swine and sheep are raised for human consumption. Horses are not. Myth – Banning horse slaughter will deprive owners of their “property right” to do with their horse as they please. Truth – Few, if any, horse owners knowingly send their horse directly to slaughter. Horses going to slaughter are the result of unsuspecting horse owners putting their horses in livestock sales only to have them purchased by “killer buyers” who then “bunch” their purchased horses and ship them to the slaughter plants for slaughter. The presence of horse slaughter deprives the average horse owner of an open and humane marketplace in which to sell their horses. Horse slaughter also exposes owners to the increased likelihood of having their horse stolen. WE AND THE HORSES THANK YOU

I am fairly certain it is illegal if under 17, in Texas. I think it was outlawed ten to fifteen years ago. Anyone know?

Eating preferences are basically habits. Once you break them, there is no intrinsic value there. Not only do I have no desire to eat animal products, I can not understand how I ever ate them, accept that it is a habit of society.

This is good Benard got the Diabetic Society to listen to this. While that society does not push a meat free diet they do encourage people to eat it sparingly. Benard has been arguing with them sometime because they consider 30% fat diet to be very low fat, while his studies show people need to be around 20%., to get these reverse diabetic results. Now that his studies have numbers to prove it the society is listening to him seriously.

Anyone notice if wild animals act differently you toward you (hypothesis: from your smell they know you are not hunting them to eat.) Last time I went hiking, I was almost stepping on animals because they would just walk way (not run.) I used to hike around woods all the time and never recall wild animals being so uninterested in me before (they usually ran before I even saw them, only seeing a glimpse as they did so.)

It needs to be outlawed. I think some unsuccessful bills have been introduced into the Texas Legislature to do it. Enroll in http://www.thln.com/ (The mission of the Texas Humane Legislation Network is to promote the humane treatment of animals through legislation, education and advocacy. ) They will put you on an alert list, which they send to signal Texans to call their representatives and senators, when bills such as those come for votes or bills they oppose.

Seafood Gladiator's name confuses me. Why not Seaweed Gladiator, especially since seaweed is what he represents. Most people think of fish or shellfish, when they think "seafood." His excerpt: SEAFOOD GLADIATOR The SEAFOOD GLADIATOR is a member of the Health Guardians. His powers come from the ocean’s natural resources - seaweeds. Seaweed is very nutritious and we should eat it as much as possible. The Ocean’s water is very similar in the make up of human blood. Some studies show seaweeds contain more minerals than farmed land plants. Seaweeds contain medicinal value that treats high blood pressure, strokes, goiter, thyroid, and some forms of cancer.

""High-density lipoproteins (HDL) carry cholesterol from the blood back to the liver, which processes the cholesterol for elimination from the body. HDL makes it less likely that excess cholesterol in the blood will be deposited in the coronary arteries, which is why HDL cholesterol is often referred to as the "good" cholesterol. In general, the higher your LDL and the lower your HDL, the greater your risk for atherosclerosis and heart disease. "" I am glad to read this as it is so rare that cholesterol articles mention what HDL really is - the product of the metabolized low density cholesterol, being neither "good" nor "bad, in itself, just the end of the process of cholesterol working through our systems. If you lower your LDL, your HDL is going to go down also, since it is the ending result of the former (the ratio is what is important because a high ratio means some of the LDL is staying around as plaque), but I have read articles actually stating that just a lower HDL reading, even when your LDL is going down more, is a bad situation.