In regards to eating meat

[Monica]

Another related, overlooked, but critical point is that the digestive tract is technically outside the body. Not inside of it.

Can you explain what you mean here? Do you mean, self-contained, as in walled off and nothing passes outside its walls? Is this different from other areas of the body?

Enzymes do not discriminate between "good stuff" and "bad stuff". An enzyme like lipase, which is designed to break down fat, will break down any kind of fat it encounters that has the proper chemical configuration. This would include, for example, the fats in the walls of arteries and veins that help them maintain flexibility.

Wouldn't that be a good thing if there is too much of the bad fats in the arteries?

Companies selling lipase claim it can clean out the arteries of the bad fats.

I get that. I am not really trying to throw my credentials around. But it might be helpful for others to understand that when I start going into nauseating detail on a subject... whether enzymes or Ra quotes... that is because I have personally and extensively studied the issue at hand.

In many cases, I have already gone down the tube that I see others going down, and I know that it is a sidetrack or dead end. But I suppose the only way for anybody else to really know for themselves is to go down it.

I understand. It's also true, though, that many 'experts' in any given field also feel that they've put in a huge amount of study and research, and they still disagree with one another.

Yes, but when highly intelligent, highly trained experts do all agree upon something... that should be an indication that what they are agreeing upon is probably true.

Good point. So the question then becomes: Do all the highly trained experts agree on the issue of enzymes?

They might agree about the role of enzymes in the body, but not necessarily agree about whether taking enzyme supplements is beneficial.

Viktoras Kulvinskas is a huge proponent of taking enzyme supplements, but I've wondered why he needs them, since he is raw vegan.

In this case, we are not debating about the therapeutic value of enzymes. We are (apparently) debating about how enzymes work on a biochemical level in general.

Oops, I had it backwards! Well in that case I can't comment, since I don't have enough knowledge of physiology and chemistry. I defer to your knowledge in this case.

Well, I certainly might be making things up in my mind about that. I will say that it appears to me that if I said the sky was blue, certain individuals would feel compelled to call it green. Not you. Also, I am saying this in the broader context of this forum, rather than just this specific thread.

Really?

Always pushing the alkaline limits would probably have a negative effect as well, in my view.

Yes it would. But it's a lot more difficult to accomplish. Most people are waaaaaaay on the acidic side, and it's very difficult to even get up to neutral, much less get too alkaline. In fact, the insert in the pH strips box says that any test of 8.0 or higher is actually a false positive and actually indicates extreme acidity, around 4.5. It explains why this is so, but I don't remember the reason.

Also keep in mind when we are talking about a range of pH in the blood it is between 7.35 and 7.45. The blood never actually becomes "acidic". If the pH falls below 7.35 for any length of time the body will cease to function altogether.

That's correct. I deal with this everyday, especially with doctors who almost always think we're claiming the blood pH can change. We're not.

In order to keep the blood pH in that narrow range, the body has to steal minerals from the organs, bones and tissues to buffer the blood from acidic waste. Hence, the blood will be just fine, but the rest of the body will be too acidic...leading to inflammation, etc.

I dunno. Generally speaking, if you take something that your body makes naturally long enough it will eventually stop making it on its own. This is generally not beneficial.

I agree. I took 'natural' bio-identical progesterone many years ago and it caused problems. Later, I found a website run by Dr. Theresa Dale, who seems to be the lone voice arguing that even the 'natural' hormones are bad, because the body gets dependent on them and forgets how to make its own hormones. She recommends homeopathic remedies instead, to re-train the body to make its own hormones. I think she's right on!

Actually, many supplement enzymes are food-derived. For example, bromelain comes from pineapple and papain from papaya. Both of these enzymes are proteolytic, which means they break down protein. Interestingly, neither pineapple nor papaya contain much protein. As with most fruits, they are more than 90% carbohydrate.

Well that's curious. Why, then, do you suppose pineapple would contain an enzyme needed to digest protein, when it has almost no protein?

This is not uncommon. In actuality, many foods do not contain the enzymes needed for an animal to digest them. So this runs directly contrary to the raw food propaganda, and there are many examples of this I could provide.

Interestingly, one of the raw vegan gurus recently ran an article in which he totally blasted the enzyme philosophy.

Depending on the individual situation, raw foods may place more strain on the digestive system. This is precisely because they don't contain all the enzymes which the human body needs to digest them, as is claimed by many gurus.

Hmmm...I'll have to ponder that. I personally feel great after a raw meal but heavier after a cooked vegan meal.

Now that being said... I doubt you are one of those individuals for which it is a poor choice. I am thinking about people whose bodies are already in a weakened state and/or not able to produce its own enzymes.

It may be that some people who wish to go raw vegan should transition gradually. The raw foods themselves will strengthen their lifeforce, thus making them better able to digest more raw foods!

Absolutist thinking tells me that a person is not sufficiently prepared to be a leader or teacher. Now of course, it would seem that most people disagree, since they keep electing these types into various offices and buying their books/tapes/videos etc.

Well I could say something here that would totally take us into a tangent, but I will refrain! Suffice to say that the average person doesn't form opinions based on due diligence, but based on slick advertising, talking points, etc.

People can and do get tested for anti-candida antibodies in the blood. What most mainstream doctors don't do is look specifically in the gut. But generally, candida is well-known even in mainstream medicine as systemic infection is a risk for those who are immunocompromised, such as an AIDS patient.

Thanks. I was wondering about that!

if practitioners (both mainstream and alternative) would bother to educate themselves about it rather than spreading rhetoric and disinformation.

You're familiar with Life Extension, right? They're really big into lab testing. They're also way more into heavy supplements for my taste, but they seem to be serving as a bridge for people transitioning from allopathic to holistic.

They are also available at a greatly reduced price for those who **shock and amazement** would actually PAY out of their own pocket for something which would directly benefit their own health.

Hey! We alternative folks have been paying out-of-pocket for decades! Man, I've spent a fortune on health foods and natural practitioners!

So notice how these concepts we have discussed about enzymes, body acidity, and detoxing, all seem to be part of the propaganda put forth by certain natural practitioners. Can you see how they all rest upon a faulty logic that oversimplifies the situation, making it appear "black and white"?

Well yes I do see that. But at the same time, much of it is valid too. The challenge is to sift thru it all and not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

After that, it shouldn't be needed anymore if the diet stays clean.

... and even if it doesn't! The body is actually designed to handle quite an onslaught of toxicity. The biochemical processes of life itself are toxic to the body, if not dealt with appropriately. This is a frequently missed, yet critical, point.

In a practical sense, if the body is in a healthy state, then it should snap back quite easily from a night of drunken debauchery... so long as they are few and far enough inbetween.

Sure. But the problem is that we're all being exposed to extremely high levels of toxicity on a daily basis. We can't escape it. It's in the air we breathe, it's on the foods we eat, it's in dental fillings...

When a person's body can't tolerate a sip of alcohol, that is a sign of a problem. Ever wonder why some people who live a "squeaky clean" lifestyle still turn up with cancer and other debilitating diseases? This is because their body can't handle the toxins produced within.

Respectfully, that sounds like the very type of oversimplification you have been railing against.

How can the toxins that are produced within possibly be separated from the toxins the body has been exposed to externally?

Who on this planet can say they have never been exposed to the toxic air, pesticides, etc.?

Some are canaries in the coal mine. I know a lady who has acute reactions to EMF's. She gets very very ill if she's around a computer or cell tower.

From a metaphysical standpoint, I wonder if this might have something to do with denial of their own negativity and the destructive nature of their being. Going back to the trinity concept, in Hinduism we have the Creator, the Preserver, and the Destroyer. It is kind of like denying the Destroyer, or pretending that it doesn't really exist. Or kind of like the Triforce in the Legend of Zelda. When the Triforce of Power becomes separated from the other two, the result is a schism whereby the other two seek reunion (as represented by Link and Zelda). In Ra terminology, we have love and light... but no power. I notice that Q'uo has been speaking more in terms of love, and light, and power lately.

Interesting idea! I've wondered why we have to deal with all these toxins. I mean, take cell phones for example. Such a convenience! Why in the world does it have to harmful?

Or maybe just looking at it from a more naturalistic perspective. There is a destructive force in nature. It is actually a good thing. Nature kills physical forms so that the consciousness within may evolve into new forms, and to eventually become formless. This is why I don't believe that killing equates to harm. In order for there to be harm, there must be an intention for something different to have happened. And even with that, we are talking about on the level of the Higher Self, not on the level of biological preservation instincts.

You're getting into the question of why there are 2 paths in the first place. Each has their role.

---

My issue with nutritional schooling arose after my experience in the NICU. Having been browbeaten for weeks to allow them to feed my daughter powdered fortifier. Constant harassment and guilt trips. Even after using the excuse that all family members were milk intolerant (a fib). Not having the right type of experience at the time, we finally gave in, against our better judgement. They promised that they would cease at the first sign of problems.

Oh Pickle, what a heart-wrenching story!! But I'm so glad you championed your baby and wife, and stood firm! And now your healthy child is living proof!

I can soooo relate! My son was in NICU for 10 days and I had to do battle just to get to breastfeed. But because I'd had a C-section and was wiped out myself, I didn't get to control what he was given the first 36 hours, unfortunately. And he wasn't even a preemie.

---

Hmm... I wonder if they would have found the same result ten or a hundred years ago..?!

That's an interesting question. Are you suggesting that rats, as a species, have evolved in the last decade or century?