04-28-2012, 11:22 AM
(04-28-2012, 10:30 AM)Valtor Wrote: From all the research I read on nutrition, there is one thing that came to be very clear to me. It's that what is "healthy" food greatly depends on the individual metabolism.
To a degree, yes. Ra did say animal products to the extent necessary for individual metabolism. But there still are principles that apply to most people. For example, fresh fruits and veggies being healthy and junk food being unhealthy. There isn't a single person on the planet who would be healthier long-term by consuming nothing but junk food, never eating any veggies, and smoking cigarettes. They might manage to avoid disease because of their strong genetics or strong mental outlook, but it could not be said that they are healthier because of eating junk foods. (this is just an example.)
(04-28-2012, 10:30 AM)Valtor Wrote: In other words, the science of nutrition trying to devise one set of advice for the whole population is not only unrealizable but is close to intentional misleading (by the Elites of course). The best researchers in the field are fully aware of this and some MDs well learned of this will always do their best to provide advice based on the metabolism of the patient, as a case by case. This is unfortunately the big minority.
I agree, regarding specifics. There is no 'one size fits all' in terms of detailed diet plans. But, there are general guidelines that do work for the most part.
(04-28-2012, 10:30 AM)Valtor Wrote: Also, the media will publish, as evidence for causation, any epidemiological study they can find. But the great public is not aware that epidemiology can never ever serve as evidence of causation (pointing the arrow of cause to effect) and can only show correlations.
I don't think it really matters, in the case of meat. The China Study proved that the more meat consumed, the higher the risk of cancer. Common sense dictates that there's a connection there.
I'm familiar with the critiques of The China Study. They critique the proposed explanations of the results of the study. For example, the proposed explanation that the reason meat is cancer-causing is because of the cholesterol, or because of the protein.
Yes, it's true that there are holes in the logic presented, regarding the reasons meat consumption increases cancer risk.
But that's irrelevant, because it does not take away from the fact that the risk does indeed increase with meat consumption.
In other words, just because Campbell may have gotten it wrong on the WHY meat increases cancer risk, doesn't change the fact that it DOES.
(04-28-2012, 10:30 AM)Valtor Wrote: In fact regarding cancer, the experiential evidence are pointing more toward sugar being a problem than meat. And not just sucrose (table sugar) per se, but fructose specifically. Sucrose being half glucose and half fructose is indeed a good source of fructose. Fructose can only mostly be metabolized by the liver, just like alcohol, and so can lead to fatty liver, type 2 diabetes. It's actually the byproducts of fructose metabolism that can exacerbate cancer growth.
Sugar is a problem too, no doubt about it. And it might be true that it's 'more' of a problem than meat. Perhaps. But there being a stronger poison out there doesn't negate the lesser poison, if in fact it's true that sugar's a stronger poison.
If I'm given a choice between Poison A and Poison B, and Poison B is stronger than Poison A, I still wouldn't want either of them.
(04-28-2012, 10:30 AM)Valtor Wrote: Yeah, I tried that. I tried pretty much everything! hehe.
You tried what? Do you mean you tried some vegan desserts instead of regular desserts?
What I meant was, have you ever tried a 100% raw vegan diet?
(04-28-2012, 10:30 AM)Valtor Wrote: I'm telling you my friends. This is paranormal (metaphysical) in my case.
OK, I believe you. My experience has been that, whenever I resolve the metaphysical cause of something, I then find a physical approach that works. I see it as resetting the metaphysical blueprint first, and then physical remedies work.
Physical remedies won't work alone; the metaphysical cause must be resolved first. But then physical remedies are often necessary too. They work together.
(04-28-2012, 10:30 AM)Valtor Wrote: It's a big catalyst that is leading me somewhere and I think that you guys will be able to really help me.
Well that would be cool! Have you read the thread? There's a huge amount of info here that you might find useful.
(04-28-2012, 10:30 AM)Valtor Wrote: Both !
Haha, ok then, I will offer an invitation and a friendly challenge: Read the thread!
