30 Bananas a Day!

i told you so! -- science confirms eating animal products bad for you

we know what's happening. we've known for decades. however, we also have found that when we talk about the health detriments associated with eating the products of the corpse industries, people don't believe us.

for instance, they could be dying at your feet in agony, but they still won't believe you as you calmly and precisely explain to them that the heart attack they are experiencing is a direct result of their dietary and lifestyle habits.

why won't they believe you even as they pass away? because some people just can't handle an "i told you so" and hope if they die soon enough, they can make it look like they didn't hear you.

well, soon you'll be able to change all that!

this series of posts will arm you with the latest information on clinical nutrition as accumulated and presented over the past few years by dr michael greger.

now michael is not someone most people would like to face on the opposite side of a debate.

he's knowledgeable.
he's thorough.
he's got the studies.

his "i told you so" will follow even those dying to escape and resound eternally throughout hades!
soon yours can too!

there will be a study introduced (in pdf format) with an approximate frequency of one or two per week. it will be prefaced with minor commentary, highlighting the conclusion reached. if you have questions about the contents, please ask for there will be brilliant and dextrous people such as B and dan (and anyone else who wishes to help out) on hand to help answer or explain your queries or even elaborate on ideas from the study.

there will be wonderful main courses on the menu such as cancer, heart disease, osteoporosis accompanied with choice beverages like cholesterol, food poisoning, constipation and infertility. for dessert, you can have contamination, mortality, obesity. as snacks, you even get delightful tidbits such as the revelation that women find non-veg males' sweaty armpits smell worse than males who don't eat corpse products!

if you find yourself becoming intrigued by what you read here, you may want to purchase dr greger's dvds from his website. he gives all proceedings to charity. in fact, i received the collection of studies from him by making a donation to mercy for animals, an excellent and dynamic organization we both support.

ready. set. go.
revealing what the research does show.
so you know "i told you so!"

in friendship,
prad

Views: 6570

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

here's a good video on alzheimer from www.vegsource.org with neil barnard:

http://www.vegsource.com/news/2012/12/neal-barnard-md----go-vegan-t...

in friendship,

prad

I was doing some research in fermented vegetables for K2 (I'm not finished yet) and came across this video: http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/03/18/mcbri...

From 30:00 minutes in it gets quite interesting/amusing with loads of arguments againt raw fruit and vegetables. I have seen/read enough prove that a vegan lifestyle can work on the long run, but I'm also not blind to problems in may provide when not doing it right.

Is there any scientific proof to what this women Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride is saying about fruit and veggies for detox and animal products for building?

From 30:00 minutes in it gets quite interesting/amusing with loads of arguments againt raw fruit and vegetables. I have seen/read enough prove that a vegan lifestyle can work on the long run, but I'm also not blind to problems in may provide when not doing it right.

there isn't an issue about "doing it right" for vegan. the principle is the same for all diets - if you eat garbage (vegan or otherwise), you'll get garbage returned. the only benefit junk vegan offers is that you won't get the detrimental effects of animal proteins and fats messing you up.

Is there any scientific proof to what this women Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride is saying about fruit and veggies for detox and animal products for building?

yes there is some truth. fruits and veggies may help you detox only if you've been filling yourself up with garbage. going to corpse products will indeed help you build the garbage dump back. :D

good, sensible, actual research presentations at www.nutritionfacts.org, btw.

in friendship,

prad

another nail in the coffin.

in friendship,

prad

====

Eating Meat Kills People. So Why Do We Keep Eating It?

Eating Meat Kills People. So Why Do We Keep Eating It?

What’s the news in nutrition these days?

It’s that red meat can kill you, and processed meat can kill you.

We knew that already, you say?

Sure, but it turns out they can kill you even faster than we thought.

According to Dr. Frank Hu, co-author of a new Harvard study on the topic, what is new “is the magnitude of risk associated with very moderate red meat consumption.” Predictably, the magnitude is greater. And the magnitude for processed meat is even greater than that.

The Harvard study concluded that one serving of red meat a day increases the risk of early death by 13 percent. The same single daily serving of processed meat (like bacon or hot dog) increases that risk by 20 percent. And “one serving” means that little deck-of-cards sized lump that doesn’t satisfy anyone over the age of 10.

Hu acknowledged that “it’s not really surprising because red meat consumption has been linked to an increased risk of chronic diseases, such as cardiovascular disease and cancer. What is surprising is the magnitude of risk associated with very moderate red meat consumption.”

The study, published on March 12th in the journal Archives of Internal Medicine, followed over 120,000 U.S. health professionals for 28 years. Every four years the subjects completed food questionnaires.

The researchers had to tease out the health effects of red meat from all the other bad habits beef-eaters tended to have, like smoking, drinking and physical inactivity. Even when they accounted for all the other terrible things research subjects were doing to their bodies, the strong association between red meat and death still stood out.

Eating more healthful protein sources in place of red meat has a significant positive effect. Eating nuts instead of red meat decreased a person’s mortality risk by 19 percent.

Even eating higher-quality beef can help, says Dr. David Katz, director of the Yale University Prevention Research Center. He recommended eating “a vegetarian dinner once or twice a week. And when you eat red meat, switch to leaner cuts and grass-fed cattle,” because when you eat an animal you are also eating whatever the animal ate.

Hu summarized, “I think the public health message is pretty straightforward. We should switch from a red meat-based diet to a plant-based diet with healthier protein choices.”

We should switch to a plant-based diet? Huh. That isn’t news either.

 

Related Stories:

Vegan Eats Steak, Shows Why Going Meatless is Good For You

4 More Reasons Not To Eat Meat

Western-Style Diet: A Recipe for Dying Before Your Time

Another Study Links Egg Consumption to Prostate Cancer

text for article copied below.

here are the particulars for the study itself:

====

Intakes of meat, fish, poultry, and eggs and risk of prostate cancer
progression
Erin L Richman, Meir J Stampfer, Alan Paciorek, Jeanette M Broering, Peter R Carroll, and June M Chan

ABSTRACT
Background:
Processed meat and fish have been shown to be as-
sociated with the risk of advanced prostate cancer, but few studies
have examined diet after prostate cancer diagnosis and risk of its
progression.
Objective:
We examined the association between postdiagnostic
consumption of processed and unprocessed red meat, fish, poultry,
and eggs and the risk of prostate cancer recurrence or progression.
Design:
We conducted a prospective study in 1294 men with pros-
tate cancer, without recurrence or progression as of 2004–2005,
who were participating in the Cancer of the Prostate Strategic Uro-
logic Research Endeavor and who were followed for an average
of 2 y.
Results:
We observed 127 events (prostate cancer death or metas-
tases, elevated prostate-specific antigen concentration, or secondary
treatment) during 2610 person-years. Intakes of processed and un-
processed red meat, fish, total poultry, and skinless poultry were not
associated with prostate cancer recurrence or progression. Greater
consumption of eggs and poultry with skin was associated with 2-
fold increases in risk in a comparison of extreme quantiles: eggs
[hazard ratio (HR): 2.02; 95% CI: 1.10, 3.72;
P
for trend = 0.05] and
poultry with skin (HR: 2.26; 95% CI: 1.36, 3.76;
P
for trend =
0.003). An interaction was observed between prognostic risk at di-
agnosis and poultry. Men with high prognostic risk and a high
poultry intake had a 4-fold increased risk of recurrence or progres-
sion compared with men with low/intermediate prognostic risk and
a low poultry intake (
P
for interaction = 0.003).
Conclusions:
Our results suggest that the postdiagnostic consump-
tion of processed or unprocessed red meat, fish, or skinless poultry
is not associated with prostate cancer recurrence or progression,
whereas consumption of eggs and poultry with skin may increase
the risk.
Am J Clin Nutr
2010;91:712–21.

====

in friendship,

prad

====

The egg industry is notoriously terrible for chickens, but more and more evidence suggests that it is terrible for men's prostates too.

In an article entitled "Choline: Why Eggs May Worsen Prostate Cancer," vegan maven Kathy Freston illuminates the findings of a recent Harvard University study of egg consumption and prostate cancer. The study, detailed in the prestigious American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, determined that men with early-stage prostate cancer, who on average ate at least one egg per day, doubled--yes, doubled--their risk of fatality from the disease.

Researchers believe choline, a naturally occurring compound found predominantly in animal products, accelerates the progression of cancer cells. The men who consumed the most eggs in the Harvard study more than doubled their risk of dying from prostate cancer, increasing their chances by 70%.

These recent findings support previous studies that have shown the benefits of plant-based eating in reducing the risk of prostate cancer.

Reducing, or better yet, eliminating our consumption of eggs and other animal products is not only better for our health, it is also a lifesaver for animals and the planet. Visit ChooseVeg.com for tips, recipes, and resources on transitioning to a healthy and humane, vegan diet.

this item (courtesy of bigG) is interesting because it shows that some businesses are starting to figure out what's been known for quite some time ... and doing something about it!

Vegetarians to be offered cheaper life insurance

text copied below.

in friendship,

prad

====

Vegetarians to be offered cheaper life insurance

by SEAN POULTER, Daily Mail

Vegetarians are to be offered cheaper life insurance because, it is claimed, they are healthier and less likely to die early.

The AFI insurance agency has devised the Vegetarian Term Life policy to reward non meat-eaters with lower premiums.

The company claims that the wider industry has failed to catch up with the reality that vegetarians are a better insurance risk.

They are, it says, less likely to suffer from the sort of serious or chronic illnesses that shorten lives.

According to the Vegetarian Society, the risk of some cancers is reduced by up to 40 per cent and of heart disease by 30 per cent.

The chance of developing kidney and gall stones is also lower, it says, while the threat of diet-related diabetes and high blood pressure is minimised.

The prospect of getting the human form of Mad Cow Disease becomes much more remote, it is argued, while there is also less danger of food poisoning.

The new policy, underwritten by the Liverpool Victoria Life Company, offers a 25 per cent reduction on monthly premiums in the first year only.

But AFI - which stands for Animal Friends Insurance - is arguing for the entire industry to deliver long-term discounts to vegetarians.

The agency was set up by husband-and-wife team Elaine and Chris Fairfax, of Worthing, West Sussex.

The couple are forgoing commission on the life policy to fund the offer and have promised to donate all profits from their other insurance business to animal causes.

'In simple terms, vegetarians live longer and are healthier throughout their lifetimes,' said Mr Fairfax.

Insurance companies look at smoking, drinking habits and family medical history when deciding premiums.

'We believe that a vegetarian lifestyle should be given equal weight.

'There is plenty of clear factual evidence to demonstrate the health benefits of being a vegetarian which should be recognised across the insurance industry.

'Independent studies show that, on a 12-year follow-up study of 11,000 people, vegetarians have a lower rate of mortality in some significant areas than non-vegetarians.'

His wife added: 'Epidemiological evidence indicates that vegetarians suffer less from chronic disease, but the insurance industry has not yet recognised this.

'Some areas of the industry are working on this, but it may take some time.

'So in the meantime, by working with Liverpool Victoria, we are delighted to be able to offer discounts to vegetarians right now.'

There are believed to be four million vegetarians in the UK, although some people who claim this status are not thought to be entirely faithful.

Studies have shown the lure of a bacon sandwich can lead a significant proportion to relapse. It is unclear whether this would affect their monthly premiums.

AFI gave the example of a 45-year-old female non-smoker.

She would pay £10.95 a month for a £100,000 policy over 15 years with the company's vegetarian policy, compared to an average figure of £16.39 and a top rate of £18.40.

A spokesman for the Vegetarian Society said: 'This is an important first step.

'We hope insurance companies will take seriously the fact that vegetarians are less likely to die young from cancer and heart disease.'

Prad,

This is a big victory identifying something that is a fact.

No debating it now.

Take Care,

here are a collection of articles mentioned in "good medicine" by www.pcrm.org

in friendship,

prad

====

high fat dairy linked to mortality

Intake of high-fat dairy, but not low-fat dairy, was related to a higher risk of mortality after breast cancer diagnosis.

J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013 May 1;105(9):616-23. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djt027. Epub 2013 Mar 14.
High- and low-fat dairy intake, recurrence, and mortality after breast cancer diagnosis.
Kroenke CH, Kwan ML, Sweeney C, Castillo A, Caan BJ.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23492346

fish oil doesn't improve the health of your heart

In a large general-practice cohort of patients with multiple cardiovascular risk factors, daily treatment with n-3 fatty acids did not reduce cardiovascular mortality and morbidity

N Engl J Med. 2013 May 9;368(19):1800-8. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1205409.
n-3 fatty acids in patients with multiple cardiovascular risk factors.
Risk and Prevention Study Collaborative Group, Roncaglioni MC, Tombesi M, Avanzini F, Barlera S, Caimi V, Longoni P, Marzona I, Milani V, Silletta MG, Tognoni G, Marchioli R.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23656645

eggs increase risk of heart disease and diabetes

Our study suggests that there is a dose-response positive association between egg consumption and the risk of CVD and diabetes.

Atherosclerosis. 2013 Aug;229(2):524-30. doi: 10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2013.04.003. Epub 2013 Apr 17.
Egg consumption and risk of cardiovascular diseases and diabetes: A meta-analysis.
Li Y, Zhou C, Zhou X, Li L.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23643053

other ways corpse parts causes heart disease

Intestinal microbiota may thus contribute to the well-established link between high levels of red meat consumption and CVD risk.

Nat Med. 2013 May;19(5):576-85. doi: 10.1038/nm.3145. Epub 2013 Apr 7.
Intestinal microbiota metabolism of L-carnitine, a nutrient in red meat, promotes atherosclerosis.
Koeth RA, Wang Z, Levison BS, Buffa JA, Org E, Sheehy BT, Britt EB, Fu X, Wu Y, Li L, Smith JD, DiDonato JA, Chen J, Li H, Wu GD, Lewis JD, Warrier M, Brown JM, Krauss RM, Tang WH, Bushman FD, Lusis AJ, Hazen SL.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23563705

Increased TMAO levels are associated with an increased risk of incident major adverse cardiovascular events.

N Engl J Med. 2013 Apr 25;368(17):1575-84. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1109400.
Intestinal microbial metabolism of phosphatidylcholine and cardiovascular risk.
Tang WH, Wang Z, Levison BS, Koeth RA, Britt EB, Fu X, Wu Y, Hazen SL.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23614584

a recent interesting article:

Meat and cheese may be as bad as smoking

text copied below.

in friendship,

prad

====

March 4, 2014

That chicken wing you’re eating could be as deadly as a cigarette. In a new study that tracked a large sample of adults for nearly two decades, researchers have found that eating a diet rich in animal proteins during middle age makes you four times more likely to die of cancer than someone with a low-protein diet — a mortality risk factor comparable to smoking.

“There’s a misconception that because we all eat, understanding nutrition is simple. But the question is not whether a certain diet allows you to do well for three days, but can it help you survive to be 100?” said corresponding author Valter Longo, Edna M. Jones Professor of Biogerontology at the USC Davis School of Gerontology and director of the USC Longevity Institute. Longo has a joint appointment at the USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences.

Not only is excessive protein consumption linked to a dramatic rise in cancer mortality, but middle-aged people who eat lots of proteins from animal sources — including meat, milk and cheese — are also more susceptible to early death in general, revealed the study published today in Cell Metabolism. Protein-lovers were 74 percent more likely to die of any cause within the study period than their more low-protein counterparts. They were also several times more likely to die of diabetes.

But how much protein one should eat has long been a controversial topic — muddled by the popularity of protein-heavy diets such as Paleo and Atkins. Before this study, researchers had never shown a definitive correlation between high-protein consumption and mortality risk.

Rather than look at adulthood as one monolithic phase of life, as other researchers have done, the latest study considers how biology changes as we age and how decisions in middle life may play out across the human life span.

In other words, what’s good for you at one age may be damaging at another. Protein controls the growth hormone IGF-I, which helps our bodies grow but has been linked to cancer susceptibility. Levels of IGF-I drop off dramatically after age 65, leading to potential frailty and muscle loss. The study shows that while high-protein intake during middle age is very harmful, it is protective for older adults: those over 65 who ate a moderate- or high-protein diet were less susceptible to disease.

The latest paper draws from Longo’s past research on IGF-I, including on an Ecuadorian cohort that seemed to have little cancer or diabetes susceptibility because of a genetic mutation that lowered levels of IGF-I; the members of the cohort were all less than 5-feet tall.

“The research shows that a low-protein diet in middle age is useful for preventing cancer and overall mortality, through a process that involves regulating IGF-I and possibly insulin levels,” said co-author Eileen Crimmins, holder of the AARP Chair in Gerontology at USC. “However, we also propose that at older ages, it may be important to avoid a low-protein diet to allow the maintenance of healthy weight and protection from frailty.”

Crucially, the researchers found that plant-based proteins, such as those from beans, did not seem to have the same mortality effects as animal proteins. Rates of cancer and death also did not seem to be affected by controlling for carbohydrate or fat consumption, suggesting that animal protein is the main culprit.

“The majority of Americans are eating about twice as much proteins as they should, and it seems that the best change would be to lower the daily intake of all proteins but especially animal-derived proteins,” Longo said. “But don’t get extreme in cutting out protein; you can go from protected to malnourished very quickly.”

Longo’s findings support recommendations from several leading health agencies to consume about 0.8 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight every day in middle age. For example, a 130-pound person should eat about 45 to 50 grams of protein a day, with preference for those derived from plants such as legumes, Longo explained.

The researchers defined a high-protein diet as deriving at least 20 percent of calories from protein, including both plant-based and animal-based protein. A “moderate” protein diet includes 10 to 19 percent of calories from protein, and a low-protein diet includes less than 10 percent protein.

Even moderate amounts of protein had detrimental effects during middle age, the researchers found. Across all 6,318 adults over the age of 50 in the study, average protein intake was about 16 percent of total daily calories with about two-thirds from animal protein — corresponding to data about national protein consumption. The study sample was representative across ethnicity, education and health backgrounds.

People who ate a moderate amount of protein were still three times more likely to die of cancer than those who ate a low-protein diet in middle age, the study showed. Overall, even the small change of decreasing protein intake from moderate levels to low levels reduced likelihood of early death by 21 percent.

For a randomly selected smaller portion of the sample — 2,253 people — levels of the growth hormone IGF-I were recorded directly. The results showed that for every 10 ng/ml increase in IGF-I, those on a high-protein diet were 9 percent more likely to die from cancer than those on a low-protein diet, in line with past research associating IGF-I levels to cancer risk.

The researchers also extended their findings about high-protein diets and mortality risk, looking at causality in mice and cellular models. In a study of tumor rates and progression among mice, the researchers showed lower cancer incidence and 45 percent smaller average tumor size among mice on a low-protein diet than those on a high-protein diet by the end of the two-month experiment.

“Almost everyone is going to have a cancer cell or pre-cancer cell in them at some point. The question is: Does it progress?” Longo said. “Turns out one of the major factors in determining if it does is protein intake.

Morgan Levine, Jorge Suarez and Pinchas Cohen of USC Davis were co-authors of the study. The research was funded by the National Institute of Aging of the National Institutes of Health (grants numbers AG20642, AG025135, AG034906, P30AG017265 and T32AG0037) and a USC Norris Cancer Center pilot grant given to Longo.

and this is a good 'companion' to the above:

Dr. McDougall Debunks Low-Carb Diets (VIDEO)

http://www.vegsource.com/news09/030714.html

in friendship,

prad

studies need to be studied!

here is an exciting article published in nothing less than the annals of internal medicine:

Association of Dietary, Circulating, and Supplement Fatty Acids With Coronary Risk: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

http://annals.org/article.aspx?articleid=1846638

well it's exciting for the corpse industries because the conclusion is:

Current evidence does not clearly support cardiovascular guidelines that encourage high consumption of polyunsaturated fatty acids and low consumption of total saturated fats.

so that must mean it's suddenly ok to eat corpse despite all the cohort studies presented so far which say it isn't! right?

well not really because if you look at the behind the scenes action, you'll see in the limitation comment:

Potential biases from preferential publication and selective reporting.

huh? what's this?!! you mean certain groups with vested interests cooked the study and got it published in a prestigious journal? wow! how about that, eh?!

and could there be 'errors' (aka deliberate misinformation) embedded within the study?

let's get mcdougall to reveal more about this interesting item:

Dr. McDougall's Comments on the National Headlines about the March 18, 2014 Annals of Internal Medicine Article Suggesting Saturated Fat (Dairy, Meat, and Eggs) Is OK to Eat

http://www.drmcdougall.com/misc/2014other/comments/satfat.htm

(text copied below)

and as you'll see he ain't the only one taking strong exception to this loose comment by lead author Dr. Rajiv Chowdhury: "My take on this would be that it's not saturated fat that we should worry about in our diets"

But Dr. Frank Hu, a professor of nutrition and epidemiology at the Harvard School of Public Health, said the findings should not be taken as “a green light” to eat more steak, butter and other foods rich in saturated fat. He said that looking at individual fats and other nutrient groups in isolation could be misleading, because when people cut down on fats they tend to eat more bread, cold cereal and other refined carbohydrates that can also be bad for cardiovascular health. “The single macronutrient approach is outdated,” said Dr. Hu, who was not involved in the study. “I think future dietary guidelines will put more and more emphasis on real food rather than giving an absolute upper limit or cutoff point for certain macronutrients.”

and

Alice H. Lichtenstein, a nutritional biochemist at Tufts University, agreed that “it would be unfortunate if these results were interpreted to suggest that people can go back to eating butter and cheese with abandon,” citing evidence that replacing saturated fat with foods that are high in polyunsaturated fats – instead of simply eating more carbohydrates – reduces cardiovascular risk.

and how about this tidbit that mcdougall reveals:

The main scientific study they used showing the safety of saturated fat (reference 12), was a study supported by the National Dairy Council. (Siri-Tarino PW, Sun Q, Hu FB, Krauss RM. Meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies evaluating the association of saturated fat with cardiovascular dis ease. Am J Clin Nutr. 2010;91:535-46.) This is the single study used to promote eating animals by the low-carb movement and the animal food industries.

http://www.drmcdougall.com/misc/2014other/comments/satfat.htm

really! there is so much evidence over so many decades that corpse consumption is bad for health in so many ways! there are going to be no new studies that counter this reality with validity - not even those that are conjured up by well paid magicians by desperate money mongerers.

eat corpse ... become one after existing as a testament to self-indulgence, cruelty, a burden on our health care system and a blight on our planet.

in friendship,

prad

====

here are mcdougall's comments on this farce.

1) I agree with the conclusion that polyunsaturated fats (fish oil) and monounsaturated fat (olive oil) are not going to prevent heart disease. They are at least fattening and most likely promote cancer.

2) However, I know that one of their main conclusions is wrong: That it is OK to eat animals. Dairy, meat, and eggs are bad for people and the planet.

This March 18, 2014 Annals of Internal Medicine article will become a feeding frenzy for the animal-food-industries: a "nugget of proof" that their saturated fat-laden foods can be eaten guiltlessly. Millions of people worldwide, especially those who are looking to hear good news about their bad habits, will die of heart disease, diabetes, cancer, and obesity, and if left unchallenged, resulting increases in livestock production will accelerate global warming even faster.

Please read on if you are interested in the details:

1) The main scientific study they used showing the safety of saturated fat (reference 12), was a study supported by the National Dairy Council. (Siri-Tarino PW, Sun Q, Hu FB, Krauss RM. Meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies evaluating the association of saturated fat with cardiovascular dis ease. Am J Clin Nutr. 2010;91:535-46.) This is the single study used to promote eating animals by the low-carb movement and the animal food industries.

Jeremiah Stamler, MD wrote an editorial in this same issue of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition criticizing this flawed paper that has received so much attention in the lay press.

Letters to the editor that followed were also highly critical of this advertisement for meat and dairy (saturated fat).

And more Letters.

2) In the results section of the Annals of Internal Medicine (March 18, 2014) article they wrote: "Seventy-two unique studies were identified (Figure 1 of Supplement 1 and the Table). Nineteen were based in North America, 42 in Europe, and 9 in the Asia-Pacific region; 2 were multinational."

I would like to look at the 9 in the Asia-Pacific region and the 2 that were multinational, independently.  This would show the effect of different diets on health (and coronary heart disease).

In the nineteen that were based in North America and 42 in Europe, people all ate the same diet (full of saturated fat, ie. Dairy, meat, and eggs) - how could you possibly see any difference in health?

3) This is an incorrect statement in the discussion of the Annals of Internal Medicine (March 18, 2014) paper:

"For example, the influence of metabolism seems particularly relevant for the de novo synthesis of even-numbered saturated fatty acids in the body, compositions of which are largely determined by dietary factors, including carbohydrate and alcohol consumption (33–35), and other metabolic pathways (36, 37) rather than direct dietary intake."

Excess Starch (and even Sugar) Does Not Turn to Body Fat (Easily)
(From: http://www.drmcdougall.com/misc/2009nl/mar/passionate.htm)

A widely held belief is that the sugars in starches are readily converted into fat and then stored unattractively in the abdomen, hips, and buttock. Incorrect! And there is no disagreement about the truth among scientists or their published scientific research.5-13 After eating, the complex carbohydrates found in starches, such as rice, are digested into simple sugars in the intestine and then absorbed into the bloodstream where they are transported to trillions of cells in the body in order to provide for energy.  Carbohydrates (sugars) consumed in excess of the body's daily needs can be stored (invisibly) as glycogen in the muscles and liver.  The total storage capacity for glycogen is about two pounds.  Carbohydrates consumed in excess of our need and beyond our limited storage capacity are not readily stored as body fat. Instead, these excess carbohydrate calories are burned off as heat (a process known as facultative dietary thermogenesis) or used in physical movements not associated with exercise.9,13

The process of turning sugars into fats is known as de novo lipogenesis. Some animals, such as pigs and cows, can efficiently convert the low-energy, inexpensive carbohydrates found in grains and grasses into calorie-dense fats.5  This metabolic efficiency makes pigs and cows ideal "food animals." Bees also perform de novo lipogenesis; converting honey (simple carbohydrates) into wax (fats). However, human beings are very inefficient at this process and as a result de novo lipogenesis does not occur under usual living conditions in people.5-13  When, during extreme conditions, de novo lipogenesis does occur the metabolic cost is about 30% of the calories consumed—a very wasteful process.11

Under experimental laboratory conditions overfeeding of large amounts of simple sugars to subjects will result in a little bit of de novo lipogenesis.  For example, trim and obese women were overfed 50% more total calories than they usually ate in a day, along with an extra 3.5 ounces (135 grams) of refined sugar. From this overfeeding the women produced less than 4 grams (36 calories) of fat daily, which means a person would have to be overfed by this amount of extra calories and sugar every day for nearly 4 months in order to gain one extra pound of body fat.10 Obviously, even overeating substantial quantities of refined and processed carbohydrates is a relatively unimportant source of body fat. So where does all that belly fat come from? The fat you eat is the fat you wear.

5) Hellerstein MK. De novo lipogenesis in humans: metabolic and regulatory aspects. Eur J Clin Nutr. 1999 Apr;53 Suppl 1:S53-65.

6) Acheson KJ, Schutz Y, Bessard T, Anantharaman K, Flatt JP, Jequier E. Glycogen storage capacity and de novo lipogenesis during massive carbohydrate overfeeding in man. Am J Clin Nutr. 1988 Aug;48(2):240-7.

7) Minehira K, Bettschart V, Vidal H, Vega N, Di Vetta V, Rey V, Schneiter P, Tappy L. Effect of carbohydrate overfeeding on whole body and adipose tissue metabolism in humans. Obes Res. 2003 Sep;11(9):1096-103.

8) McDevitt RM, Bott SJ, Harding M, Coward WA, Bluck LJ, Prentice AM. De novo lipogenesis during controlled overfeeding with sucrose or glucose in lean and obese women. Am J Clin Nutr. 2001 Dec;74(6):737-46

9) Dirlewanger M, di Vetta V, Guenat E, Battilana P, Seematter G, Schneiter P, JÇquier E, Tappy L. Effects of short-term carbohydrate or fat overfeeding on energy expenditure and plasma leptin concentrations in healthy female subjects. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2000 Nov;24(11):1413-8.)

10) McDevitt RM, Bott SJ, Harding M, Coward WA, Bluck LJ, Prentice AM.  De novo lipogenesis during controlled overfeeding with sucrose or glucose in lean and obese women. Am J Clin Nutr. 2001 Dec;74(6):737-46

11) Danforth E Jr. Diet and obesity. Am J Clin Nutr. 1985 May;41(5 Suppl):1132-45.

12) Hellerstein MK. No common energy currency: de novo lipogenesis as the road less traveled. Am J Clin Nutr. 2001 Dec;74(6):707-8.

13) Tappy L. Metabolic consequences of overfeeding in humans. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2004 Nov;7(6):623-8.

Really great stuff, easy to paste and copy into a FB conversation! 

And a new bumper sticker in the making:

"eat corpse ...

...become one...

...after existing as a testament...

...to self-indulgence...

...cruelty...

...a burden on our health care system...

...and a blight on our planet....

honk if you are savvy!" 

 

RSS

About

TheBananaGirl created this Ning Network.

30BaD Search

Latest Activity

OrganicMark posted a status
"Navy Patents UFO-Like Compact Nuclear Fusion Reactor and Hybrid Space/Sea Crafts #evolution #peace #truth #love #light http://j.mp/2qtNgbW"
20 hours ago
Aysel is now friends with Houdini Steve Owens and Sugalena
Wednesday
OrganicMark posted a status
"Why the 2008 Housing Crisis Recovery Is Just an Illusion (w/ Keith Jurow) #evolution #awakening #peace #truth #light http://j.mp/2ODSZ93"
Tuesday
OrganicMark posted a status
"Not Transitory - Fed Liquidity Handout Surges To Near $90 Billion #evolution #awakening #peace #truth #love #light http://j.mp/35F4Sl5"
Tuesday
Frugisaurus and Alex Curtis-Slep are now friends
Oct 15
Michael Lanfield posted a video

Return to the Gentle Sea by Michael Lanfield with Music by Dr. Will Tuttle, PhD (Full Audiobook)

Return to the Gentle Sea: For the Love That Lives in Everyone is a book on spiritual healing and cultural transformation on the human relationship to nonhuman animals. It explains how living in a herding culture, eating animals and their secretions,…
Oct 14
Michael Lanfield commented on ednshell's video
Oct 14
Michael Lanfield and Olga are now friends
Oct 14
Raw Aussie Athlete and Lil Green Coconut are now friends
Oct 14
ednshell replied to Tams's discussion Best vegan retreats ?
Oct 13
ednshell posted a video

Take Back Your Power 2017 (Official) - smart meter documentary

This award-winning film documents the real story on smart meters. + Subscribe for free EMF guide & help stop 'smart' meters and 5G: https://TakeBackYourPower...
Oct 13
ednshell posted a discussion
Oct 13
Profile Iconmichael wilson, Savannah Holte, tori jacobs and 2 more joined 30 Bananas a Day!
Oct 13
OrganicMark posted a status
"QE4 "Not A QE" Begins: Fed Starts Buying $60BN In Bills Per Month Beginning Next Week #awakening #peace #truth #light http://j.mp/2M9cmoQ"
Oct 12
Rock and Tams are now friends
Oct 12
Tams posted a discussion
Oct 11

© 2019   Created by TheBananaGirl.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service