Minutus

This is the old debunked Pottenger experiment of about a century ago
and Adelle Davis said nothing about it in or out of any book.

All she said - per YOUR website reference was:
"According to Adelle Davis: "There are many reasons why heated milk
is inferior to unheated milk."
.....your website reference suggests interest?

Fortunately for all the cats who benefit, many people understand that
explaining the benefits of chicken over milk as cat food,
is not "nit picking".

Trying to suggest Adelle Davis supported such nonsense as the
Pottenger study.....
that's the part I'll just debunk and leave alone.

Namate,
Irene
--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."

Very sad - you are seriously crazy - I will not stir you up any longer.

Kind regards,

Fran Sheffield
Homeopathy Plus! (Information - Education - Treatment)
http://www.homeopathyplus.com.au
Do No Harm Initiative (Homeopathic Immunisation)
http://www.d-n-h.org
Irene de Villiers wrote:

you must be reading a different label than i am. there is no yucca in
wellness brand, at least in the varieties i get. a small amount of
sweet potato and squash and some blueberry/cranberry. no garlic
or rosemary.
and there are no artificial preservatives.

Hi Irene,
I was just explaining why I looked up the word "bias".The reason was
that perhaps the expression does include something to do with
profiting from it. However, the definition showed that it does not. So
anyone may have a bias regardless of whether s/he profits from it or
not.
I do know and I did look at the other definitions. They, however, are
irrelevant to the topic, so I left them out.
No, it has nothing to do with it. Where there are more definitions
than one to a given word one has to look at all of them to find out
whether they may be relevant to what on wants to say/write or to what
one reads and tries to understand.
Well, my "opinions" would also be based on reseearch: my own and that
of others I base them on. So let's call them "conclusions" or any
other word you consider more apt.

The research itself, when well-done, is objective evidence for thie
specific question investigated. The decision on what to look for and
how is based on a pre-judgement (bias) of the resarcher. The
conclusions are based on his/her bias, which may be non-existent to
enormous. So are the conclusions of the person reading the research
itself. I called this "opinion", you may call it something else.
No - one would have to know on what the researcher or the person who
evaluates the research bases his *conclusion* that it is indeed
"better". It would be optimal to look at research that shows the opposite, if
such exists. Research papers should, but often do not, reference to
the latter research also.

Yes, you do - you have come to conclusions and these are now your
opinion.

see above-
You have based your conclusions on just two instances of research.

1)
The thymus question. I fully accept the research and also your
conclusions.

However:

Ardavan e.g. has found from his research that not only vaccinations
but also infections can be the cause of miasms. If we base the
damaging effects of vacc. on their potential to cause chronic
diseases/miasms and this on their effect on the thymus, those
infections aooarently also have the potential to cause damage to the
thymus - even those infections that occurred without outbreak of the
disease in the person. So for impartial evaluation the question
arises: would it be better if there were no vaccinations and the
people (I am leaving animals out for the purpose of this discussion)
got the infection? Even if it did not kill them? May not the
percentage of those who developed a miasm from it be just as high as
those who develop a miasm from vaccination? This does not even take
into account the people who die from the infection. You yourself wrote
about an epidemic of diphtheria when your mother was a child, where
significantly more than half the children of a small town died of it -
at a time when the only vaccination was against smallpox.

2)
Experience.

Only the experience of vaccination *damage* is considered by the
anti-vacc. groups including you.

I told you about the phenomenon that in the former communist part of
Germany many of the diseases that you (Plural) ascribe to vaccinations
were significantly lower than in the non-communist part (and the rest
of the Western world), although vaccination rate was higher in the
communist part than in the non-communist part of Germany. Living
conditions were different in many ways, so that conventional
research would have been impossible (it also was not wanted - for
political reasons this fact was never to any degree publicised) But
with a sample of many millions on both sides, a lot of the things
necessary for research with comparatively small samples would not be
required. And yes - by now there no longer exists that kind of
difference.

I have written the above in our discussion on beyondhomeopathy - has
that made you or anyone in the anti-vacc. group made you reconsider
the issue?

I bet your bias has prevented you from doing so:-)

It is the same, just opposite, bias that prevents the pro-vaccination
people to look at the evidence the anti-vacc. groups present. The same
kind of bias that prevents the "homeopathy-cannot-work" people to
consider the evidence showing that it *does* work!
Of couse. But they would be left anyway.
If he does not like it, I would find even 1 mixed-in piece of the
non-acceptable kibbles:-))

Yes!
Yes, indeed;-(

Well, I'll take the ingredients list of the Propac and compare.

I may have more questions to ingredients later.

I have thought, and it seems to be correct, that quite a few people on
this list are interested in those questions - that's why I kept
posting about the matter here. But for further questions I'll join
Catwell or ask them on the vethom list:-)

Thanks again for responding to this and also for understanding that my
remarks about bias etc. are not a meant to be personal in any way.
"You" are just "pars pro toto":-)

Regards

Luise
--
One thought to all who, free of doubt,
So definitely know what's true:
2 and 2 is 22 -
and 2 times 2 is 2:-)
==========> ICQ yinyang 96391801 <==========

I *think* Fran's memory may be mixing two studies? If I remember right
(and I couldn't swear to that!), I think there was one where *calves*
were raised on "store milk" and died, and another where cats were
raised on cooked food versus raw food. I think it may have been the
calf study that Adele Davis mentioned? Tho she was also a fan of
powdered skim milk, which IMO is horrible stuff...

I found an interesting commentary on that second study by googling...
er, something, which took me to Pottenger's cats and some interesting
commentaries, e.g.
www.beyondveg.com/tu-j-l/raw-cooked/raw-cooked-1h.shtml. One thought
is that the cats' sad fate had less to do with "cooked food" and more
to do with taurine deficiency (whose importance was not at that time
recognized, and which is depleted by cooking). Anyway, interesting
reading.

Shannon

Thanks Fran--I see you did have it right!

also to be kept in mind, during the years of adele davis and
carlton fredericks, there was major pressure and threats from the
amer meat assoc against them for promoting vegetarianism. they
both caved in and began to support meat eating, usually organ
meats. i think they tried to side step their attackers with as little
compromise as they thought they could get away with.

that being said, i suspect the powdered milk was touted as their
minimalist efforts. but i also think the limitations of a wartime
economy on food as well as the 'new' techonologies that were
beginning to produced processed food such a margerine had a
part in her choice. then, we can also add in the beginning fear
of fats in the diet at that time. and lastly, is the cost factor. cheaper
but better eating for working people was a big part of her effort.

add in less resesarch than we have today, and we get powdered
milk.

tanya

Tanya...
My biggest concern about Wellness, and other "holistic" formulations, is their berry additives. These berries, if a kitty has calcium oxalate crystals, can cause further discomfort. There are 2 types of crystals, calcium oxalate and struvite. Generally, struvite crystals will respond to diet and be improved by diets such as Wellness.
At least this food has better quality food sources, and NOT A TON OF SALT, which will make urinary problems that much worse!
It's all about choosing a diet...or preferably diets that are synergetic...to ensure the health of YOUR cat.
Marilyn

Irene, I have to say, I am shaking my head at your thoughts on feline
nutrition.

I can't imagine EVER feeding a cat dry food and claiming it's nutritionally
sound for cats. Feeding a processed, refined food to ANY creature for every
meal, every day is a serious disservice to them.

I'm not going to debate my thoughts on why I come to that conclusion, that's
not the focus of this list.

I'm sure you feel you've run the gamut on feline research but it seems
you've left a few books out of your list of "must reads". And since you do
so much work with felines, I do hope you open your mind to the thought that
you just might not know it all, as people come to you as an expert.

Jennifer Lennon
Toronto, ON

Dear Luise,
I did not respond further to the discussion on fact versus opinion -
I think we each know what the other feels,
and may prefer the time be on the other topics:
..........
I have also found that - did not know Ardavan also found it:-)
But I consider that there are specific phases or prerequisites to this:
* First a skewing of the immune system from whatever cause (examples
being vaccines in the individual and/or their forebears, soy food,
steroid drugs), and without which there will be no miasm developed.
* Then the introduction of the miasm-causing infection.
Whether a miasm forms at this stage depends how damaged the immune
system is. More often:
* There is introduction of a suppressive therapy (usually allopathic)
which forces the infection energy deeper and that resuts in a miasm
forming.

I do not feel an infection can cause a miasm unless the immune system
is first skewed, as otherwise the immune system will simply fight off
the infection.
I doubt this.
It's my opinion that the skewed immune system - with "out of balance"
cytokines - OR with nutritional inability to maintain balanced
cytokines - is prerequisite to infection being established.
I am not aware of any infection that directly affects the immune
system. They attack the *products* of the immune system:
For example in HIV, specific CD4 and CD8 T-cells are attacked, but
not the cytokines that trigger their production. It takes more time
for the disease to progress enough to damage the bone marrow so that
no more defensive white cells are produced there. SO the cytokine
skewing (as when Thymus is damaged) comes first, the infection after.

And for another example: In FIP, the macrocytes (blood cells which
normally would engulf and destroy an invader) are commandeered as
incubation systems and the virus actually replicates in the very
cells that should destroy it, but the virus does not attack the
Interleukin-2 (IL-2) from the thymus that directs the making of
macrocytes. In fact to get FIP, there FIRST has to be a low level of
the IL-2 cytokine.
Also to heal from FIP, there has to be a high level of IL-2 to
overcome the FIP virus misuse of macrocytes.
I have no formal research on it but I'd be willing to bet that if
IL-2 levels were monitored during homeopathic treatment in FIP, you'd
see IL-2 low to start (which IS known from current research) and
you'd see it rise during treatment, back to normal.

SO basically I do not think infections damage the thymus - I think
they damage the products of the thymus.
But I may be wrong - it's so far what I see - a damaged cytopkine
balance that pre-disposes infection... based on my own cases and on
the allopathic cytokine research which is a heavy-activity field
these days.

It's a pity that allopaths and homeopaths are so far apart that
research combining the two is unlikely. SO much more could be
discovered with a little open-minded collaboration.
Leaving out death from disease, the choice is infinitely better to be
unvaccinated.
There is easy proof of this in research that has already been done:
I'll explain but want to make a comment first about the "ultimatum
approach" of "only two choices". As always when one is given an
either-or ultimatum, there is at least one other option that provides
benefits not available in the "ultimatum" choices, in this case
Homeoprophylaxis.
So a far better option to the theoretical two you offer is to NOT
vaccinate ever, and to use homeoprophylaxis for any illness that has
sufficient risk to warrant prevention.

But back to the question you asked:
It is readily proved from research that IF one survives natural
infection, the health is improved. It is always damaged by vaccines.

Specifically:
The cytokine response to vaccination is a huge skewing of cytokines
towards overproduction of the TH-2 category of cytokines (with
seriously reduced production of Th-1 cytokines and associated Thymus
atrophy.
By contrast, if the person gets the infection instead of the
vaccination (and recovers) - the infection actually INCREASES the
production of Th-1 cytokines, not Th-2 cytokines as with vaccines.

These are two diametrically opposed immune system responses. The
vaccine damages the immune system and the natural infection
strengthens it. Specifically Th-1 cytokines (important in resisting
chronic disease like cancer, arthritis allergy, diabetes etc etc)
are increased by natural disease and severely decreased by vaccines.
Th-2 cytokines are wildly overproduced by vaccines (hence auto-immune
syndromes later), and left normal by natural infection.
True. I do not know enough about the conditions at the time to make a
well founded estimate about why there was widespread susceptibility
to diphtheria but I can make think of some potentially relevant factors:
* ONE vaccine (smallpox) is all it needs to skew the immune system
and predispose disease.
* It was a very small town which was devastated (attacked by 1500
troops with only 60 men defending from trenches) in the first world
war which ended 1918. The town was in depression times to say the
least.
My mom who survived: She was a young child at time of diptheria - she
was born in 1917, and had already narrowly escaped death from scarlet
fever at age 4 (which likely strengthened her immune system again
after the smallpox vaccine damaged it) .
* The nearest supplies were 85 miles away by horseback over an almost
impassable mountain.
* Stress being high is also worth discussion. Steroids are known to
skew the immune system - prednisone for example, which is an
artifical substitute for the natural stress hormone cortisol, in
animal research shows that one dose can reduce thymus size by as much
as 90%.
Cortisol is high when there is stress - so IF the population was
living in stressful times (which was definitely the case) it would
have high cortisol and skewed immune systems (added to any smallpox
skewing).
* The time of the infection was in cold weather when Vit D is too low
to help the immune system, and there was no heating or running water
or electricity in the town. The town (Jamestown) is well under
freezing point all winter.
Huh?
I am sorry - what do you mean by this statement? Have you made some
inappropriate assumptions about me?
I am not part of any anti-vacc group.
It is true that I advise very strongly against vaccination - but that
is because I know from research and experience just what harm they
do. I also advise against other immune system damaging things like
steroids, and soy food and stress and malnutrition. All based on good
research, not guesswork or some sort of fanaticism.
So I do not understand what you mean by the above statement.
In fact the majority of the chronic cases I see in my work, involve
damage from artificial steroids (in addition to past vaccines and
whatever else was damaging).
Who ascribes what diseases? What diseases are you referring to?
DO you mean Th-2 skewed diseases (cancer, diabetes, arthritis, other
autoimmune etc) that are predisposed by a skewed immune system - or
do you mean the diseases that are imposed by the vaccine material
itself? (Such as autism or my grandson's paralysis after polio vaccine.)
There are different mechanisms and energies involved - and there may
be one or other or both at some point after vaccination.
There are always reasons for everything - but there's no way to
comment on that without in depth study which I do not have:-)
No problem. But I think you assume more about my vaccination views
than fits the whole:-)
Thanks for the discussion.

Also - I have developed a cat food checklist for people to use in
evaluating a list of commercial catfood ingredients. It's on Catwell
in the files section for sure. Not sure if it is in Vethom-friends
files, I'd be glad to put it there if not.
It needs some editing for overseas ingredient names. It lists names
used in USA, and they are not all the same overseas. For example "by-
product" here is called something else in Europe, can't remember
what. And there is a move by junkfood makers here to try to get legal
permission to call by-products like hoofs, feathers, beaks feet etc
"animal protein" in order to sell more food to the unsuspecting
consumer.
SO far that application (from Iams) was defeated.

Namaste,
Irene
--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."