Minutus

I cannot imagine that high carbohydrate foods are unhealthy - except
for some people for specific reasons.

Remember: for all of known history, i.e. thousands of years for most
people in most parts of the world this has been their staple food.
Perhaps the kind of high carbon food they got accustomed to and that
may still be best for them varies in accordance with what has been
growing in their respective parts of the world.

Real sweet things may be an exception - in most parts of the world
they were pretty hard to get and thus expensive.

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 <==========

COMPLEX CARBOHYDRATES
(http://www.macrobiotics.nl/encyclopedia ... ml#complex)

Complex carbohydrates (polysaccharides), found in
whole grains, beans, vegetables, and sea vegetables,
enter the bloodstream gradually and contribute to
overall health and balance. Because of their
protective effect in the development of cardiovascular
disease, cancer, and other serious disorders,
scientific and medical guidelines all call for
substantial increases in complex carbohydrates and
corresponding decreases in intake of simple
carbohydrates such as sugar, white flour, and white
rice. See Paleolithic Diet, Premenstrual Syndrome,
Whole Grains, World Health Organization.

• Saturated Fat and Cholesterol - Comparing the
blood values of middle-aged Irishmen living in
Ireland, their brothers who had migrated to Boston,
and unrelated men of Irish descent living in Boston,
researchers at Harvard School of Public Health found
that mean total blood cholesterol levels were strongly
correlated with intake of saturated fatty acid and
dietary cholesterol from meat and other animal food.
Fiber intake and vegetable consumption were also lower
among those who died from coronary heart disease,
leading the researchers to speculate that a decrease
in complex carbohydrates rather than a change in fat
consumption was the main causative factor in increased
mortality from heart disease.
“Although the risk of coronary heart disease has
been reported to be related to the intake of dietary
lipids, an equally consistent finding has been the
relation with starches and complex
carbohydrates,” the scientists noted. “. .
. The principal nutritional change that has occurred
since the early 1900s has been a decrease in the
consumption of dietary carbohydrates, not including
sugar, of about 45 percent during the period from 1909
to 1976. In contrast, changes in the consumption of
dietary lipids have been much smaller.”
Source: L. H. Kushi et al., “Diet and 20-Year
Mortality from Coronary Heart Disease. The
Ireland-Boston Diet-Heart Study,” New England
Journal of Medicine 312:811-18, 1985.

• Complex Carbohydrates Stimulate Mental
Development - At Massachusetts Institute of Technology
(MIT), researchers have investigated the effects of
food on the brain and nervous system. “It is
becoming increasingly clear that brain chemistry and
function can be influenced by a single meal. That is,
in well-nourished individuals consuming normal amounts
of food, short-term changes in food composition can
rapidly affect brain function,” explained Dr.
John Fernstrom. According to scientists, whole grains
and other foods high in complex carbohydrates have the
capacity to increase the brain’s intake of
tryptophan, an amino acid that aids in relief of pain
and in lowering blood pressure. Tryptophan has also
been associated in studies with lifting depression and
improving sleep. In contrast to grains and vegetables,
meals high in animal protein lower levels of
tryptophan reaching the brain. This “growing
body of information now points to new clinically
useful applications of tryptophan and thus also for
the use of specific meals that would increase
tryptophan levels,” Fernstrom concluded.
Source: Tom Monte, “A Nutritional Approach to
Mental Health,” Michio Kushi et al., Crime and
Diet (Tokyo & New York: Japan Publications, 1987), pp.
146-47.
--- Luise Kunkle wrote:
___________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

Luise Kunkle wrote:
I learned a different history - that cave men hunted meat and fish for
example (protein and fat) and that agriculture (and carbohydrates) were
added a LOT later. Also, it was customary to eat a lot of high carb
fruit growing wild (grains came a lot later still) and put on fat to
last the winter when there was no fruit and no international shipping of
fruit to other hemispheres where summer was winter - and when the fat
was burned off looking for meat to eat.

That's more or less how our bodies are designed
Overuse of carbohydrates is what leads to many illnesses......
The body NEEDS protein and fat - carbs are not a basic need:-)

But gee they can taste good:-)
In my house chocolate could easily be a food group.....

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."

Michael wrote:

According to?
In fact carbohydrates are what cause problems leading to heart attack risk.
Not science - research shows carbohydrates turn to bad fats that create
LDL cholesterol. It's the grain companies who want "complex carbs" on
the biggest part of the food pyramid. In countries like USA where people
will eat what the grain companies tell them - there is the highest
increase in rate of diabetes and other poor health compared to any other
country of comparable wealth to feed the nation better, and with ability
to inform the nation better.

This society then touts the supposed difference between complex carbs
and simple carbs when the real problem is too many carbs - especially
from grains!

It's time people judged food by its inflammatory versus
anti-inflamamtory characteristics,. instead of by whether it is carb,
fat or protein of simples or whatever kind.
Wheat is inflamamtory no matter how whole grain it is. In fact for
type O blood the whole grain wheat is MORE inflammatory.
But if you look at rice bran- there is huge anti-inflammatory
capacity instead. But who has more money in USA - wheat or rice farmers?
So 90% of the grocery stores are lined with wheat-products or
wheat-containing products.... all inflammatory and none necessary to
health - but ubiquitous!
Disproven.
dietary cholesterol accounts for less than 25% of cholesterol intake -
and in fact it is essential brain-supporting cholesterol.
The bad stuff is made internally by the body, from fat stored after more
carbohydrates are eaten than are burned off in exercise after that meal.
So to lower cholesterol - eat more meat and eggs and less carbs.
The true correlation here has to do with intestinal health (fiber for
gut bacteria to use to make B vitamins etc) and antioxidants (chemicals
that undo damage in the body) which come from fruits and non-starcy
colored vegetables.
There's good research to replace speculation:-)

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."

Hi Irene,
I thought it was also well established that *some* people (some blood
types and some genetic background; some physiologies) in fact do well
with high veggie, moderate carbo from whole grains, roots, etc., and
not much meat? Do you disagree with that? (And others, as I know from
family experience, do not even tolerate fruits; but I assume that would
go if she were healthy.)
Shannon

According to what?

A study in Germany quite some years ago showed that vegetarians have a
quite significantly lower incidence of heart attacks etc.

There was also decades ago research done by one Prof. Wendt on the
dangers of too much protein, claiming that, as surplus of
carbohydrates and fats are stored as body fat, surplus of protein is
stored along arteries and caplillaries, making them more and more
"dense" i.e. preventing exchange of substances into the intercellular
space.

I am not touting his or any other point of view. Starting around 1970
or so with Atkins/Adelle Davis/... I have in the meantime go to know
so many divergent and contradictory opinions as to which kinds of food
are healthy and which are not, I have given up on the matter:-)

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’d lay money on it being, at least to some extent, homogenization of milk as far as physical culprits are concerned. The rise in heart attack stats in the US parallels the rise in use of homogenization in the 30s-50s (NOT pasteurization, though that is surely also not good for the healthiness of the milk; probably a necessary evil if you don’t know the farmer, but homogenization is a big-industry thing, prolonging the freshness of the milk or some such, I think.) Teresa (Northern VA)
I’m not quoting but my information comes from reading Wise Traditions—Weston A Price Foundation--(now) and from reading many, many sources over the past 20 years plus some research on the net.
According to?
In fact carbohydrates are what cause problems leading to heart attack risk.

._,___

there was fruit, nuts, grubs and fish that could be
easily caught by hand. if one looks at small tribal
cultures that were documented in the 19-20c, there are
numerous food gathering skills that did not require
major weaponry but provided protein. people most likely
developed these skills many millenium ago. the big game
hunting required better weaponry and trapping skills and
often sent hunters off for months at a time. it was not
a very efficient process in those times. the women
usually gathered in village centers and provided most of the
food as they developed the agricultural skills.
for many today, the belief is that the onset of inflammation began with
the cultivation of grains. today there are those who think that
wheat, as currently provided is a major inflammatory culprit. these
people suggest eating the older style grains such as amaranth or
spelt as healthier, ie, less or non-inflammatory foods. corn is also a major
culprit in promoting disease.
but of course, nothing we get today in industrialized america resembles
food stuffs of yore in quality. everyday there is some piece of information
reflecting the deteriorating quality of what we eat, particularly in america
where corporate profit is the leading motivation and deteriorating health is
a welcomed effect for the pharmaceutical and medical industries. as a
monsanto exec said a few years ago when asked about concerns about
the safety of gmo seeds: 'it is not our concern, let others worry about
that. our interest is to sell as much of our product as possible!'
considering that they are busy patenting all gmo seeds they are taking over
control of the food supply of the world (their intent, by the way). and they
are mutually owned by pharmaceutical companies.
i also think it important to distinguish between carbs from fruit and vegetables and
carbs from grains. we can survive quite well without grains, but not without fruits
and veggies.
tanya

Hi

afaik, Inuit did this several thousands of years.

Peter

Tanya Marquette schrieb:

Luise Kunkle wrote:

Dear Luise,
I understand the contradictions in people's opinion - but there is no
contradiction if you read the original research.... which I make it my
job to do:-)

It's the *interpretation* of the research that goes wrong, and which
leads to crazy suggestions.

For example:

In 1991 Hills research study fed cats a diet of high soy protein plus
40% fat and they found that this damaged the kidneys. If they fed less
soy protein also with 40% fat, then the kidneys were less damaged.
Those are the research facts. Those you can believe.
Dr Delmar Finco was a researcher working for Hills on the project.

The conclusions made however were what was publicized, and still tosdqy
are the source of the training of doctors and vets everywhere! The
conclusion Hills made was that "High protein diet damages kidneys".
Dr Finco did not like the *conclusions*. Nor did he like the 40% fat
aspect, and the fact that some cats gagged so much on the fat, that they
failed to eat their quota. So as an independent researcher (not working
for Hills any more) he and separate other research studies designed
better research:

They set up food using appropriate protein (chicken not soy), reasonable
fat, and ranging in protein content from 18% to 56%. Tested this on cats
with half the usual kidney (surgically removed).
The result: Cats on 56% protein did best, and those on 18% did worst.
This is what to remember - the facts of the research.

Subsequent additional research has explained the problem with soy
protein. It has a different ratio of amino acids from those the cat is
designed to eat. During digestion, left-over amino acids have to be
handled by the kidney - raising the BUN, and causing damage over time.
This too is fact and not conclusion.

However - if you go to the average doctor or vet, you will be told that
if you have damaged kidneys you should eat a low protein diet. Why?
Because Hills is a VERY powerful company and has touted their
*conclusions* from 1991 far and wide, with "free lectures on nutrition"
at the medical schools.

So what do you want to believe?
The doctors trained by Hills at the medical schools - or the actual
research results, minus any "conclusions" convenient to the researcher?

I like to make my own conclusions. The result is that when my
endocrinologist discovered I had kidney damage and told me to eat a
low-protein soy-based diet, I knew from my own reading of the reswearh
that this came straight from the Hills 1991 study. The kidneys are
damaged by soy and the more damaging soy you eat, the more the kidneys
are damaged by the soy. MY OWN conclusion putting that together with the
other subsequent research, was to eat instead a high protein diet, based
on meat, fish and egg - which I did. I worked to get grams of protein
per day to equal my weight in kilograms.

The result?
Six months later (this was in 2004) the endocrinologist did the lab
tests on my kidneys again to see how much worse they were, because -
per her studies - kidneys do not repair, and she hoped the low soy
protein diet would slow the damage.
However she found them undamaged with all results "normal" to her
great surprise.

So to go back to your concern to find "which kinds of food are healthy
and which are not" - it takes a hard good look at the actual research to
find truth where there is varied opinion, and one also finds from such
"good research" as I call it, that peple are all differnt (surprise
surprise) and that many factors need to be considered to devise the best
individual diet.
For example, blood type is a factor; *I* claim constitutional-TYPE is a
factor; anti-inflamamtory characteristics are very important; food needs
to be planned in proportion to the condition of health of the
individual, the activity levels, the environment and so on.

But overall - it is high protein of the right kind, that is healthy over
low protein.
The story that meat/protein lines the blood vessels is an erroneous
conclusion. What lines the blood vessels with arterial plaque is
glycation products plus cholesterol made from stored carbohydrate (which
is stored as "bad" fat, centrally.)
That mainly affects men. Heart attacks in women are different and are
caused not so much by blockage of a stiffened artery as by spasm of the
artery. Spasm can be triggered by a high fat meal sooner than 6 hrs
after the previous high-fat meal however.
So again - we are all different and specifics count.

NO research shows a direct correlation between cholesterol and heart
attacks....it's all supposition from statistics, and the conclusions
(often wrong as I mentioned) from the stats. There IS a direct
correlation per newer research between c-reactive-protein and heart
attack - and this is easy to get low using an anti-inflamamtory high
protein (meat,fish,egg) diet.

My advice is that in all things you need to know what the research
actually shows and not what the researchers conclude from it.

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."