Re: Bananas destroy coral reefs and cause rainforest destruction
From: pearl (tea_at_signguestbook.ie)
Date: 09/16/04
- Next message: pearl: "Re: Bananas destroy coral reefs and cause rainforest destruction"
- Previous message: pearl: "Re: Bananas destroy coral reefs and cause rainforest destruction"
- In reply to: J: "Re: Bananas destroy coral reefs and cause rainforest destruction"
- Next in thread: ta: "Re: Bananas destroy coral reefs and cause rainforest destruction"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 12:55:43 +0100
"J" <buffer@example.net> wrote in message news:41487830.EBC98006@execulink.com...
> Wolfbrother wrote:
>
> > "Do you have any idea about what you are saying? Do you even
> > comprehend the vast amounts of bio available nutrients that are found
> > in animal source foods, especially the parts most people do not eat.
> > The nutrients in animal source foods are so superior to plant foods
> > there is no comparison. Humans have known this instinctively for
> > thousands of years. One can easily sustain optimal physical mental
> > and reproductive health and thrive off the various raw organs, bones,
> > and meats of a single animal without a need for any other kind of food
> > in the diet at all. That is more than clear. I would like to see you
> > do that with bananas moron. Go ahead and feed a baby or young child
> > an exclusive diet of bananas or other fruits and see what happens.
> > Amazing how people ignore reality and undeniable facts.
>
> Yay ! http://www.hwatson.force9.co.uk/cookbook/recipes/meat/steakandkidney.htm
> Steak and kidney pie.
[..] Cancers of the colon and prostate were significantly more
likely in nonvegetarians (RR of 1.88 and 1.54, respectively),
and frequent beef consumers also had higher risk of bladder
cancer. PMID: 10479227
['According to Harper's Biochemistry, the putrefaction bacteria
in the large intestine convert amino acids from undigested protein
into toxic amines or ptomaines, such as cadaverine (from lysine),
agmatine (from arginine), tyramine (from tyroseine), putrescine
(from orithine) and histamine (from histidine). And these amines
are "powerful vasopressor substances". Tryptophan undergoes a
series of reactions to form indole and methylindole (skatole), which
produces the distinctive putrefying faecal smell of a high protein diet.
The sulphur-containing amino acids (cysteine and methionine) are
transformed into mercaptans such as ethyl and methyl mercaptan
as well as hydrogen sulphide (H2S). All these compounds are very
poisonous and unpleasant. Phosphatidylcholine, found in meats,
breaks down into choline and the related toxic amines such as neurine.
This is evidence that meat is not well digested. Herbivores do not
produce putrid excrement, but "dung" instead, some still contains
sufficient nutrients to warrant eating again, as with rabbits.
However, a meal of fruit with similar food energy value would yield
about 2.6 g of protein of which 0.4 g would be wasted. A high protein
food at least doubles the quantity of protein that is potentially subject
to putrefication in the bowels. Worse still, the reason that plant protein
is less digestible is because it is found in the tough cellulose walls of
plant cells which pass through the gut undigested if not sufficiently
masticated. These proteins are not available as soil for putrefying
bacteria in the bowel. Animal protein wastes are highly bioavailable
to putrefying bowel bacteria since they have no cellulose cell wall.
It seems that only putrefying bacteria benefit from the "highly
digestible" animal proteins.'
http://tinyurl.com/3t7qn
Asia Pacific J Clin Nutr (1996) Vol5, No 1: 2-9
Intestinal flora and human health
Tomotari Mitsuoka, DVM, PhD
Professor Emeritus, The University of Tokyo, Japan
..
Other intestinal bacteria produce substances that are harmful to
the host, such as putrefactive products, toxins and carcinogenic
substances. When harmful bacteria dominate in the intestines,
essential nutrients are not produced and the level of harmful
substances rises. These substances may not have an immediate
detrimental effect on the host but they are thought to be
contributing factors to ageing, promoting cancer, liver and kidney
disease, hypertension and arteriosclerosis, and reduced immunity.
Little is known regarding which intestinal bacteria are responsible
for these effects. A number of factors can change the balance of
intestinal flora in favour of harmful bacteria. These include
peristalsis disorders, surgical operations of stomach or small
intestine, liver or kidney diseases, pernicious anaemia, cancer,
radiation or antibiotic therapies, immune disorders, emotional
stress, poor diet and ageing.
....
The intestinal flora may play an important role in the causation
of cancer and ageing
Dietary factors are considered important environmental risk
determinants for colorectal cancer development. From
epidemiological observations, a high fat intake is associated
positively and a high fibre intake negatively with colorectal cancer.
This is thought to occur by the following mechanisms. From food
components in the gastrointestinal tract, organisms produce
various carcinogens from the dietary components and endogenous
substances, detoxify carcinogens, or enhance the host's immune
function, which results in changes in the incidence of cancers. The
ingestion of large amounts of animal fat enhances bile secretion,
causing an increase in bile acid and cholesterol in the intestine.
These increased substances are converted by intestinal bacteria
into secondary bile acids, their derivatives, aromatic polycyclic
hydrocarbons, oestrogen and epoxides derivatives that are
related to carcinogenesis. Various tryptophan metabolites (indole,
skatole, 3-hydroxykinurenine, 3-hydroxyanthranilic acid, etc.)
phenols, amines, and nitroso compounds produced by intestinal
bacteria from protein also participate in carcinogenesis (Fig. 5).
..
Figure 5. Relationships among diet, intestinal bacteria and cancer.
Recent epidemiological studies have revealed that insufficient intake
of dietary fibre is associated with high incidences of Western
diseases such as colorectal cancer, obesity, heart disease, diabetes,
and hypertension. Ingested dietary fibre causes increased volume
of faeces, dilution of noxious substances, and shortening of the
transit time of intestinal contents, resulting in early excretion of
noxious substances such as carcinogens produced by intestinal
bacteria. '
http://elecpress.monash.edu.au/APJCN/Vol5/Num1/51p02.htm#top ]
> I hear the milk market is doing well too. Good for strong bones later in life.
Good for cancer too, espescially if it's from rBGH treated cows.
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2001 Sep 5;93(17):1330-6.
..
Milk and dietary calcium may have antiproliferative effects
against colorectal cancer, but milk intake also raises serum
levels of insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I). A high ratio of
IGF-I to IGF-binding protein-3 (IGFBP-3) has been linked
to an increased risk of colorectal cancer.'
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve& db=PubMed&list_uids=11535708&dopt=Abstract
'As reported in a May 9 article in The Lancet, women with a relatively
small increase in blood levels of the naturally occurring growth hormone
Insulin-like Growth Factor I (IGF-1) are up to seven times more likely
to develop premenopausal breast cancer than women with lower levels.
Based on those results, the report concluded that the risks of elevated
IGF-1 blood levels are among the leading known risk factors for breast
cancer, and are exceeded only by a strong family history or unusual
mammographic abnormalities. Apart from breast cancer, an accompanying
editorial warned that elevated IGF-1 levels are also associated with greater
than any known risk factors for other major cancers, particularly colon and
prostate.
http://www.psrast.org/bghcpc.htm
As for calcium..
'Anthropologically speaking, humans were high consumers of calcium
until the onset of the Agricultural Age, 10,000 years ago. Current
calcium intake is one-quarter to one-third that of our evolutionary diet
and, if we are genetically identical to the Late Paleolithic Homo sapiens,
we may be consuming a calcium-deficient diet our bodies cannot adjust
to by physiologic mechanisms.
The anthropological approach says, with the exception of a few small
changes related to genetic blood diseases, that humans are basically
identical biologically and medically to the hunter-gatherers of the late
Paleolithic Era.17 During this period, calcium content of the diet was
much higher than it is currently. Depending on the ratio of animal to
plant foods, calcium intake could have exceeded 2000 mg per day.17
Calcium was largely derived from wild plants, which had a very high
calcium content; animal protein played a small role, and the use of dairy
products did not come into play until the Agricultural Age 10,000 years
ago. Compared to the current intake of approximately 500 mg per day
for women age 20 and over in the United States,18 hunter-gatherers had
a significantly higher calcium intake and apparently much stronger bones.
As late as 12,000 years ago, Stone Age hunters had an average of
17-percent more bone density (as measured by humeral cortical
thickness). Bone density also appeared to be stable over time with
an apparent absence of osteoporosis.17
High levels of calcium excretion via renal losses are seen with both
high salt and high protein diets, in each case at levels common in the
United States.10,11
..
The only hunter-gatherers that seemed to fall prey to bone loss
were the aboriginal Inuit (Eskimos). Although their physical
activity level was high, their osteoporosis incidence exceeded
even present-day levels in the United States. The Inuit diet was
high in phosphorus and protein and low in calcium.20 '
http://www.thorne.com/altmedrev/fulltext/calcium4-2.html
> J (alt.support.cancer)
(You got that right at least.)
- Next message: pearl: "Re: Bananas destroy coral reefs and cause rainforest destruction"
- Previous message: pearl: "Re: Bananas destroy coral reefs and cause rainforest destruction"
- In reply to: J: "Re: Bananas destroy coral reefs and cause rainforest destruction"
- Next in thread: ta: "Re: Bananas destroy coral reefs and cause rainforest destruction"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
