Minutus

Anyone here know what it means when a package of hamburger meat is
*bright* red on the outside (looked normal enough in the package) but
dark on the inside? It looked like maybe a quarter-inch layer of
bright, and the rest dark. ???????????

Thanks,
Shannon

could be treatment with viruses.
do you remember the fda permitted the treating of meat so it looked better in the
supermarket. they are allowing treatment with a virus. they also allow other
treatments as well i think. just like dyes in gmo salmon to mask the grey color.
check out organic consumers website or environmental working group. i also get
a newsletter from a group journal of living food and healing that has good articles
and news updates.
tanya

Meat that is red on the outside and dark on the inside are meats that are old and oxidized from prolonged exposure to air. We all notice this with ground beef, especially hamburger. When ground meat sits too long it turns brown. The butcher will open the package and spray the meat with red dye, a known carcinogen. Then they re-package it and put it back out on the shelf for some unsuspecting customer to purchase and poison their families. I only but frozen hamburger as it is fresh when it is flash frozen and is not oxidized.

I avoid red meat most of the time because digesting it diverts digestive enzymes required by the body to dissolve tumors that form on a regular basis as a part of the healing process. It is well-documented that cancer is more prolific in the meat eating countries. As we age, the pancreas produces lesser amounts of trypsin and chymotrypsin, the enzymes that break down protein. We consume too much protein and the excess must be dealt with by consuming our precious limited enzymatic resources. Caveat Emptor! Carmi Hazen

back in the late 1960-early1970's there was a little article buried in the NYTimes that noted that
eating too much meat was found to cause cancer. i still remember that because the hiding of that
information struck me then as quite dramatic. your post below is the science behind that article, or
at least a portion of it.
and of course you are right about meat oxidizing, but they do also use a viral spray for keeping
bad meat looking fresher.
tanya

This is my understanding about cancer too Carmi, yet it has always raised more questions for me than answers as my interest in homeopathy began with dogs, who are carnivores, and designed to eat meat, and I feed mine a variety of red and white meats.

Does anyone know if this also applies to dogs and their healing from Cancer?

Michelle

--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, "comdyne2002" wrote:

Years ago (late 1960's-early 1970's) there was a little article buried in the NYTimes
that said quite bluntly that eating meat was related to increasing cancer. Red meat
in particular is hard on the human body to digest. This means to me that it takes excess
energy to handle it. Ultimately, the body processess are on overload and begin to
break down.
As for dogs, they are not humans and their bodies are not like ours. It is a myth that
other mammals are equated with humans. There are similarities, but not equation.
Dogs are carniverous as are cats. I believe the term is obligate carnivores to describe
their nutritional needs.
tanya

There are so many variables. It would be fun to see a study that teased some of them out, not just lumping all "eating red meat" into one tub. Some body types do not run well without some (greater or lesser) amount of red meat. (E.g. Type O; e.g. mine...)

Who are the people who, in this society, are apt to be eating "a lot of red meat"? "A lot" is not going to be the meat-and-salad, or stir-fry, or "Caveman Diet" eaters, but instead will be more skewed toward those eating lots of hamburgers, or (often overcooked and/or burnt) barbequed/grilled meats. It's going to be skewed toward those eating commercial, feedlot raised beef, in a "whatever" context, not grassfed organic ("natural") meat in context of a balanced, veggie-rich, natural diet.

Without teasing out some of these variables, the statistic is, IMO, worse than useless, and in fact misleading.

Back to "individualization"--eating the diet that is right *for the person*, not for someone's philosophy...

Shannon

Not sure I agree with you. When the early studying was done, commercial beef was not subject to
the extent of abuses as they are today. McD and Burger King were not all over the country and people
ate home a lot more. It was a lot of red meat eating, period.
While it may be true that we have individual differences and tolerances, it all can be overdone.
I grew up with people who thought there was nothing in the house to eat if there wasn't meat on the
plate and that was always beef or pork.
Further, the statement was not to give up meat completely. But I would note that most countries
of the world did not eat a lot of meat/beef. The animal proteins were much lighter and more
easily digested such as fish and chicken and goat or small wild game that had much less fat.
Further, red meat and heavy meat eating were reserved to the upper, ruling class that seemed
to suffer from diseases such as gout. Large game hunting was a limited source of food that was
often reserved for major celebrations that occurred infrequently.
tanya

You got it right, Shannon, it is more the quality of meat that is important, how it has been raised, grain fed or grass fed as free range, hormones, antibiotics or nothing, and also its balance with veggies, fruits, a.s.o....
Anecdotally, many years ago I decided to try becoming a vegetarian......it was kind of OK, although I felt something was not entirely correct but could not point out what. Then at a barbecue (with lots of grilled veggies) someone put a juicy steak in front of me, I could not resist.........immediately I felt "grounded", as if I had been "sitting on a cloud" during the vegetarian period........
Interesting experience............
Joe.
 
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD.
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind"
Visit my new website www.naturamedica.webs.com

Red meat is a source for Vitamin B-12 which is absent in vegetarian diets for the most part. Burning of animal flesh via charcoal grilling converts nitrogen into nitrosomines and produces HAAs Heterocyclic Aromatic Amines which are highly carcinogenic. Also when the animals are slaughtered, they realize what is about to happen to them as they see the fate of the creature in front of them. They release large amounts of adrenalin in a feeble attempt to escape their fate. The adrenalin soaks into the meat and when consumed by humans, these hormones, which are foreign to our bodies, wreak havoc upon our endocrine systems. One of the effects of these hormones is to stimulate some pathogenic activity going on in our bodies as evidenced by high levels of homocystine in our blood.

Also animal fats are solid at human body temperatures. These fats clog up our cells, encasing them in what can be characterized as gunk combined with hydrogenated oils whose presence is foreign to our bodies and thus we have no effective mechanisms in removing them from the body. This gunk coats the cell membranes and produces insulin resistance which is the primary characteristic of type 2 diabetes.

Humans were not built to consume the vast amounts of protein found in the SAD (Standard American Diet) which should be limited to 30 grams daily. Digestion breaks down proteins into amino acids which then recombine to make up new tissue that our bodies require. Overloading with excessive proteins, especially animal proteins, forces the body to exhaust its enzyme supply required to break down these materials. When combined with hypothyroidism induced into our population via the introduction of halogens into the food and water supplies, it is understandable why so many foreign doctors wish to come to America to join in on the feeding frenzy. Caveat Emptor! Carmi Hazen