Re: Diseases & pressure linked to dairy/meat
Exceptional, Chris. Six stars. Crossposting .. each electron pure gold.
HNY. :)
"crisology" wrote in message news:1a021e40-d996-41b0-a165-4bf986692982@w35g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 19, 5:03 pm, arch...@scfas.com wrote:
> > >> Humans have been by observation to grow in population and thrive by eating anything they can get their hands on.
So have cows. In spite of recent hamburger & milk dud supplemented
diets, human population has grown. By using medication/technology,
humans are able to make such nutritional compromises and still breed.
(NaturalNews) More than 50 percent of insured residents of the United
States regularly take prescription drugs for at least one chronic
health condition, according to a study conducted by Medco Health
Solutions, which manages prescription benefits for 20 percent of the
population.
Medco reviewed the prescription records of 2.5 million customers of
all ages between 2001 and 2007. The company found that 51 percent of
children and adults in the United States took at least one
prescription drug for a chronic health condition in 2007, compared to
47 percent in 2001. The majority of drugs were taken at least once per
day.
http://www.naturalnews.com/024204.html
Medication Nation: Half of Americans Now Taking Daily Pills
75 percent of NJ adults aged 50 years and older reported using
prescription medications in the past month; more than 20 percent used
5 or more medications.
With the availability of new drugs to treat major chronic illnesses
such as heart disease, hypertension, and depression, the use of
prescription drugs has increased significantly. Prescription drug use
has increased among all age groups
Topics In Health Statistics June 2008
http://www.state.nj.us/health/chs/topics0801.pdf
The percentage of adults who reported having high cholesterol was over
five times higher in 2001 (7.8 percent) than in 1987 (1.4 percent).
The percentage of adults who reported having diabetes increased nearly
one and one-half times when comparing 1987 to 2001 (4.1 percent versus
6.0 percent).
Medical Expenditure Panel Survey
Statistical Brief #58
December 2004
Chronic Conditions and Outpatient Prescription Medicines for Persons
18 and Older in the U.S. Civilian Noninstitutionalized Population,
1987 and 2001
http://www.meps.ahrq.gov/mepsweb/data_files/publications/st58/stat58.pdf
So, thriving reflects sanitation and medication not eating
anything. Eating anything just creates a greater dependency for
medication.
> There is in evolutionary biology no other measure.
Youre not measuring anything. Human population grew in spite of
tobacco/alcohol use too. A better measure to detect if humans are
adapting to animal consumption is to identify disease risks associated
with the food in question. 1/3 of human population is starving. 1/3 of
population is malnourished. And ¼ of the ppl are obese. Clearly most
people are not eating optimal diets as meat consumption has increased.
By eating anything there is no other measure for pica.
> When you eat a hamburger does chewed meat appear in your feces?
No but blood may appear in your feces with hamburger cremains on the
day of defecation.
If you want to avoid hemorrhoids you've got to have parents who fed
you vegetables rather than hamburgers.
-Dr Telford, Healthlink Medical College of Wisconsin.
http://healthlink.mcw.edu/article/1031002573.html
Not only are bloody stools a reflection of difficulties trying to
eliminate meat & other food compromises, but meat feeders may also
find their bones being pissed out in urine. This is also not a healthy
sign..
bone mass is also dependent upon the relative acid/alkaline dietary
load [Massey 1998; Barzel and Massey 1998]. Acid generated by the diet
is excreted in the urine and can cause calciuresis. Meat and fish have
a high potential renal acid load (PRAL) whereas fruits and vegetables
have a negative PRAL, meaning they reduce acid excretion. The human
kidney cannot excrete urine with a pH lower than 5; consequently the
acids (mainly phosphate and sulfate) of acid-producing foods such as
meats, fish, and some cereals must be buffered partially by calcium
which is ultimately derived from the skeleton [Massey 1998; Barzel and
Massey 1998].
J Am Diet Assoc. 1995 Jul;95(7):791-7. Potential renal acid load of
foods and its influence on urine pH. Remer T, Manz F.
> Plant foods have many parts, some you mention, that are not digested and do pass in feces
And are the plant parts that are not digested contributing to
disease or in ANY way unnatural at all?? Do you have a problem with
fruit fiber? The fiber helps digestion.
> The same has been found for grain and fruit and nuts as well.
FALSE. The same has NOT been found for fruit (you just searched for an
article that lacked details linking fruit). In fact, fruit has been
negatively correlated w/DB1. Bovine serum albumin (BSA) in cow milk
(not fruit) is recognized as an antigen but looks like pancreas cells,
which make insulin. The immune system loses ability to differentiate &
destroys both.
On high fiber/carb diet, subjects reduced meds by 40% -China Study p.
152.
Pubmed search terms: Type 1 diabetes risk fruit
Result 1:NA
Result 2-
Recent recommendations by the American Diabetes Association suggest
that children with type 1 diabetes should follow the recommendations
for age, sex and body size of the general population..Adherence to
recommendations should be pursued by continuous nutritional education
that should start at the onset of diabetes and maintained by means of
nutritional counselling to the family. .., nutritional recommendations
for children with diabetes focus on limiting the intake of foods of
animal origin (red meat, cheese, cold cuts), moderating fat intake and
promoting the intake of foods that naturally contain fibre (mainly
vegetables, legumes, fruit).
Br J Nutr. 2008 Feb;99 Suppl 1:S33-9..
Just go down the list
Result 3-
CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Diabetic children and adolescents had a
high intake of energy from saturated fat and low intake of fibre,
fruits and vegetables, which could increase the risk of development of
atherosclerosis. This study supports the idea that nutritional
guidance in the treatment of children and adolescents with type 1
diabetes should be more focused, especially with regard to intake of
fibre, fruits and vegetables and to quality and quantity of fat
intake.
Diabetologia. 2007 Feb;50(2):307-16.
Etc
With random searches such as the ones I did (my search terms were
presented), it is clear most of the studies detected negative
correlation of DB1 and fruit consumption but animal fat/meat/dairy
were positively associated w/DB1 and mechanisms of action have been
described.
> let them consume domestic milk
That is called human breast milk. Im letting them.
> I presented the full picture
You never presented search terms. I presented 10 references in order
of date on a scientific database. Your unique reference that didn't
show a positive association between milk consumption and DM1 was #9 on
my search results, as mentioned. Do you really need me to explain
again how you were the one who cherry picked research and mine were in
order of date published on Pubmed?
> The order of search results depends on search terms.
Which is why I provided that info for clarity/honesty only to see you
bring up the issue of search items as if it wasnt covered..
Oct 9, 2:26 am, crisology wrote:
When you do a Pubmed search for "Type 1 diabetes milk", there is a
6/10 relevant item consensus (most sources acknowledge/describe
positive correlations that are biologically plausible between non-
human milk consumption & diabetes, as "someone in a recent thread"
informed you already). Here is a list you'll see with that search..
> grains and fruit and tubers were also said to be associated with higher diabetes type 1"
No details about the how, in your sole result for DB1/fruit
association. Most studies show negative correlation of fruit and DB1.
> Bty, you have yet to explain why every milk drinking individual does not have type 1 diabetes
Unnecessary. Not every smoker gets lung cancer either. There are many
diseases associated w/consuming cow milk as an adult. Why risk disease
affliction for self and family?
> the vast majorityy of infants who use milk, domestic or foreign, do not get type 1 diabtees. Any moddl of disease must account
for the vast majority as well as the few.
One of the factors causing DB1 is dose dependent upon milk
consumption. The following graph speaks a thousand words to this:
Chart 9.3: Association of Cows Milk Consumption and Incidence of Type
1 Diabetes in Different Countries
Incidence
Per
100,000/year (y-axis)
40| /
| /
| /
| /
_| /
30| Finland */
| /
| /
| /
_| Sweden * /
20| /* Norway
| /
| Great Britain */
| U.S.A.*/ * Denmark
_| / * New Zealand
10| / * Netherlands
| Canada */
| /
| Japan / * France
0_|_____*/_______________________________________
0 100 200 300
Cow Milk Consumption (liters/person/year)
Chart shown in The China Study p. 190 from (27) Dahl-Jorgensen K,
Joner G, and Hanssen KF. Relationship between cows milk consumption
and incidence of IDDM in childhood. Diabetes Care 14 (1991):
1081-1083.
(28) The proportion of Type 1 diabetes due to the consumption of cows
milk, the r2 value, is 96%
> The milk alone causes assertion is not supported in current research taken as a whole.
This was addressed. Scroll to Oct 14, 11:53 pm, crisology
wrote:
Genes don't act alone either and diet activates genes. And because of
the fact there are different genes and different degrees of genetic
susceptibility to DM1 after exposure to cow milk, you're still playing
in traffic
> I want to go where science leads
Applied science leads people to minimize not ignore (eat anything)
the greater risk factors for diseases.
> Those who adopted milk
Remain unadapted to cow milk.
> from domesticated animals also have a clear mutation/natural selection for the lifelong production of lactase
but are also susceptible to disease related components of cow milk
previously listed (IGF-1, chol, casein, etc).
" the meat feeders in general tested high for inequality, self-concept
related to social power, acceptance, etc. regardless of actual content
of the food consumed."
"meat symbolizes social power and related values (i.e., inequality;
Adams;Fiddes 1991; Heisley 1990; Twigg 1983)." Journal of Consumer
Research (35) 296.
> In other words, you are saying that in some cultures being able to consume meat whell others can not is a status symbol, "wellda".
Wellda ??? Meaning Im stating the obvious?
>There is in fact no concensus
A consensus exists among sociologists and anthropologists that meat
symbolizes social power and related values (i.e., inequality; Adams
1990; Fiddes 1991; Heisley 1990; Twigg 1983). Red meat symbolized
inequality more than the other food groups, and consumption of red
meat was more strongly correlated with social power values than other
value domains. (Allen and Ng, 2003).
The social power domain has consistently emerged in cross-cultural
studies of values, and people who support social power values exhibit
related behaviors, such as pressuring others to go along with their
preferences and opinions (Bardi and Schwartz 2003). The Interactive
Effect of Cultural Symbols and Human Values on Taste Evaluation, JCR,
p. 297, 2008.
And here are some innocent babies being forced/conditioned to consume
unnatural/unhealthy food (meat) for the first time:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvRtfDo1w70&feature=channel_page
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JW0XTx6hqCE&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWNfn8kvxho&feature=related
In contrast to introduction of apples:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQ1hzxCL3t0&feature=related
bananas:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmLDCNC2erA&NR=1
By the 4th minute Cassie is gobbling down peaches/ecstatic by the end:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNUHvdP4Bhk
So consumption of meat seems to be a rite of passage, in spite of
disease risks.
> humans like fat.
Then there would be no reason to force-feed cow fat to infants
(risking diabetes and other diseases), as opposed to human breast milk
and phytosterols. But addiction & acculturation may help explain the
health compromise.
> It can not be said animals do it for reasons of culture then if that is correct
Either or fallacy
> No, animals like meat
No, animals dont like diabetes.
> and it then can not be based on culture alone
Culture + addiction in the case of humans.
> as only man has culture as the primary source of behavior.
Chimps to a lesser degree are influenced by culture. And chimps
consume less meat to reflect less cultural pressure.
ScienceDaily (Jan. 10, 2008) Socially-learned cultural behaviour
thought to be unique to humans is also found among chimpanzees
colonies, scientists at the University of Liverpool have found
> And the same then can be claimed for the cultural choice and self reinforcing practice not to eat meat.
If people werent forced/conditioned to consume meat in the first
place, there wouldnt be counter-cultural pressure to exclude meat.
But even among humans conditioned to consume meat, it is taboo to
consume the animals alive with the fur. And acculturated people use
Victorian manners while carving the game after it has been packaged
and burned. Even trained hunters cant stand the odor of fresh meat,
no matter how much theyve been acculturated.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4CT1qtpMPaI
> How then is explained attitudes among egalitarian cultures which hold different non status views about meat?
The article explained that the vegetarians represented the egalitarian
group in the study- they did not value social dominance and
inequality, while the meat-consuming people did.
What "attitudes among egalitarian cultures" are you requesting? From
the literature it seems acculturated humans who value domination over
people also value domination of animals. Maybe this is the case within
some chimp cultures too.
Chris
date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 12:47:42 -0000
author: pearl
|
