Diet Linked To Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma

On Sun, 4 Apr 2004 18:15:39 +0100, "pearl"
posted:

"Moosh" wrote in message ...
On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 14:13:07 +0100, "pearl"
posted:

"Moosh" wrote in message ...
On Fri, 26 Mar 2004 14:21:14 -0000, "pearl"
posted:

"usual suspect" wrote in message ...
Jonathan Ball wrote:
..
"vegan" diets are linked with B-12 deficiency.

And iron deficiency, zinc deficiency, etc.

Common in the general population.

The Baer report (Rutgers Univ., 1984) "Variations in Mineral
Contents of Vegetables"
Percentage of | Quantities per 100 Grams | Trace Elements. Parts per million
Dry Weight Dry Weight Dry matter

Vegetable: Mineral Ash | Calcium Magnesium | Boron Manganese Iron Copper Cobalt
Snap Beans
Organic 10.45 40.5 60 73 60 227 69
0.26
Non-organic 4.04 15.5 14.8 10 2 10 3
0
Cabbage
Organic 10.38 60 43.6 42 13 94 48
0.15
Non-organic 6.12 17.5 13.6 7 2 20 0.4
0
Lettuce
Organic 24.48 71 49.3 37 169 516 60
0.19
Non-organic 7.01 16 13.1 6 1 9 3
0
Tomatoes
Organic 14.2 23 59.2 36 68 1938 53
0.63
Non-organic 6.07 4.5 4.5 3 1 1 0
0
Spinach
Organic 28.56 96 203.9 88 117 1584 32 0.25
Non-organic 12.38 47.5 46.9 12 1 49 0.3 0.2

http://www.organicnutrition.co.uk/wh...whyorganic.htm

Look at the amazing numbers, and then look at the URL. Bull****!!!

Ipse dixit. .. Anyway, you have a reference.

Maliciously misleading though.

What is?

Your organic propaganda reference.
As an old hort science lecturer of mine once said, it is akin to
Voodoo Economics.

Organic produce MUST contain less minerals than conventional.

Organic growing can't replace the harvested minerals, whereas
conventional growing analyses and replenishes the mined minerals.

Mineral content: This may be the most important nutritional difference
between organic and regular produce since heavy use of fertilizer inhibits
absorption of some minerals,

Bull**** scare tactics!!! How can you possibly claim that crops grown
on soils which are prohibited from replenishment of exported minerals
in the crop, can be more mineral-rich than soils which are constantly
monitored and replenished?

Prohibited from replenishment of exported minerals? Explain.

A plot of land grows a crop which is harvested and sold at the market.
That crop will contain a lot of nutrients extracted from the soil.
The soil will therefore become shorter and shorter in this element.
Potassium eg is exported in great amounts. How is organic farming
going to replace this potassium? This is crucial to the logic of
organic growing. I've heard some advocates claim that extraterrestrial
sources provide these nutrients.

snip more of same

No proper scientific evidence, I see, just organic propaganda.

Ipse dixit.

Well that's all I've seen from you.
Please explain the above conundrum wrt potassium.

Excellent observations, all!

There is one small part, however, that bears consideration. Wheat, barley
and rye gluten proteins evoke an IgA and IgG immune response in about a
third of all people. In most it is a fairly low level response in the
intestine. In about one per cent of all people it turns into and immune
system attack on the intestinal mucosa and epithelium. And recent research
has discovered the fact of associated NHL and intestinal cancers if the
condition is allowed to persist untreated.

For information about the one per cent, see this reference

http://www.uchospitals.edu/news/2003...210-celiac.php

For information about the 35% see this medical lab website

http://www.enterolab.com/


where they offer a newer, more sensitive test.


Funny how it is really tough to sort out the "locker-room science" from the
real stuff.

Laurence



"Moosh" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 4 Apr 2004 17:34:29 +0100, "pearl"
posted:

What I'm saying is that ongoing excess consumption of wheat
will often precipitate a wheat-specific allergic response.

No evidence for this. Some folk are allergic to just about anything.
I'm allergic to paper wasp stings. They cure this by giving me weekly
stings Go figure.

Eating
anything in excess may result in some problems as well, I agree.

But most of Western man's problems stem from too much energy.

can produce a craving
as well as allergic response (headaches, tiredness,
fuzzy-headedness,
abdominal discomfort, bloating, tinnitus (referred) [especially
with,
wheat-bran, shredded wheat, and weetabix, ..

Evidence? Or is this just personal opinion?

Evidence to what?

Your ipse dixit

Symptoms of allergic response to wheat,
or the part about tinnitus? The former is well known,

In a very few people, so what?

You admit it's not just my ipse dixit then.

No I asked you for evidence of what you said above.
Sure some folks are intolerant of wheat, or milk, or nuts, or
shellfish....

the latter
I learned during my training,

As what?

As a reflexologist.

OK. What are you doing on this group, then?

I hope you are not appealing to authority?

No, just answering your question 'Evidence? Or is this
just personal opinion?'.

So why mention "training" as though this gives what you say some
authority. It doesn't. It is just an ignorant personal opinion.

and has been confirmed many times
during almost ten years of clinical practice.

As what?

A reflexologist.

Sort of Tarot cards of the feet?

Anecdotal I know,
but I doubt I could do any better than that in this case, sorry.

So it is meaningless? Thanks.

It might be meaningless to you.

Or anyone else here.

Probably not to the tinnitus-suffering
all-bran/weetabix/shredded-wheat eating folks reading this though.

Show us any evidence that these things cause what you claim in any but
a tiny tiny minority of overfed Westerners who are becoming
increasingly allergic to everything. Possibly coz of our obbsessive
cleanliness.

all of which are highly
abrasive to the colon, especially the ileo-caecal valve, situated
between the small and large intestine- just above the appendix]).

Nonsense. We've evolved to eat such things.

'All-bran' and 'weetabix' bushes? (That's 'nonsense').
We haven't evolved to eat large amounts of course grain-fibre.

Well we've certainly survived it. And that's what really counts.

'Survived it' in what sense? As a species?

We're discussing individual's health, not surviving as a species.

No, we are discussing epidemiology, I would have thought.
General principles.

because vegetables alone didn't fill me up.

Nuts, seeds, legumes, cereals, sweet fruits, roots, leafy greens,
rice?

But the pasta and bread didn't fill me up either!

Wholegrain or refined?

I could eat unlimited quantities of starchy foods, seemingly,
and never feel satiated.

You may have been missing out some higher protein plant-foods.

(Were you drinking 'diet' cokes, etc?).

Eliminating those foods has made it a lot easier
to eat less, and I feel a lot better too.

For cutting out all the wheat, no doubt.

Meat is a nutritionally dense
food, meat eating animals don't need to eat nearly as frequently
to survive
as plant eating animals do.

Meat is a high protein food, in fact so high that it's unhealthy
for us.

More nonsense! Do you regard eggs as unhealthy?

Animal product consumption and mortality because of all
causes combined, coronary heart disease, stroke, diabetes,
and cancer in Seventh-day Adventists.

Noticed they are nearly all skinny as rakes? I have.

Funny that, because many of them aren't vegetarians!

Well the few dozen that I have known have been, and the pictures I've
seen of SDA conferences were.

Snowdon DA. Division of Epidemiology, School of Public
Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.

This report reviews, contrasts, and illustrates previously published
findings from a cohort of 27,529 California Seventh-day Adventist
adults who completed questionnaires in 1960 and were followed
for mortality between 1960 and 1980. Within this population, meat
consumption was positively associated with mortality because of all
causes of death combined (in males), coronary heart disease (in
males and females), and diabetes (in males). Egg consumption was
positively associated with mortality because of all causes combined
(in females), coronary heart disease (in females), and cancers of the
colon (in males and females combined) and ovary. Milk consumption
was positively associated with only prostate cancer mortality, and
cheese consumption did not have a clear relationship with any cause
of death. The consumption of meat, eggs, milk, and cheese did not
have negative associations with any of the causes of death
investigated.

PMID: 3046303 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Have you taken note of that?

Yes, so what? It tells us nothing but what it tells us. What were
these correlations like compared with say smoking, drinking,
overweight, sedentariness...

Otherwise, plant foods are far richer than meat in most nutrients,
and we can obtain all the essential nutrients we require, in
suitable
and balanced amounts; sans all the unhealthy anti-nutrients in
meat.

What ARE you talking about?

What part isn't clear?

The assertion abour anti-nutrients in meat.

Yes. I really should have written 'components' instead.

Again, what are you talking about?

I think one of the things that gets missed in
the debate about low-carb diets is that for the people who
respond well to
it, you end up eating less overall than before.

The conclusion in the in-depth documentary I saw, was that protein
satiates appetite very quickly. But you could just as easily eat
plant
foods that are high in protein, such as nuts and legumes, also
rice.

Potatoes are the most satiating, when you measure it scientifically.

I find a diet comprised of a variety of quality plant foods very
satiating.

I agree. But that doesn't mean that a little meat shouldn't be
included in this variety.

'In short, disease rates were significantly associated within a range
of dietary plant food composition that suggested an absence of a
disease prevention threshold. That is, the closer a diet is to an
all-plant
foods diet, the greater will be the reduction in the rates of these
diseases.'
http://www.news.cornell.edu/releases...sis_paper.html

OBSERVED-TO-EXPECTED CORONARY
HEART DISEASE MORTALITY IN ADVENTIST MEN
Total Vegetarians 14%
Lacto-Ovo-Vegetarians 39%
Meat Users 56%
Phillips et al. (Amer. J. of Clinical Nutrition, 1978, 31: S191-S198)

RELATIVE risk of breast cancer among Japanese woman
Meat Eggs
Butter/cheese
less than once per week 1.0 1.0 1.0
2-4 times per week 2.55 1.91 2.10
almost daily 3.83 2.86 3.23
(from a paper by Hirayama cited in John Scharffenberg's
"Problems with Meat", 1989)


So? Associations? Londoners who get run over by London busses have a
strong association with drinking tea.

On Sun, 4 Apr 2004 16:55:30 -0400, "Patricia Heil"
posted:

I agree. Why doesn't she just take some massive
dose of antibiotics and kill off all those nasty
intestinal bacteria?

[Hint; because it will make her sick as hell.]

And of course, no brew of antibiotics would sterilise the gut. Those
left will likely overgrow.

On Mon, 5 Apr 2004 02:37:11 +0100, "pearl"
posted:

"Moosh" wrote in message ...
..
absorbed through the wall of the large intestine?

'The intestinal epithelium and the normal intestinal microflora represent
a barrier to the movement of pathogenic bacteria, antigens and other
noxious substances from the gut lumen. Under normal circumstances
this barrier is intact and provides normal intestinal function. When either
the epithelial cells or the normal microflora are disturbed altered
permeability facilitates the invasion of pathogens, foreign antigens and
other harmful substances. '
http://elecpress.monash.edu.au/APJCN...Num1/51p53.htm

See;
http://www.riken.go.jp/engn/r-world/...news/2004/feb/
Figure 3: Relationship between intestinal microbiota and disease


Thankyou. I rest my case

On Fri, 9 Apr 2004 11:49:24 -0700, "Laurence" lharris@nwlinkDOTcom
posted:

Funny how it is really tough to sort out the "locker-room science" from the
real stuff.

It really needs a scientist with good teaching skills to translate all
the studies and tell us what is really relevant to everyday lives and
what is merely academically interesting or just plain speculation.