In regards to eating meat

[Tenet Nosce]

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?

No, what I mean is that topologically, or geometrically, speaking, the body is a torus, or a donut shape. The digestive tract running from the mouth to the anus is technically outside the body. It may seem a bit esoteric of a point, but I think it is highly significant. Especially in light of "nested worlds" and such.

Of course, things do pass to and fro, but it is a very specialized sort of exchange. Kind of like the skin... The point is that just because something enters our mouths doesn't necessarily mean it enters our bodies. Other things must get broken down into smaller parts and there really is no guarantee that they will be put back together in the same way.

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

Possibly so. But consider this in light of the idea that the deposition of "bad fat" is an attempt by the body to protect damaged arterial walls. What happens if we peel off the "band-aid" but don't treat the wound?

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

It can. But it doesn't know how to discern between "good" and "bad" fats. (Actually good/bad is again somewhat of a misnomer here.) Similar to how some people promote consumption of plain distilled water to "pull out the toxins". Well, sure it will pull out the toxins... along with everything else! These things act mechanically to various chemical laws... they have no consciousness of their own.

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.

Well, that's true. All I can say is that I have a pretty good track record so far in terms of what I thought was true about the body turning out to actually be true. How do I know? That's anybody's guess.

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

Well, they agree as to the nature of enzymes and how they work. For example, that the lipase in food or secreted by the body into the digestive tract has little bearing on the lipase acting within a fat cell to break down fat. It is the same molecule... but in two different contexts. They are not directly linked, although everything is connected at some level.

For example, as regards this idea of "depleting enzymes". All enzymes are made of protein. So, if a person's diet is deficient in protein, the body will have trouble making all the enzymes it needs. But even then, it won't just stop. It will slow down, and start to pull protein out of the muscle tissue.

Then, if it is still deficient in protein the body will tend to shut down what it considers to be "auxiliary systems". Usually the reproductive system goes first, then certain branches of the immune system.

The digestive system is typically one of the last to go... precisely because everything else depends on it. But I have seen situations where people don't seem to be producing enough proteolytic (protein-eating) enzymes in the gut. This is a real pickle because how can the body get in protein to make the enzymes it needs to break down the protein?!

Now to confound the issue, and bring it back to meat-eating, research demonstrates that different people's bodies seem more able to digest different kinds of protein sources. This is because their bodies' digestive enzyme profiles differ from one another.

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

Right. Although actually I haven't seen too much resistance to the idea of enzyme supplements if it can be shown that the body is not digesting food properly.

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

Well, I don't know in his particular case. But his choosing to take enzyme supplements despite being a raw vegan is consistent with what I know... that for some people raw veggies are particularly difficult for them to digest.

Really?

Well, I might be making it up. Strange negative energies appear to be afoot once again, so perhaps this is clouding my ability to discern what is really going on.

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.

No doubt about that. I just point it out because sometimes people fall back to acid/bad - alkaline/good and I don't think that is the best conceptualization. I would imagine the body operates most efficiently when all the available pH ranges are utilized. But you are right... somebody eating the SAD diet is not in risk of becoming too alkaline.

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.

Sadly, I think much of the confusion is due to partially-informed practitioners who are actually claiming such things.

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

Not sure! I think that is part of what the Creator built into the program to encourage humanity to seek deeper into the true nature of reality, and our purpose here.

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

Interesting. Do you have a link?

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

I don't doubt you do. But what goes on with your body may not be wholly generalizable to others. For example:

Enterotypes of the human gut microbiome.

This indicates further the existence of a limited number of well-balanced host-microbial symbiotic states that might respond differently to diet and drug intake. The enterotypes are mostly driven by species composition, but abundant molecular functions are not necessarily provided by abundant species, highlighting the importance of a functional analysis to understand microbial communities.

Linking long-term dietary patterns with gut microbial enterotypes.

Diet strongly affects human health, partly by modulating gut microbiome composition. We used diet inventories and 16S rDNA sequencing to characterize fecal samples from 98 individuals. Fecal communities clustered into enterotypes distinguished primarily by levels of Bacteroides and Prevotella. Enterotypes were strongly associated with long-term diets, particularly protein and animal fat (Bacteroides) versus carbohydrates (Prevotella). A controlled-feeding study of 10 subjects showed that microbiome composition changed detectably within 24 hours of initiating a high-fat/low-fiber or low-fat/high-fiber diet, but that enterotype identity remained stable during the 10-day study. Thus, alternative enterotype states are associated with long-term diet.

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!

I suspect that is the case.

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.

Yes. They were a client of ours at one time. They were looking for somebody to rewrite their therapeutic manual, and we couldn't find anybody who wanted the job!

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

Not you! Actually, I do find many that are willing to pay for their own tests. But I think in terms of the general population they are few and far between. It seems like most people think that "good" things should be free.

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...

Right. I'm not saying it is a great idea to increase the toxic burden. Just that the body is designed to handle a large amount of toxicity that it just normally a part of life. For example, all of the bodies steroid hormone have toxic forms that need to be eliminated. Even the oxygen we breathe is "toxic" in the sense that it is oxidizing to the body. Which is why we need to take in other elements to balance that out.

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

Sorry, I didn't mean in all cases. The broader point is that some people go through great pains to live in a "toxin-free" bubble and still end up sick, or don't improve if they already are. In these cases we might find that they have genetic differences causing impairment of one or several detox pathways in the liver. Which explains to some degree why they were so sensitive to tobacco smoke, or alcohol, or medications, or whatever, in the first place.

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

Well, typically they are different. But not in all cases. This is why the body tends to have a more difficult time with man-made toxins to which it is not accustomed. But typically it still does a pretty good job. The detox pathways are generic enough to be applied to most things coming in from the outside.

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

Well, nobody. What I am getting at is- even if we lived in a world free from man-made toxins and pollutants, people would still be exposed to a massive amount of substances that are toxic to the body, just through the normal processes of living.

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.

But I would see her sensitivity to EMF as a symptom. I would wonder why the electromagnetic field of her body is not powerful enough to mitigate the effects of the negative external fields.

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?

It seems to be connected to being able to accept the negative and destructive forces present in nature, and to some degree put them to positive use. I offer the image of Asclepius, the Healer, which I believe to be a Greek representation of Imhotep- the first known physician and contactee of Ra:

Here you see that the healer holds the snake in his hands. The snake represents the destructive forces of the universe. Interestingly, the constellation of Ophiuchus, which is the representation of Asclepius/Imhotep in the sky located opposite from Orion.

Of other interesting notes is that Ophiuchus and Orion are both constellations where scientists have recently confirmed the presence of oxygen. Also, not too long ago a diamond crystalline planet orbiting a quasar was found in this region. It "just so happens" to be located precisely where the serpent disappears behind Imhotep's body. I documented this in Diamond Planet Discovered In Ophiuchus/Serpens
and further note that an alignment of the Sun with the diamond planet in Ophiuchus starts today and reaches its culmination on Monday 12/12.

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

Indeed.

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

Why not? If so, they seem to be evolving more rapidly than we humans!

Also, I will admit to having eaten jungle rat a couple of times when it was served to me in the Amazon. You're not missing out.